Personally Identifiable Info On Lexis/Nexis?

This is the entire report released by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG):

Quick Response Evaluation: Access to Personally Identifiable Information Available in the LexisNexis Total Research System (Limited Distribution) (A-07-09-19059)

Our objective was to determine whether the Social Security Administration's policies and procedures safeguard personally identifiable information (PII) in LexisNexis from improper use by Agency employees.

Our review found that SSA needs to establish policies and procedures to adequately safeguard PII available in LexisNexis applications from improper use by its employees. SSA also needs to establish the related instructions for restricting this access.

This report contains restricted information for official use. Distribution is limited to authorized officials.

Delays In Minnesota

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press:

Don Gunnon was the breadwinner until his back gave out. Then he found himself in the bread line. ...

For decades, Don ... paid taxes — to the federal government, the state, the county, the city. They never had a reason to take advantage of the safety net they helped fund. ...

Don's taxes included coverage for Social Security Disability Insurance, and now he was disabled. ..

Like 60 percent of Minnesotans who applied, Don was denied on his first application. He asked for a reconsideration — a request to have a different pair of eyes look at the application. He was denied again. The next step was to file a request for a hearing before an administrative law judge. That's when he discovered he was caught in a backlog of scandalous proportions: In 2007, about 746,000 claims were pending at the hearing level, 9,000 of them in Minnesota. Some cases had been on the back burner for three years.

For those all-important hearings, it's best to hire a lawyer, but Don, who was broke, could ask only for free help through Hennepin County. Don said his representative, who wasn't a lawyer and whom he met only a few days earlier, kept shushing him when he tried to object to incorrect information. Six years after he started the process, he was denied disability insurance payments for the third time.

Some Emergency Messages

Last year I made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Social Security Administration for all the recent Emergency Messages that the agency has been withholding from public view on the grounds that they are too "sensitive" to be released. I have finally received a partial response to my request. 121 pages of records were released to me. Another 68 pages are still being withheld.

I am of the opinion that as a result of a recent order from President Obama and a recent Memorandum from the Attorney General that the agency has no basis for withholding these records from me. I have filed an appeal.

I am not going to try to post the entire 121 pages I have received. Most are truly trivial. If you want them, please let me know and I can e-mail the whole thing to you.

I have posted five of the more interesting ones on the separate Social Security Perspectives blog.

• EM-07084 contains instructions for implementing "Informal Remands", also known as "re-recons." Because of its length and Blogger's limitations, this is broken up into Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3. I think that any reasonable person familiar with the subject will agree that this should have been released to the public. As an attorney who represents Social Security claimants I should have had access to this. Ironically, the "Informal Remands" are now about to end just as we finally find out how they are being implemented.
  
• EM-08081 shows that several large Long Term Disability (LTD) companies have entered into an agreement to provide the Social Security Administration with medical records on their insureds.
• EM-08087 shows how the Social Security Administration is administering the HEART Act which provides for special treatment of certain veterans annuities, special pay and allowances to military service members and AmeriCorps payments. It is clearly a policy document that should have been released to the public.
• EM-08093 is a great example of the absurdity of Social Security's treatment of these Emergency Messages. This "sensitive" document shows how Social Security was working with the Postal Service and the Department of the Treasury to move up the delivery date of checks in advance of Hurricane Ike in September 2008. I have no idea why Social Security would want to keep this secret. The absurdity did not end in 2008. Take a look at the document. Social Security has redacted the portion of the document showing the zip codes affected. The only explanation is "Ex. 2." This refers to the Exception 2 in the FOIA which allows agencies to withhold materials "related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency." I do not think those who received their checks early thought that this matter related only to the agency. Even if one can imagine a twisted justification under FOIA for this redaction, what is the point? The recent order from President Obama specifically directs agencies that their should be a "clear presumption" for release of records. The Attorney General's memorandum warns agencies that the Department of Justice will defend FOIA cases only if some interest protected by the FOIA would be harmed by the disclosure. What is there to even think about here?
  
• EM-08105, which is broken down into Part 1 and Part 2 due to its length, contains information about how Social Security is interpreting and applying the SSI Extension for Elderly and Disabled Refugees Act. It seems obvious to me that this policy material should be freely available to the public.
  

Turnaround In Galveston

From The Daily News of Galveston County:

Eight months after leaving, the U.S. Social Security Administration will return to the island, easing fears that the services upon which many residents depend would remain on the mainland.

