Technical Questions On Re-Recons

I am not going to the trouble of trying to explain this so that those not well-versed in Social Security can understand it. People who cannot understand this, would not care anyway.

Can Social Security issue a partially favorable decision on re-recon (or informal remand, if you wish to use the agency's formal terminology)? I have been told that this is not allowed, but take a look at this POMS section, which shows a form for issuing a partially favorable re-recon decision and also look here at this POMS section that was updated in 2002 that refers to partially favorable re-recons. The form, in addition to being impossibly confusing, is clearly quite old, since it refers to the Bureau of Hearings and Appeals, whose name was later changed to the Office of Hearings and Appeals and then to the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review.

If partially favorable decisions can be issued on re-recon, what is the procedure after the partially favorable decision? If partially favorable decisions are not allowed on re-recon, can DDS call the claimant or his or her attorney to ask if they want to agree to accept the partially favorable decision? Should DDS notify ODAR if it feels that a partially favorable decision should be entered, but it is not allowed to do so?

And where are Social Security's updated re-recon instructions? Could they possibly be in an emergency message that is too sensitive to release to the public? That sounds ridiculous, but most emergency messages are being withheld from the public.

NY Times: Fix The Database First

From a New York Times editorial:

Every American who has a job or wants one should be following the debates in Congress over bills to crack down on illegal hiring. Employment verification is one of the few ideas still lurching around the Capitol after last year’s Senate shootout mowed down a forest of immigration reforms. It’s boring and complicated — it’s about databases — but unlike other immigration fixes, it affects every worker and employer in America, native-born or not.

Two House bills — the SAVE Act, sponsored by Heath Shuler, and the New Employee Verification Act, sponsored by Sam Johnson — are designed to squeeze illegal immigrants out of the country by making it impossible for them to find work.

Immigration reform is always tricky, but employment verification is where the details get demonic.

It starts with a flawed database that everyone would have to rely on to get work or change jobs. Think of the “no-fly” list, the database of murky origins with mysterious flaws that you, the passenger, must fix if you are on it and want to fly. These immigration bills seek to take small, badly flawed “no-work” lists and explode them rapidly to a national scale. With an error rate of about 4 percent, millions of citizens could be flagged as ineligible to work, too.

That’s only part of the price. The Congressional Budget Office says the SAVE Act would cost $40 billion over 10 years, adding up lost tax revenue and spending on things like thousands of immigration judges. It is likely to overwhelm the Social Security Administration, which already is swamped with disability benefits and retiring baby boomers. It won’t do much for small businesses that would have to pay to comply.

The problem is not with employment verification itself. Illegal immigrants should not be allowed to work, and any system that is rational and lawful needs to be backed up with a hiring database. The trouble with these bills is that they don’t fix the database errors first, and they are strict enforcement-only measures, uncoupled from any path to legalization for undocumented workers.

Emergency Message On Social Security Debit Cards

The Social Security Administration has sent out an "emergency message" on the new debit cards to be issued for Social Security benefits. Here is the message:

Direct Express is a debit card sponsored by the Department of the Treasury that will be made available to Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients through Comerica Bank. The Direct Express card allows individuals who do not have a bank account to access their funds with a debit card. The debit card can be used to make purchases from participating merchants, get money back from a point-of-sale transaction, and get cash at Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) and financial institutions (FIs) across the country. Representative payees for individuals may sign up for the Direct Express debit card, but it is not intended for use by organizational representative payees. Treasury will enclose an insert with information about the Direct Express program with the April 23, 2008, Social Security benefit payments mailed to 75,000 beneficiaries residing in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Alabama. These are the first in a series of inserts that will be used to promote the program to Social Security and Supplemental Security Income beneficiaries nationwide.

NOTE: Enrollment for the Direct Express debit card is not limited to these states. Individuals from any states who inquire about the debit card can also enroll in the debit card program.

Action

When handling inquiries involving Direct Express take the appropriate action as explained in the following chart.

