Field Offices With Fewer Than 15 Employees To Be Closed?

From the Storm Lake Iowa Pilot-Tribune (emphasis added):

Worries continue to circulate on the potential closing of the Storm Lake Social Security office and others like it around the state.

On Tuesday, officials of the union that represents many of the Social Security workers called on Iowans to protest to their members of Congress.

Officers of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Local 836 said that a Social Security Administration downsizing initiative and increased use of online services would be "a mistake that will compromise the quality and efficiency of service." ...

The SSA facility in Oskaloosa is slated to be closed on February 1, although Senator Tom Harkin has spoken to Commissioner Michael Astrue opposing any office closures in his state.

"The Commissioner has said that offices with 15 or fewer employees could be shutdown, and most of the offices in Iowa currently have fewer employees than that," said Cheryl Hainkel, the Kansas City Regional Vice President of Council 220.

If the agency approves additional shutdowns in Iowa, there could be just five remaining locations for the entire state, the union claims: Davenport, Des Moines, Waterloo, Cedar Rapids, and Council Bluffs.

"An individual would have to travel up to two-and-a half hours (153 miles) in order to reach their nearest Social Security office," Hainkel said. ...

The local manager of the Storm Lake office is also concerned about the future, feeling that not all senior citizens would be comfortable in using electronic communications or be able to drive long distances to meet with Social Security staff.

Budget Outlook For FY 2009

It may not make that much difference what President Bush wants in the budget for fiscal year (FY) 2009, which begins on October 1, 2008, since Democrats in Congress can just pass continuing funding resolutions until Bush leaves office and they can deal with a different president, perhaps of their party. However, Bush is not going to make it easy. From Reuters:

President George W. Bush will propose freezing most domestic spending in his upcoming 2009 budget and will seek big cost savings from government health care programs, a U.S. official said on Thursday.

Bush's final budget is due out next week.

Testimony On Overpayments

David Rust, Social Security's Acting Deputy Commissioner for Disability and Income Security Programs, testified today before the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information and International Security of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on the subject of "preventing, detecting, and collecting improper payments." Rust's written statement is available online.

Here is a little excerpt that gives a small preview of the President's fiscal year (FY) 2009 recommended budget for Social Security:

The President's Budget for FY 2009 includes a proposal to provide SSA with funding, outside the spending caps, for program integrity activities such as CDRs and SSI redeterminations. The Budget includes a special funding mechanism that will provide $240 million for SSA's program integrity efforts, in addition to the $264 million already included in the base request, for a total of $504 million. SSA plans to process 329,000 medical CDRs and nearly 1.5 million SSI redeterminations in FY 2009. If found to be as cost-effective as SSI redeterminations, up to $40 million may be used for initiatives to improve the disability process and up to $34 million may be used to expand the Access to Financial Information project, which automates verification of SSI recipients' assets held in banks. In total, SSA estimates this program integrity funding in FY 2009 will result in over $4 billion in savings over 10 years.

Proposed Settlement Of Kaplan Case

The Social Security Administration has posted a notice of a proposed settlement agreement and hearing in the Kaplan v. Chertoff class action pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The class action has to do with delays at the Department of Homeland Security in adjudicating applications for adjustment of immigration status and naturalization. Those delays have had serious impacts upon immigrants who receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI), because of time limits for SSI benefits for some immigrants.

Jonathan Stein of Community Legal Services of Philadelphia is class counsel.

Allsup's Ten Questions

Allsup, a corporation which has for many years represented Social Security disability claimants on behalf of Long Term Disability insurers and pension plans (who offset the benefits they pay by Social Security disability benefits), has increasingly been seeking to represent individual Social Security disability claimants. Allsup recently issued a press release entitled "Top Ten Questions to Ask When Choosing a Social Security Disability Representative." Here is an excerpt:

- What are your options if you want to hire representation?

Typically, there are two major types of paid SSDI representatives: specialized organizations like Allsup, which has multiple representatives and specialists experienced in handling SSDI claims in local communities across the country; and law firms that may or may not have attorneys solely dedicated to SSDI claims.

