Allsup's Plans

From the Belleville News-Democrat of Southwestern Illinois:

Jim Allsup is at it again. Twenty-four years after founding his own business to provide representative services for those who are looking to get Social Security disability insurance, which had previously been unserved in the market, Allsup is now expanding with a broader range of services to assist clients with disability life planning and advisory in Medicare. ...

Jim Allsup recently talked with business reporter Will Buss about his business' new services:

Q: What is your new focus?

A: "Our focus these days is really aggressively going toward the disabled consumer.

"Our future really lies in being able to go directly to the disabled consumer to continue to grow the core Social Security service, but at the same time, we're expanding the portfolio of services that we provide to that disabled consumer so that we're providing a complete range of both financial and health-care services for the disabled consumer.

"The majority of our business in the past has been commercially based where we contract with large insurance carriers and Fortune 500 employers around the country to provide our services to their disabled employees and disabled insurers. And they pay the fee because they have a financial stake in the outcome of what we do. So our focus, up until now, our primary focus has been on companies that have employer-provided, long-term disability benefit plans. And the reason being is that these plans and Social Security, and every dollar we obtain from Social Security, reduces their liability by a dollar. However, only one out of every three employees are the U.S. is covered by an employer-provided, long-term disability plan, which means two out of three employees aren't. So we really have a concentrated focus now to go directly to the disabled consumer."

Astrue Partially Suspends Regulatory Proceedings

This does not begin to solve all the problems associated with the proposed rules. Click on each page to view full size. Ending reopening for new and material evidence is a major element of this proposal that remains, for instance. That may be the largest part of the $2 billion cost saving associated with this proposal.

Baucus Announces Economic Stimulus Plan

Senator Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has announced his version of an economic stimulus plan. Baucus' plan would differ from the President's plan and the plan that the House of Representatives is working on in several important respects, but for our purposes the big difference is that recipients of Social Security benefits, presumably including disability benefits, would receive rebates of $500 each from the government.

If this happens, I wonder what the effect will be on those who also receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. It would be cruel to give them a check for $500 -- but then reduce their SSI by $500.

All federal regulations must be approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the White House. Even regulations issued by independent agencies like the Social Security Administration must be approved by OMB. This is one of the many reasons that Social Security's independence is more theoretical than real. OMB posts lists of regulations awaiting approval. Here is a new OMB filing from yesterday:

AGENCY: SSA	RIN: 0960-AG49
TITLE: Amendment to the Attorney Advisor Program (3398I)
STAGE: Final Rule No Material Change	ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT: No
** RECEIVED DATE: 01/28/2008	LEGAL DEADLINE: None

Social Security In State Of The Union

An excerpt from last night's State of the Union address:

Every member in this chamber knows that spending on entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is growing faster than we can afford. And we all know the painful choices ahead if America stays on this path: massive tax increases, sudden and drastic cuts in benefits, or crippling deficits. I have laid out proposals to reform these programs. Now I ask members of Congress to offer your proposals and come up with a bipartisan solution to save these vital programs for our children and grandchildren.

AFGE Newsletter: Situation "Ugly"

Council 220 of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents many thousands of Social Security Administration employees, has issued its January 2008 newsletter.

To put it mildly, relations between the union and Social Security management are poor. Here is a quote, from Debbie Fredericksen, Executive Vice President of the Council:

About the current state of labor/management relations within Social Security, Fredericksen is very frank: “It’s ugly,” she says without hesitation. “In the past we had some bad moments, even under partnership, but we got a lot more information. The agency now believes it can do pretty much whatever it wants and management doesn’t think it has to follow the contract.

“They probably thought we would shrivel up and die, but that’s certainly not the case. They may have finally realized that we are not going to run away and a new day is coming.”

Senate Plans To Add Rebates For Social Security Recipients To Economic Stimulus Package

From KTHV:

Senate Democrats are planning to add a few things to a bipartisan $150 billion economic stimulus package.

Senior Senate aides in both parties say the Senate is planning to draft its own measure to add rebates for senior citizens living off Social Security and an extension of unemployment benefits.

Adding to the plan would be in direct defiance with White House wishes, as President Bush has called on Congress to quickly adopt the original plan. Bush has said additional spending measures could derail the deal.

Senate Finance Committee Democrats Letter On Proposed Procedural Rule Changes

Several of the Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee have issued a press release attaching this letter:

January 24, 2008

The Honorable Michael J. Astrue
Commissioner
U.S. Social Security Administration
6401 Security Boulevard
Baltimore, MD 21235

Dear Commissioner Astrue:

This letter provides comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled, “Amendments to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), Appeals Council, and Decision Review Board Appeals Levels,” published in the Federal Register on October 29, 2007 (72 FR 61218).

The proposed changes in this NPRM raise many concerns. The Social Security Administration should undertake a more detailed discussion before taking any final actions on these proposed rules.

Changing the rules for medical and vocational evidence submission. This NPRM seems to restrict the ability of claimants and their representatives to submit critical evidence during the period from five days before the hearing to the issuance of the ALJ decision. While some efficiency is necessary, it seems inappropriate to enforce strict rules when claimants and their representatives do not necessarily have control over when and how evidence is made available. For example, we question whether claimants should be held accountable for the responsiveness of health care providers. The Social Security Act requires SSA to accept new evidence adduced at a hearing. It would exceed SSA’s statutory authority systematically to disallow that evidence.

Formalizing the appeals process. We have concerns about increasing ALJs’ opportunities to dismiss cases based on the claimants’ ability to attend pre- or posthearing meetings. The NPRM will leave the ALJ significant latitude on this issue, and this may compromise claimants’ due process rights and their access to the appeals process.

Closing the record. While closing the record will simplify the legal procedures, it is at the expense of the affected claimant. This NPRM achieves its estimated $1.5 billion cost savings from attrition; the denied claimant who would have been allowed benefits either chooses not to reapply or dies in the interim. This change may also cause evidence to be excluded from further consideration during a reapplication hearing. This is an unacceptable means of simplifying procedures. It is also less effective in decreasing backlogs. Those whose appeal to the ALJ fails will be encouraged to submit new applications, and even a streamlined reapplication process will only increase the backlogs at the field office and disability determination services offices. Shifting a backlog is not an effective solution.

We look forward to further discussions regarding these and other issues prior to any final actions on this NPRM. We look forward to continuing to work with you to better serve the American public. Please contact [staff] at the Finance Committee to schedule a meeting to explore these issues.

Sincerely,

Max Baucus, Chairman
John D. Rockefeller
Debbie Stabenow
Jeff Bingaman
John Kerry
Maria Cantwell
Blanche L. Lincoln
Ron Wyden