Unrealistic Views About Social Security Contributions

From a press release:

According to a newly released Stony Brook Poll conducted in association with Left Right Research, a Long Island based Marketing Research supplier, more than 81 percent of approximately 7,000 people surveyed believe that they had contributed enough to Social Security to support themselves in retirement, or more than they will receive during their lifetime. ...

When asked about how much they believed they had contributed to ... Social Security during their best paid year, more than 2 in 5 individuals surveyed were wrong by 50 percent or more regarding Social Security contributions ...

One of the reasons that many people believe that Social Security is a bad deal is that they believe that they have paid far more in FICA than they actually have. They think that if they had just invested this money for themselves that they would be wealthy. FICA is not high enough for that to be possibility.

Charlie Binder's Hat

Ever wondered about that cowboy hat that Charlie Binder wears in the TV ads for Binder and Binder? Binder and Binder's blog has an explanation.

McPaper Covers ALJ Disparities

From USA Today:

The growing number of people seeking Social Security disability benefits are finding vast disparities in how their claims are decided.

The gap is most obvious among the Social Security Administration's 1,400 administrative law judges (ALJs), who hear appeals from people who believe their initial application was unfairly denied. Some judges approve most claims they hear, while others approve almost none, federal data show. ...

Congress and the agency's inspector general have begun looking at the disparity. Yet both Social Security officials and advocates for the disabled say they are reluctant to interfere with the judges' independence.

"Congress has been pretty enthusiastic about the idea of ALJ independence," said Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue, adding that only "a handful" of judges have approval ratings above or below average.

Chained CPI Under Consideration

RJ Eskow writes at the Huffington Post that switching the Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) to the "chained CPI" method is under serious consideration. That may sound very technical but there is no question about it, switching to the "chained CPI" method would reduce future COLAs and would result over time in significantly lower benefits.

Retired ALJ Borowiec Writes Book

Retired Social Security Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Frank Borowiec of Chamblee, Georgia, has written a book with the title Upholding the Rule of Law in the Social Security Administration, An Agency At War With Itself, about the efforts that he and others made to eliminate the disability claims backlog at Social Security. Borowiec had worked for Social Security in Atlanta. His career included two years as the Regional Chief Administrative Law Judge in Atlanta. Here is some information on the book from the Dunwoody [Georgia] Crier:

The word "frustration" crops up often when Borowiec talks about his experiences as an ALJ handling disability claims cases. "You feel as you hear each case that you can correct an injustice, but [claimants] waited so long for a decision," Borowiec said, adding that sometimes people can become impoverished during an appeal, even losing their home. "When a check comes, it doesn't make up for the loss," he said.

For most of the book, Borowiec cites legal proceedings, governmental reports and SSA regulations in making his case for the changes he believed would eliminate the disability claims backlog. The book points out bureaucratic incongruities that thwarted that effort. For example, individual states and not the SSA make initial disability determinations. State operations are funded by the SSA, but disability decisions are not based on SSA laws and regulations, rather, a "manual" that attempts to interpret them. The manual has no legal standing and ALJs and the courts cannot use or reference it in their decisions.

 The book is available for $12.71 from Amazon. It was 1,838,249 in Amazon's ranking of books when I looked at it. I have not read it yet but I am sure it deserves better than that.

Update: It's soared up to 115,196 in Amazon's rankings!

SSI Is Not Enough To Live On

From a fact sheet prepared by the Technical Assistance Collaborative:

People with disabilities who receive SSI [Supplemental Security Income] payments continue to be the nation’s poorest citizens. In 2010, the annual income of a single individual receiving SSI payments was $8,436 – equal to only 18.7% of the national median income for a one-person household and over 20% below the 2010 federal poverty level of $10,830. Since the first Priced Out study was published in 1998, the value of SSI payments compared to median income has declined precipitously – from 24.4% of median income in 1998 to 18.7% in 2010 – while national average rents have risen over 50% during the same time period. 

In 2010, as a national average, a person receiving SSI needed to pay 112% of their monthly income to rent a modest one-bedroom unit. In the 12 years since the first Priced Out was published, the amount of monthly SSI income needed to rent a modest one-bedroom unit has increased an astonishing 62 percent. People with disabilities were also priced out of smaller studio/efficiency units, which averaged 99% of monthly SSI.

A Little Binder And Binder Info

I had posted earlier on the decision in the case of Binder v. Disability Group. That case was a trademark infringement action based upon the Defendant's use of the name "Binder and Binder" in Google search engine advertising. Binder and Binder won. That decision is now available online. The part of the decision concerning computation of damages sheds a small amount of light on Binder and Binder's operations. Here is an excerpt (footnotes and exhibit numbers omitted):

We conclude that Plaintiffs' are entitled to an award for lost profits. Plaintiffs earned an average revenue of $3,576.93 per case in California from December 1,2005 through November 30,2006.  Plaintiffs retained 18.78% of cases for which submission forms were entered on their site.

One footnote indicates that Binder and Binder's average fee per case in California was slightly lower than  its nationwide average of $3,606.69.

What is unclear to me is why the Court made no adjustment, as best I can tell, for the fact that Binder and Binder would not have won all the cases it might have lost due to the trademark infringement. It seems odd to me to assume a 100% success rate for cases taken on a contingent fee basis.  Surely, the Defendant's attorney argued this point. Since the Court ordered treble damages and awarded attorney fees, it would appear that the Court was not impressed with any of the Defendant's arguments.

Social Security Checks At Risk In Debt Limit Impasse

From USA Today:

Social Security payments to millions of retirees and people with disabilities could be threatened if President Obama and Congress can't agree to increase the government's debt limit by Aug. 2, a new analysis shows.

Although the Treasury Department likely could avoid delaying Social Security checks, the analysis by the Bipartisan Policy Center points up the depth of the cuts that would be needed if the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling isn't raised.

It shows that in August, the government could not afford to meet 44% of its obligations. Since the $134 billion deficit for that month couldn't be covered with more borrowing, programs would have to be cut.

If Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment benefits, payments to defense contractors and interest payments on Treasury bonds were exempt, that would be all the government could afford for the month. No money for troops or veterans. No tax refunds. No food stamps or welfare. No federal salaries or benefits.

 If the threat seems abstract to you, consider this from Ezra Kline:

The best advice I’ve gotten for assessing the debt-ceiling negotiations was to “watch for the day when the White House goes public.” As long as the Obama administration was refusing to attack Republicans publicly, my source said, they believed they could cut a deal. And that held true. ...  But today they went public. The negotiations have failed.