- How knowledgeable and experienced is the organization in representing individuals applying for SSDI?

You should look for a representative who specializes in SSDI who understand the complexities and nuances of the process. Don’t be fooled if a representative tries to impress you with their local influence. It’s highly unlikely that they have special power over local SSA staff or can ensure your hearing will take place in front of a specific judge.

- Will the organization help you file the initial application for SSDI?

The myth that you cannot have a representative help you file your initial application for SSDI may stem from the fact that many attorneys only accept SSDI clients after their applications are denied.

“Turning away a potentially qualified individual seeking help with the SSDI application process is like telling someone who doesn’t know how to drive a car to get behind the wheel and come back once they’ve had an accident,” said Swierczek. “It’s not a safe strategy when finding help from the beginning can improve your chances of getting approved earlier and cost you less in representative fees as a result.”

- What specific activities will the representative undertake on your behalf?

It’s important to choose a representative who consistently works the claim on your behalf throughout the process and removes the burden from you. For example, you should ask:
- Will you contact my doctors and collect or update medical records for my file independently of the SSA?
- Will you regularly query the SSA for status of my claim or confirm my claim file is up-to-date?

“The SSA’s Disability Determination Service may arrange for you to visit a doctor of its choice and compile your medical records,” Swierczek explained. “But it’s generally in your best interest to have your representative help you by having your treating physician provide the needed medical evidence.

“Likewise, your representative should regularly be following up with the SSA to ensure your claim is in order. You don’t want to show up at a hearing only to learn critical information, such as your most recent medical tests showing your illness has worsened, did not make it into your file in time,” he added.

- Does the organization have experience representing someone with your disability?

Not all disabilities are alike — the SSA has specific Disability Impairment Criteria for hundreds of specific conditions, from AIDS to strokes. It’s essential to prepare each case with details and in the language required by the SSA to avoid unnecessary delays, a reduced award or denial of benefits.

- How does the organization – and who within the organization – will keep you informed on the progress of your claim?

Disability applicants should make sure that the representation organization they choose will keep them regularly updated on the progress of their application, including timely notices of deadlines, documents required or scheduled hearings.

“People sometimes select a local representative based on the belief that they’re going to have regular in-person meetings with the representative,” said Swierczek. “Then they learn after the initial meeting that the representative is no longer available to meet with them, take their calls or keep them regularly informed. In fact, it’s an all-too-common practice for some representatives to minimize communications until a specific deadline or event, like a hearing, is scheduled. Knowing the communication approach of the representative you choose is essential in making sure you’re not disappointed.”

- Will you have to attend any hearings?

Approximately one-quarter of SSDI cases proceed to the hearing level where there are hearings before judges. However, this might not be necessary if the representative asks for and receives an “on-the-record” decision, where the judge makes a decision based on a review of information in the file. It does require that your representative create a well-written brief that provides a thorough, factual record of your claim. For example, 63 percent of Allsup customers at this phase never have to attend a hearing because many judges will make a decision without the need for an oral hearing based on the information Allsup presents.

“The SSDI process is overwhelming,” Swierczek warns. “And if you have physical limitations or live in a remote area, figuring out how to get to a hearing can be a significant concern. Going through the extra effort of creating solid briefs needed to gain on-the-record decisions is a sound representation practice to help alleviate concerns and accelerate a decision.”

- What is the organization’s success rate?

No organization has a 100-percent track record, but consumers should look for a representative with a high success rate in gaining SSDI benefits for its clients. This indicates the representative not only can deliver the desired result, but also probably has a powerful credibility in the industry.

- How much faster can the organization help you win your award?

There is no guaranteed timeline. External factors, including the growing backlog at the SSA in processing claims, can affect the timing. But a representative should know on average how long it takes their clients to get through the various stages of the SSDI process. For example, individuals Allsup represents at the hearing level (where 84 percent of all claimants have representation) generally receive an award four months faster than the national average.

“How fast you get through the process matters, because it gives you access sooner to the SSDI award you need to pay for daily living expenses. It also lowers your representation fee,” said Swierczek.

- What does it cost?

