GAO Report Continues To Put Astrue In Bad Light

I have posted about the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on service delivery at Social Security. Hardly anyone pays attention to most GAO reports. (Sorry, GAO, but you know it is the truth.) This report, however, is continuing to draw attention from the press.

Government Computer News has an article that contains this little paragraph, which is not something that Commissioner Astrue is too interested in seeing in the media:

Online services so far have not produced a big benefit, SSA staff members told GAO. Relatively few customers use them, and because of erroneous or missing information on some online forms additional time is required by staff to contact customers to gather or correct information.

The Washington Post has a story out today with this quote from Commissioner Astrue:

Since becoming commissioner, I have repeatedly said we need timely and adequate funding in order to maintain the employee levels we need to serve the American public,... We have been aggressively simplifying processes and embracing new technologies in order to provide better service, but the continuing [budget] resolutions of the past three years have constrained hiring and damaged service delivery.

Astrue has repeatedly called for the budgets that were recommended by former President Bush, but those budgets were barely enough to prevent Social Security's workforce from declining. He has consistently failed to ask for enough money to increase the number of employees at the Social Security Administration and has consistently downplayed Social Security's staffing problems and the service delivery problems that the staffing shortages have caused. These are simply facts which make Astrue vulnerable to criticism. Astrue seems to be thin-skinned, pugnacious and self-righteous. His personality and his situation are a bad combination.

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), a union that represents most of Social Security's workforce, has released a press release on the GAO report urging that Commissioner Astrue step down.

About Time For A Hearing

I looked back at when the House Social Security Subcommittee held its first new hearing after an election and here is what I found:

• February 14, 2007 -- Social Security Disability Backlogs
• May17, 2005 -- Protecting and Strengthening Social Security
• February 27, 2003 -- Social Security Protection Act of 2003
• February 28, 2001 -- Social Security Administration's Proposal to Implement Return to Work Legislation
• February 2, 1999 --Impacts of the Current Social Security System, Today's Children
• March 6, 1997 -- The Future of Social Security for this Generation and the Next: 1994-1996 Advisory Council on Social Security Report

Nothing has been scheduled yet. I know that Congress in general and the Ways and Means Committee (of which the Social Security Subcommittee is a part) in particular have been working overtime on the economic stimulus bill, but still it looks like it is about time to schedule a hearing.

GAO Report On Service Challenges Draws Attention

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has issued a report with the title, "Social Security Administration: Service Delivery Plan Needed To Address Baby Boom Challenges." The report notes that:

Reduced staffing [at Social Security] also impacted key customer service indicators. In fiscal year 2007, more than 3 million customers waited for over 1 hour to be served. Further, SSA’s Field Office Caller Survey found that 51 percent of customers calling selected field offices had at least one earlier call that had gone unanswered, but for methodological reasons, the unanswered call rate was likely even higher.

GAO urges that Social Security develop a service delivery plan. Social Security's response is that it already has a plan. GAO mentions the argument that Social Security lacks adequate operational funding, but does not endorse it. The report does tentatively suggest that Social Security's service delivery plan may need to call for more money for the agency, which may be an oblique way of saying that Social Security should be sounding the alarm itself, instead of downplaying its problems.

The GAO report is drawing attention from U.S. News and World Report and Government Executive. More importantly, Chairman Baucus and Ranking Minority Member Grassley of the Senate Finance Committee have issued a press release citing the GAO report as a reason for Social Security to get additional funding.

Update: U.S. News and World Report has a second story about the GAO report.

Night Of The Living Dead -- 20,000 Of Them

The Social Security Administration maintains a Death Master File (DMF) available to the public which lists the names, Social Security numbers, date of birth and last address on those Americans whose deaths have been reported to the Social Security Administration.

A new report from Social Security's Inspector General contains the disturbing news that there are 20,000 living Americans who are listed on the DMF! That sort of error could have serious consequences and the possibility of identity fraud may be the least of the problems. All sorts of public benefits, including Social Security are cut off once one's name and Social Security number show up on the DMF. It might become impossible to do a wide range of business activities, including getting credit. Of course, the burden of correcting this mistake would be upon the innocent victim.