The administration will open its office, 4918 Seawall Blvd., at 9 a.m. Monday.

Although its island offices sustained minimal damage from Hurricane Ike, administration officials blamed the Sept. 13 storm for its decision in October to leave and lease office space at 2700 Marina Bay Drive in League City.

The return comes after much controversy about the administration’s long-term real estate strategies.

In April last year, the administration generated public outcry when it said it would make a permanent move to League City.

The decision angered island residents who worried the elderly and disabled would have trouble traveling to League City, which doesn’t have public transportation.

Although the administration secured an 18-month lease in League City, terms of the deal allowed it to terminate the agreement in six months, officials said.

Island resident Margaret Canavan collected 1,600 signatures on petitions opposing the move.

In July, administration officials agreed to halt the plans.

The administration, which complained about high rents on the island, has not abandoned its search for new office space, spokesman Wes Davis said.

Same-Sex Partners And Social Security

Because of the Defense of Marriage Act there is virtually nothing that the Social Security Administration can do to give recognition to same-sex partners for purposes of benefits payments. However, the Department of State has just given recognition to the same-sex partnerships of its employees, especially for purposes of the diplomatic service. There are vast differences between the Department of State and Social Security, but are there some things that Social Security could and should do for its employees who are in same-sex partnerships? What do you think?

Roundtable On Backlogs

From Government Executive:

The economic downturn, inadequate funding and red tape are at the core of an increasing backlog of Social Security disability cases, panelists said during a roundtable discussion in Washington on Thursday.

The government has tried for years to reduce the number of cases awaiting review from administrative law judges, but the recession is a significant setback, said Alan Cohen, senior budget adviser for the Senate Finance Committee.

"Initial claims are going to skyrocket in 2010," he said during the forum, organized by the Association of Administration Law Judges. "The tsunami hasn't hit the administrative law judges here." ...

"You just need the money to properly administer the program," said Kathryn Olson, staff director for the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security. "Too much pressure to crank out cases really does undermine the integrity of the process." ...

Some panelists said SSA's plan to reduce the backlog by 2013 was forcing judges to take on too many cases.

"I am truly stunned by the suggestion that administrative law judges should review 500 to 700 cases per year," said U.S. Magistrate Judge Jillyn Schulze, referring to an expectation set by Chief Administrative Judge Frank A. Cristaudo in a 2008 letter to administrative law judges. "That is truly unconscionable."

"The Notes Of Your Horn Are Flat"

From an e-mail from Witold Skwierczynski, the head of the labor union that represents most Social Security employees, to Social Security Regional Commissioner Bea Disman:

I found the regional memo that you issued regarding SSA’s “Going Green” initiative particularly disingenuous. ... Increased use of mass transit will result in less carbon emissions, less pollution, less ozone layer depletion and a diminished greenhouse effect. ...

The economic stimulus package that recently passed Congress provided SSA [Social Security Administration] with an additional $1 billion in administrative expenses. The FY 09 budget resulted in an $834 million increase in SSA’s administrative expenses over FY 08. The stimulus package also contained an increase to $230/month for transit subsidies for federal employees. Other agencies increased their transit subsidies for their employees as a result of the stimulus legislation. SSA’s current transit subsidy is $105/mo. in the Washington DC area and $60/mo. everywhere else.

The Union asked Commissioner Astrue to increase the transit subsidy to the amount provided in the stimulus package. Despite the large amount of additional revenue that SSA is receiving in the stimulus package, the Commissioner refused to increase the transit subsidy. AFGE requested bargaining with SSA regarding the new legislation which increased the amount that agencies could pay to employees for transit subsidies. SSA issued a letter to the Union refusing its bargaining request. ...

So you can tout your horn regarding SSA’s “Going Green” accomplishments if you wish. Unfortunately the notes of your horn are flat and are not in sync with the instrumentation of other agencies of the government. ...

Guam Wants To Remove The Cap

The Pacific Daily News reports that Guam's non-voting delegate to the House of Representatives, Madeleine Bordallo, is introducing a bill to remove the cap on Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments to people living in U.S. territories such as Guam. The article says that because of the cap the average SSI payment in Guam is only about $100, rather than over $600 as it is in the U.S. proper.

I am confused. I thought that SSI was not payable at all in U.S. territories such as Guam -- and more importantly, Puerto Rico. When did this change and what is the cap?