The SSA determines the maximum fee that any organization can charge for SSDI representation. Currently, it is 25 percent of the retroactive dollar amount awarded, not to exceed $5,300. Those who are approved quickly at the application level and receive no retroactive award pay much less – as little as $750. You should not pay a fee if you don’t receive your SSDI award. However, you should ask a representative if they charge for costs in addition to the representation fee, such as travel or medical records.

Baltimore Sun And Social Security

Take a look at the front page of today's Baltimore Sun. No mention of Robert Ball's death. I am unable to determine online whether the Baltimore Sun even carried an obituary for Robert Ball! Certainly, there was no major article on Ball's passage.

The Social Security Administration is the largest employer in the Baltimore area. Robert Ball was arguably the most important figure in the history of the Social Security Administration. I cannot comprehend the Baltimore Sun's studied indifference to the Social Security Administration. Is this ideological? Is it because the Baltimore Sun is just a bad newspaper? Is it because the Social Security Administration is located somewhat on the periphery of Baltimore?

Senate Finance Committee Version Of Economic Stimulus Package

The Senate Finance Committee has reported out an economic stimulus different than that passed by the House of Representatives. In the Senate Finance Committee version the following individuals would be eligible for rebates:

(1) The sum of an eligible individual’s: (1) earned income (as defined for purposes of the earned income credit); and (2) social security benefits must be at least $3,000; or
(2) The eligible individual has a net income tax liability of at least $1

This would allow virtually all recipients of benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act a rebate. I had been uncertain of this, since press reports had emphasized that the Senate Finance version of the economic stimulus package would give rebates to "seniors" on Social Security. Of course, there are many drawing disability and survivors benefits from Social Security who are not "seniors."

The Senate Finance bill would exclude almost all Supplemental Security Income (SSI) only recipients.

I have been unable to determine whether the rebate checks would be counted as income for purposes of SSI. If so, concurrent recipients of both Title II and SSI benefits would receive a rebate check, but would then lose most, if not all of it, because it would reduce their SSI benefits. In fact, they could actually end up worse off if the rebate check were enough to knock them out of Medicaid altogether for a month.

House Social Security Subcommittee Press Release On Suspension Of Regulatory Proceedings

A press release from the Social Security Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee -- and note the last paragraph:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) today notified Congress that the agency would suspend some parts of a controversial proposed regulation that would sharply restrict appeal rights for severely disabled individuals applying for benefits.

Under the proposed regulation, severely disabled persons would have been denied access to over $2.0 billion in Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits over the next ten years – not because their disabilities were not severe enough, but because they could not successfully navigate the complex new procedural requirements established by the proposed rule. Those denied would also have lost access to critical Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

"This proposal would have complicated the disability system and denied benefits to deserving folks – I commend the SSA for reconsidering it," said Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-NY). "We should be looking for ways to improve, not complicate, the current disability system. Our immediate priority is making sure SSA has enough disability claims examiners and judges to dramatically reduce the backlog of unprocessed claims. In the future, I look forward to working with the agency to ensure that the right balance is struck between speedy processing and adjudicating claims in a way that is thorough, fair, and accessible to claimants."

The proposed regulation engendered a strong outcry from Congress and advocacy organizations. A letter objecting to the regulation was sent in December by eleven House Committee and Subcommittee chairs. Letters objecting to the proposal were also sent by the Senate Finance Committee and other Senate leaders, and almost 500 comments were filed on the regulation, primarily in opposition.

"I am pleased that Social Security Commissioner Astrue has pledged to work with Congress to improve the disability process," said Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Michael R. McNulty (D-NY). "It is essential that SSA bring down the backlog in a way that does not harm those we are trying to help. In my view, the most important thing we can do is to work together to ensure that SSA has sufficient resources to process the claims it receives without imposing intolerable waits and hardships on those suffering from severe disabilities."

The agency has agreed to suspend some portions of the regulation and will seek additional public input. However, it remains to be seen whether all aspects of the regulation that would unfairly harm disability applicants will be revised. The Committee on Ways and Means will continue to provide close oversight of the process and any proposed changes.