Andrew Biggs Already Campaigning

Until his recent resignation, Andrew Biggs held a recess appointment as Deputy Commissioner of Social Security. The Senate had refused to confirm Biggs' appointment because of his advocacy for privatizing Social Security.

From a Wall Street Journal editorial page piece penned by Biggs and published today:

Until recently, Sen. Barack Obama took a responsible position on Social Security, noting the urgency of reform and saying all options should be on the table.

But having cornered himself among Democratic activists whose attitudes toward Social Security reform range from demagoguery to denial, Mr. Obama has recently veered sharply left. He now proposes to solve the looming Social Security shortfall exclusively with higher taxes. [Obama's plan is to partially lift the cap on wages covered by the FICA tax] ...

If we want to retain the shared character that underpins its political support and distinguishes it from traditional welfare programs, we need to share the burdens of reform proportionately.

For Biggs to talk about Obama undermining "the shared character that undepins [Social Security's] political support" is rich, since undermining Social Security's "shared character" is Biggs' purpose in life.

53 Days Behind In Birmingham

Earlier today, a staff member at my firm called Module (or Mod as they are usually called) 3 at Social Security's Program Service Center in Birmingham, AL to inquire about a case. Mods are where the actual work of putting claimants on benefits is done.

The staff member was told that Mod 3 was 53 days behind on its workload -- and I suspect that that is 53 days behind in even starting each workload item, not on finishing each workload item.

Commissioner Astrue has conceded that Program Service Center backlogs will grow over the course of this year, because few departing program service center employees will be replaced.

The claimant in the case about which my firm had inquired has now been waiting about three and a half months after a favorable decision for payment of back benefits. The delay occurred because Social Security took an unnecessary Supplemental Security Income (SSI) claim, which was denied due to excess income. However, this SSI claim lived on in Social Security's computers. Once she was approved, the Title II back benefits could not be paid until something was done about SSI, because of windfall offset concerns. No one did anything about implementing SSI benefits, because there was nothing to implement. Would the back benefits ever be paid without someone raising questions? I cannot say. I can say that it will be quite some time before this lady's back benefits will be paid, through no fault of hers.

I predict that Social Security's response to this post will be to tell Mod 3 and other Mods not to tell attorneys anything specific like 53 days; just keep it vague and pretend that things are not as bad as they are, because if Social Security admits that things are bad, then Social Security would have to admit that its current budget is inadequate, and that is not what the Commissioner of Social Security wants to admit.

Waiting In Tuscaloosa -- And Allsup Can Help

From the Tuscaloosa News:

Rebecca Sutton was 46 years old when she realized that her body would no longer allow her to hold a job.

She had suffered for years from spondyloarthritis, a severe and degenerative form of arthritis of the spine, and had been diagnosed with fibromyalgia, a muscle affliction that causes chronic pain, tenderness to being touched and fatigue. ...

Despite recommendations from her longtime rheumatologist and years of documentation of her worsening condition, her first application for Social Security benefits was denied. As part of the application process, the Social Security Administration sent her to a doctor who said he felt her medical conditions did not qualify. ...

So began Sutton’s waiting process that, in light of the Social Security Administration’s backlog of such cases, was fairly short. ...

Through a friend at church, Sutton turned to one of several Social Security claimant advocacy providers (Allsup, Disability Group or a Social Security lawyer are a few options) that help people denied disability benefits maneuver through the appeals process.

The company she chose was Allsup, which claims to have helped 100,000 disabled Americans obtain about $1.5 billion in Social Security and Medicare payments since 1984. ...

“Allsup pre-qualifies claimants to help ensure their eligibility, gathers critical medical and other information to prepare an accurate factual record and represents the individual at hearings,” Allsup said. “This can ease a significant burden for Tuscaloosa residents who may have to travel more than 60 miles for a hearing.”

Proposed Regs On Rep Payees

The Social Security Administration has posted proposed regulations on representative payees in today's Federal Register. There is some technical problem with the Federal Register at the moment, so the link is not working. I suppose they will get it straighted out shortly, since none of the links from today's Federal Register is working at the moment. My understanding is that what is being proposed is only a minor change.

Unions Oppose Rehires

From the Federal Times:

Drowning under a growing case backlog in 2001, the Social Security Administration rehired 152 of its retired claims representatives, office attorneys, administrative law judges and other employees on a part-time basis. By 2006, 392 retirees were on board.

SSA got special waivers from the Office of Personnel Management to pay those retired employees their full pensions and part-time salaries. Without the waivers, retirees returning to SSA would have had their pensions docked by the amount of their salaries. In effect, they would have been working for free.

OPM and some leading lawmakers are pushing legislation to expand those waivers — available now to only a few agencies — to all agencies.

But the government’s two biggest unions, the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union, oppose the measures, which have gone nowhere.

Without the waivers, retirees would be “working for nothing, and I think that is outrageous,” OPM Director Linda Springer said at a Feb. 29 news conference.

Now, with the Bush administration in its final year, Springer appears pessimistic about the chances of getting the bills passed.

“It will probably be the greatest frustration I have” this year, she said.

What I do not understand is why Social Security would be offering incentives for employees to retire early at the same time they are trying to rehire retired employees -- unless the real goal is reduction of the work force.

New Item Filed With OMB

All new federal regulations must be approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the White House. Social Security filed this item for OMB approval recently:

AGENCY: SSA	RIN: 0960-AG22
TITLE: Additional Insured Status Requirements for Certain Alien Workers (2882P)
STAGE: Proposed Rule	ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT: No
** RECEIVED DATE: 03/07/2008	LEGAL DEADLINE: None

House Budget Resolution

The budget resolution (page 33) reported out of the House Budget Committee would give the Social Security Administration $10.64 billion for its operating budget -- or Limitation on Administrative Expenditures, as it is technically known, for fiscal year 2009, which begins on October 1, 2008.

President Bush's recommended LAE for Social Security was $10.386 billion.

A number of Senators have been seeking $10.677 billion or perhaps it is $10.917 billion. These things get hazy since the House Budget Committee budget resolution includes $240 million specifically earmarked for continuing disability reviews. It is unclear whether the Senators were including this amount in their total.

Remember, that the Budget Resolution sets only general guidelines for the Appropriations Committees.

Seven Months To Get Initial Determination

WKRC in Cincinnati is running a story on the length of time it takes to get an initial determination on a Social Security disability claim. The woman in the story had to wait seven months for an initial determination -- and then she was denied. See the video online.

In my part of the country, it takes an average of about six months to get an initial determination. Waiting seven months for an initial determination is nothing unusual. Of course, the wait to get a hearing is ridiculous, but that does not mean that the time it takes to get an initial determination is of no consequence.