Social Security Earnings Estimator

The Social Security Administration has added a new feature to its online services, an "earnings estimator." I do not understand the name "earnings estimator" since what is estimated is not what I would call "earnings" but what I would call benefits. The agency must be proud of it, since I got about five e-mails about it. Unfortunately, the service is painfully slow, at least this morning.

Union Newsletter

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Council 220, which represents many Social Security employees, has issued its July 2008 newsletter. No breaking news, but worth reading.

Waiting In Ohio

From the Columbus Dispatch:

A 57-year-old man has waited three years and counting for a Social Security disability determination because of his failing heart, vascular disease, cirrhosis of the liver and hepatitis ...

Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue doesn't gloss over the problem with his federal agency. He has told Congress that the jumbo-sized backlog stems from an increasing baby boomer caseload, years of underfunding and an increase in Social Security's responsibilities coupled with a 5 percent staff reduction from 2003 to 2007.

Astrue, who took the top job in February 2007, said that while "everything is focused on moving in the right direction … there is no one magic bullet" to cut through the backlog, stemming from years of the "system being out of whack."

"It's hard if you are on the waiting end," Astrue said. "We are making progress … (But) it is a lot of detail, and it is hundreds of things we have to focus on."

Astrue is sending 13 new disability judges to Ohio this year, two of them to Columbus.

He wants to cut the 761,000-case national backlog by about 60,000 a year.

Jim Allsup, a former administration employee whose company handles rejected disability claims, says, "The whole thing is completely broken" and that the disability benefits process is "so woefully out of date that it has to be totally overhauled and streamlined."

White House Liaison?

I no longer see anyone listed on Social Security's organizational chart as being White House Liaison. This position was created by Commissioner Astrue, as best I can tell. The position may still exist, but just not be shown on the organizational chart, which does not seem as detailed as I remember it. Can anyone enlighten me on whether this position still exists?

New Regulations In Final Months Of Bush Administration

With the end of the Bush Administration in sight and several possible regulatory changes in the pipe at Social Security, it is a good time to review what the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is telling federal agencies. What OMB says matters since OMB has to approve any proposed regulations before they go in the Federal Register. Here is an excerpt from a recent memo from OMB to federal agencies:

Every regulatory agency and department has a responsibility for continuing to ensure regulations issued in this final year are in the best interests of the Alnerican public. To the extent pennitted by law, the heads of executive departments and agencies should continue to minilnize costs and maxilnize benefits for each of their upcoming regulations, and should avoid issuing regulations that are unnecessary. Except in extraordinary circumstances, regulations to be finalized in this Administration should be proposed no later than June 1, 2008, and final regulations should be issued no later than November 1, 2008.

Results Of Unscientific Poll

What is your general impression of the job that Social Security does in deciding upon disability claims?

It's way too easy to get on disability benefits. They're approving a lot of phonies. (5)	6%
Social Security is a bit lax . Some people are getting on benefits who shouldn't. (10)	11%
Social Securtiy does as good a job of deciding who is disabled and who isn't as you could reasonably expect. (11)	12%
Social Security makes it a bit too tough. Some people are being denied who should be approved. (10)	11%
They make it far too tough. Many people who are way too sick to work are being denied. (8)	9%
It's a bit of a mess. They approve some people who should be denied and deny some people who should be approved. (22)	24%
It's a total mess. There's little consistency. You can never tell who is going to be approved and who is going to be denied. (24)	27%

Total Votes: 90

New Regulations

Today's Federal Register includes two new Social Security items.

The first is a "direct" final regulations with request for comments, which is effective on August 18, 2008 unless adverse or critical comments are received

... amends our regulations by correcting a cross-reference affecting entitlement to mother's and father's benefits, to include alternatives to the 9-month duration of marriage requirement. We are deleting an out-of-date cross- reference to the definition of ``substantially all.'' In its place, we are restoring the regulatory definition for ``substantially all'' that had been inadvertently deleted to show if a grandchild or stepgrandchild is dependent based on our support requirements. Also, we are revising headings in six of our regulations to conform to plain language provisions of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, as amended.

We are also amending one of our regulations for clarity and to correct a typographical error.

The second is a notice of proposed rulemaking:

These proposed rules would amend our title II regulations to explicitly provide that we apply an underpayment due an individual to reduce an overpayment to that individual in certain cases. Our title XVI regulations already state this policy. Additionally, these proposed rules reflect our procedures for collecting overpayments when a payment of more than the correct amount is made to a representative payee on behalf of a beneficiary after the beneficiary's death. These proposed rules would clarify that we would collect overpayments in this situation from only the representative payee or his estate but would not collect these overpayments from the representative payee's spouse or from the spouse's estate.

What Hourly Rate For Paralegals?

The Supreme Court recently held in Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff that fees are available for paralegal assistant time under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which requires the federal government to pay attorney fees for those who sue the federal government when it is determined that the government's position was not substantially justified. This raises the question of what rate is available for paralegal assistant time. The Alaska Employment Law blog tells us that the government did not object to a $95 hourly rate for paralegals in Onstead v. Astrue, 2008 WL 2065252 (D.Alaska May 13, 2008).