E-Verify Fight Continues

Congress Daily (scroll down) reports that there is an E-Verify battle going on over the economic stimulus bill, with efforts being made to require increased use of the system to verify Social Security numbers. Social Security will be caught in the middle if there is any major expansion of E-Verify, since Social Security's databases contain a certain percentage of errors but the agency lacks adequate staffing to quickly resolve complaints from those denied employment as a result of the errors.

Senate Compromise Does Not Cut Social Security

I can now confirm that the Senate compromise on the Obama economic stimulus package (see lines 461-464) does not change the amount going to the Social Security Administration from the bill that was reported to the Senate floor. The amount is still $893 million with $750 million going towards building a new National Computer Center (which will be several years into the future) ,$140 million going to other information technology projects at Social Security and $3 million to Social Security's Inspector General. The bill that passed the House contained $400 million for the National Computer Center, $500 million for reducing backlogs at Social Security and $2 million for the Inspector General. Assuming the Senate compromise passes, which seems likely, this matter then goes to a Conference Committee to work out the differences between the two bills.

Update: Here is a link to the actual text of the amendment. The Social Security part begins on page 148.

AEI On Social Security Disability

Henry Olsen and Jon Flugstad at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) have produced a remarkable piece called "The Forgotten Entitlements." Let my give a few quotes:

The word “disabled” triggers visions of quadriplegics and speechless stroke victims, but the actual definition applies to those with ailments far less severe. Indeed, today the vast majority of those awarded benefits suffer from chronic back pain, mental problems, and other difficult-to-diagnose maladies. Gaining access to the program, and staying in it, was made easier in the 1980s and 1990s by decisions that adopted less-stringent qualifying criteria and made other such changes. Jack Kemp’s famous truism — if you subsidize something, you get more of it — has proven true for ssdi. Disability is increasingly subsidized, and in the past decade, the number of SSDI beneficiaries has grown by over 2.5 million people. Program costs have also exploded and are projected to keep rising. ...

The history of SSDI is typical of entitlements: What started as a narrow program to assist the hardest cases has expanded incrementally and is now overwhelming. ...

By 1977, 2.8 million non-elderly people were on SSDI a program whose expenditures by that time exceeded revenues by 25 percent. These looming financial problems led to federal legislation in 1980: Initial applications were scrutinized more closely, which increased benefit denial rates by 15.5 percent. The Reagan-led Social Security Administration also instituted more thorough and frequent disability reviews and made eligibility requirements more stringent, determining that 380,000 beneficiaries — or 40 percent of those reviewed — no longer met the program’s medical criteria. ...

A congressional backlash ensued, leading to new amendments in 1984 that expanded SSDI’s scope. Eligibility was extended to those without the “ability to function in a work like setting” — a drastic change from the program’s original, medical focus on whether an applicant’s diagnostic criteria “met or exceeded a listed impairment.” This opened the door to granting benefits for expensive, long-term impairments like back pain, arthritis, and mental disabilities, which affect an applicant’s ability to function in the workplace. ...

Congress has stacked the deck in favor of SSDI applicants in other ways, too. Medical evaluations provided by an applicant’s doctor take precedence over those conducted by SSDI program’s medical staff and hired independent doctors. Giving priority to the decisions of an applicant’s caretakers effectively renders powerless SSDI’s evaluation measures, especially on ambiguous conditions such as depression and back pain, which comprise a large portion of SSDI applications. To appeal a Social Security Administration decision is also relatively easy; in fact, three separate avenues of appeal are open to disappointed benefit seekers. Furthermore, appellants may use lawyers hired on a contingency-fee basis to help them prepare their cases; SSA, though, is restricted in its ability to retain and use outside counsel. ...

Many people currently receiving SSDI probably can work, perhaps not full-time and perhaps not in their former careers, but nevertheless: They can work. ...

AEI is usually called a "think tank." A more accurate description would be "right wing polemic factory." This hit job is an example of what they do every day.

Compromise Has No Cuts For Social Security?

The economic stimulus bill that came to the floor of the Senate for action contained $893 million for Social Security, mostly for a new national computer center. There is now a compromise version of this bill that is likely to pass the Senate. This compromise version contains a number of changes. Planet Washington provides a list of the changes and Social Security is not on the list. This contrasts with an earlier report that $140 million would be cut from the amount going to Social Security.

Regardless of the amount, it appears that the Senate bill will contrast with the House bill, which has a similar amount of money, but which devotes much of it to working down Social Security's backlogs. This difference will be worked out in a Conference Committee.