IF the individual…	THEN…
would like to sign up for Direct Express OR	advise him/her to call the Direct Express enrollment line at 1-877-212-9991 or visit the website: www.USDirectExpress.com. This website will be available on April 23, 2008.
obtain more information (e.g., fee schedule, how to manage card activity to reduce or eliminate their costs, etc.) about the program
has signed up for the Direct Express card and wants to know the status of his/her account (e.g., did not receive the card, etc.)	tell him/her to call the Direct Express enrollment line at 1-877-212-9991.
has received his/her Direct Express card and has customer service questions about the program	advise him/her to call the toll-free customer service number on the back of his/her Direct Express card.
has questions about Direct Express that cannot be answered using the information in this Administrative Message	tell him/her to call the Direct Express enrollment line at 1-877-212-9991
reports a missing payment and indicates that he/she receives benefit payments through Direct Express	check the MBR/SSR to ensure that the payment was sent Other than confirming that the RTN is the one that Comerica Bank is using for Direct Express no other verification is required of the RTN/DAN If the MBR/SSR shows the payment was sent to the Direct Express RTN then we should process the nonreceipt based on the beneficiary's allegation Follow routine procedures regarding when to input the non-receipt. NOTE: The RTN database will be updated in May 2008 to include the newly activated RTN and will have the following statement in the remarks: "Direct Express Debit Card". Contact your RO or PSC if you need assistance determining whether nonreceipt should be transmitted

Direct all program–related and technical questions to your RO support staff or PSC OA staff. RO support staff or PSC OA staff may refer questions or problems to their Central Office contacts.

Bandwidth Or Server Problems At Social Security?

This is just a little speculation based upon a couple of things. First, I have noticed recently that it often takes a long time to access Social Security web pages. The problem seems to be getting worse. Second, I am hearing a lot of complaints that while Social Security is encouraging use of Electronic Records Express (ERE) to upload medical records to the agency, that a lot of the time ERE is unavailable.

Could these two problems be linked by inadequate bandwidth or inadequate network servers at Social Security, basically inadequate computer infrastructure? If so, the Social Security Administration is going to have to address the issue pronto or stop promoting the use of the internet to do business with the agency. But these may be no more than temporary blips.

Senator Kohl Introduces Bill To Stop Illegal Garnishment

From the Small Business Times of Wisconsin:

U.S. Senators Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) have introduced the Illegal Garnishment Prevention Act, a bill that would prevent the U.S. Department of Treasury from promoting the use of direct deposit for Social Security beneficiaries until they put a stop to the illegal garnishment of government benefits from the bank accounts of private citizens.

With increasing frequency, financial institutions are garnishing or freezing funds on behalf of creditors from bank accounts into which Social Security, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Veterans benefits are electronically deposited, despite clear protections in federal law against the garnishment of such benefits, Kohl said.

Senator Clinton On Backlogs

A press release from Senator Clinton's office:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton today joined Congressman Brian Higgins in calling on the Social Security Administration (SSA) to answer questions regarding excessive delays in appeal hearings that have been caused by a lack of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) who are charged with hearing those cases. In a letter sent today to SSA Commissioner Michael Astrue, Senator Clinton expressed her concerns regarding the excessive delays that have been reported in the Buffalo Hearing Office, which affects Social Security recipients in Erie, Chautauqua, Niagara, Genesee, Ontario, Monroe, and Cattaraugus counties. She also called for an explanation of how the agency determines the allocation of ALJs throughout their offices. Congressman Higgins brought this matter to the forefront on Monday when he singled out the delays affecting the Western New York region, and called for additional ALJs to be assigned to the Buffalo Hearing Office.

“It is unacceptable that people in Western New York are forced to wait almost two years before they can expect the SSA to hear their appeals,” said Senator Clinton. “People can’t be expected to put their lives on hold indefinitely. If the SSA is aware that certain offices have a track record of experiencing excessive delays, the agency should take a thorough look at how they are allocating the judges charged with hearing those cases.”

“This is a matter of basic human dignity,” Higgins said. “No one should have their life put on hold for years to find out whether they will receive social security disability benefits, but this has become the frustrating reality for thousands of Western New Yorkers. I thank Senator Clinton for partnering with me to advocate for getting these people the service they deserve.”

Monthly SSI Stats

The Social Security Administration has released its monthly statistical package for the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program.

Treasury Won't Give Up On Privatization

No else one is paying attention any more, so maybe I shouldn't, but the Department of the Treasury has released its Issue Brief No. 4 promoting privatization of Social Security. The paper aspires to an above the fray tone, basically by assuming that everyone agrees that we should privatize Social Security and that the only dispute is on how to do it. That is a ridiculous assumption, of course. Here is a small excerpt:

The institutional reforms considered in this issue brief, including several variants of personal accounts, are discussed solely in terms of the contribution they make to ensuring that attempts to pre-fund Social Security actually result in an accumulation of resources to fund future benefits. Accordingly, elements of these reforms that do not directly bear on the question of pre-funding—for example, the inheritability of personal accounts—are not discussed. In addition, it should be emphasized at the outset that none of the mechanisms for pre-funding considered here involve the privatization of any function of Social Security.

Yeah, right. Personal accounts and privatization are two completely separate things. Why would anyone think they were the same thing?