The Social Security Administration's "Update" contains this sentence: "The number of employees we have determines the amount of work we can complete."
Does that sound innocuous? Self-obvious? The last Commissioner of Social Security, Jo Anne Barnhart, would never have allowed such a sentence in a Social Security document. She promised that the magic fairy dust of her "plan" would make everything all better at Social Security regardless of the number of employees her agency had. She promised wonders from her "plan" but delayed and delayed announcing what her plan was. The delay was almost certainly because she had no more than vague ideas about a "plan." She probably also had an increasing realization that no "plan" would work without additional employees. She finally announced her "plan" shortly before she was to leave office, leaving it to her successor to make her "plan" work. Of course, her "plan" was unworkable and quickly abandoned. The whole thing deceived the naive, of which there are many.
This week is an opportunity to fully bury the Barnhart approach. We have a Congressional hearing coming up that will focus on the question of why Social Security keeps overpaying people. Undoubtedly, Social Security will be criticized. Social Security can respond by saying, in effect, "Thank you, Congress, for pointing out our errors. We will do better." Or Social Security can respond by saying, in effect, "Yes, we've known about these issues for years. We'd love to address them but we don't have enough personnel. We've been telling you this for years. We got a bigger budget in 2009 and 2010 but never enough to get these problems resolved. Now, our budget has gotten tighter. Get us a bigger budget and we'll take care of these problems. Otherwise, nothing's going to happen and it's not because we don't care." Which would be a more honest answer to the criticism? Which will Social Security give? I understand the need for diplomacy in dealing with Republican Congressmen who remain all too eager to believe that the amount of work which may be accomplished by a federal agency is independent of the number of employees that agency has but honesty is needed as well.
This week is an opportunity to fully bury the Barnhart approach. We have a Congressional hearing coming up that will focus on the question of why Social Security keeps overpaying people. Undoubtedly, Social Security will be criticized. Social Security can respond by saying, in effect, "Thank you, Congress, for pointing out our errors. We will do better." Or Social Security can respond by saying, in effect, "Yes, we've known about these issues for years. We'd love to address them but we don't have enough personnel. We've been telling you this for years. We got a bigger budget in 2009 and 2010 but never enough to get these problems resolved. Now, our budget has gotten tighter. Get us a bigger budget and we'll take care of these problems. Otherwise, nothing's going to happen and it's not because we don't care." Which would be a more honest answer to the criticism? Which will Social Security give? I understand the need for diplomacy in dealing with Republican Congressmen who remain all too eager to believe that the amount of work which may be accomplished by a federal agency is independent of the number of employees that agency has but honesty is needed as well.