"Doesn't Necessarily Mean You're Fine"

From the Rochester Post-Bulletin:

Three years into retirement, William Dunn of Rochester thought all was going well. Then he received a nine-page letter from the Social Security Administration that caught him off guard.

The letter, dated May 11, said he'd been overpaid and owed the administration $6,114....

"I've been enjoying retirement too much to work," he said. "I knew something was messed up."

Dunn appealed the letter and is waiting for the administration's investigation to be complete....

Carmen Moreno, communications director for Social Security in the Chicago region, said, "Just because you're getting benefits doesn't necessarily mean they're fine."

If you went only by what you heard from Social Security's Office of Inspector General you would believe that overpayments happen only because of fraud by claimants. There is some of that, but there is also a lot of what happened to Mr. Dunn.

Senate Appropriations Subcommittee Markup Scheduled

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 appropriations bill that covers Social Security has been reported out of the House Appropriations Committee and should come up on the floor of the House of Representatives in the near future. The Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee that covers the Labor-HHS-Education bill that includes Social Security has scheduled a markup session for Tuesday, July 28. This does not guarantee that the appropriations bill will be enacted by October 1, 2009, the beginning of FY 2010, but Congress is making much more progress towards that goal than in other recent years.

President Talks Social Security "Reform"

From the transcript of a telephone interview that President Obama gave to the Washington Post, mostly concerning health care legistlation (emphasis added):

What I think has to happen is if we can show that we have a disciplined health care reform package that is serious about cost savings and is deficit-neutral, you combine that with the pay-go rules that we have been promoting and I believe that we can get through Congress, and you are imposing some discipline on the appropriations process -- and I thought that the F-22 victory yesterday was a good example of us starting to change habits in Washington -- then I think we're in a position to be able to, either at the end of this year or early next year, start laying out a broader picture about how we are going to handle entitlements in a serious way.

It may start with Social Security because that's, frankly, the easier one. And I think that it's possible to also look at tax reform and think about are there ways that we can maybe even lower marginal rates but eliminate all the loopholes and have that a net revenue generator. I think there are going to be a bunch of things that we can take a look at, but I think health care reform combined with pay-go, combined with how we deal with appropriations bills over the next six months will help lay the foundation for us to be able to make some of these broader structural changes....

Hiatt: And you'd be willing to look at a commission -- I mean, beyond Social Security that sort of puts everything on the table?

Obama: Yes, I think everything is going to have to be on table.

Recovery Act Lobbying

The economic recovery act signed by the President on March 20 gave the Social Security Administration a good deal of extra funding, but there were some catches. The act requires all federal agencies to disclose contacts between agency personnel and registered lobbyists concerning recovery act funds. Social Security has issued instructions to its staff concerning the disclosure provisions. Disclosure forms are supposed to be posted online. Thus far, no disclosure forms have been posted to Social Security's "Recovery Act and Lobbyists" website, which notes that the reports of contact "will be posted as received." I have a hard time believing that there have been no contacts.

Government Agencies Staying Away From Resorts

From the Wall Street Journal:

What do Reno, Orlando and Las Vegas have in common? To some pockets of the federal government, they just seem like too much fun.

Instead, employees at some big agencies, like the U.S. Department of Agriculture, are being encouraged to host meetings in more buttoned-down places such as St. Louis, Milwaukee or Denver. ...

The Department of Justice "decided conference[s] are not to be held in cities that are vacation destinations/spa/resort/gambling," according to a May email from an FBI employee obtained by the U.S. Travel Association and viewed by The Wall Street Journal. "Las Vegas and Orland[o] are the first 2 on the chopping block." ...

According to an Agriculture Department employee familiar with the guidelines, the agency issued internal travel guidelines in the spring that encourage employees to hold meetings in cities that display three key attributes: a travel hub; low in cost; and "a non-resort location."

Tales Of Woe In Tidewater Virginia

From the Newport News Daily Press:

Last week's column about a Newport News woman denied Social Security benefits after she was disabled by brain surgery struck a nerve.

"My husband was severely injured when he fell 30 feet off a roof," wrote a reader named Cheryl. "He was unable to work for six years. ...

"It was VERY obvious he could not work. ... We applied for Social Security disability and (were) outright denied. It was unbelievable."...

I've seen it too often, too: People debilitatingly ill or badly injured trying to wrest disability payments from a system that seems hell-bent on hanging on to every dime.

For years I've heard of initial claims routinely denied. That you need a lawyer to get any traction on appeal. That the third time's a charm. ...

If you qualify for federal disability, you should get it first time out of the gate. Approval shouldn't hang on an uncrossed T or undotted I.

You shouldn't have to wait years for final approval. Or have to pay 25 percent of your retroactive benefits — standard nowadays — to a lawyer or professional claims company just to get what's rightfully yours. ...

As the population ages and the economy worsens, the system is more backlogged. About 7.5 million Americans are drawing federal disability today — more than twice the number in 1990. Meanwhile, the number of staffers to process 3 million new claims every year has dropped by about 5 percent. ...

You have to wait five months just to apply. Then the average wait nationwide for a decision is three to six months. The first appeal will take another four to six months. The final appeal will take another 505 days — almost 17 months. ...

Average Processing Time At Hearing Offices

Here is the most recent report on average processing times at Social Security's hearing offices. Click on each image to see it full size.

Compare the average processing time as it has changed over time:

• January 25, 2007 -- 508 days
• May 25, 2007 -- 523 days
• July 28, 2007 -- 528 days
• August 31, 2007 -- 523 days
• November 30, 2007 -- 500 days
• February 29, 2008 -- 511 days
• May 30, 2008 -- 523 days
• June 27, 2008 -- 529 days
• July 31, 2008 -- 530 days
  
• September 3, 2008 -- 532 days
• November 5, 2008 -- 476 days
  
• December 3, 2008 -- 480 days
• March 8, 2009 -- 499 days
• April 24, 2009 -- 505 days
• June 3, 2009 -- 505 days
• June 29, 2009 -- 495 days
  

Revolt In San Diego Quashed

From the San Diego Union Tribune:

From their nondescript eighth-floor offices in Golden Eagle Plaza downtown, nine administrative law judges of the Social Security Administration work in near-total anonymity. ...

Despite the obscurity, the judges wield an impressive amount of power. Each year they conduct thousands of hearings and issue opinions on individual claims for Social Security benefits – such as retirement, disability and Supplemental Security Income – that the agency initially denied.

But behind the placid scenes of this little-known court system, a quiet revolt has been simmering for months.

One day in November, eight of the judges took the extraordinary step of signing a petition demanding the removal of the longtime chief judge of the San Diego office, Edward D. Steinman. ...

The petition was sent to the chief administrative law judge in Washington, D.C., who oversees all 1,200 judges in the Social Security legal system spread across 141 offices around the country.

Two investigators sent from Washington interviewed several of the ODAR judges earlier this year, one judge in the San Diego office said. The judge would speak only if he were allowed to remain anonymous because judges are not allowed to speak to the media.

Weeks later, two other officials announced the results. “They decided the chief judge would stay and there was no rationale for removing him,” the judge said. ...

Judge David Wurzel wrote that Steinman “put himself first by commandeering support staff for his own use. He takes the best clerks and writers for himself, and manipulates assignment of cases to enhance his own numbers. That enhances his own productivity but lessens the overall productivity of the office.”