Quiz

Free Web poll for your Web site - freepolls.com

Does This Make Sense To You?

     Is there some tension, or perhaps self-contradiction, in this section of Social Security's manual?

Section 207 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C 407) states: “The right of any person to any future payment under this title shall not be transferable or assignable, at law or in equity, and none of the monies paid or payable or rights existing under this title shall be subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process, or to the operation of any bankruptcy or insolvency law.”...

Any arrangement in which the claimant shares control of the funds from his or her benefit with a person or entity that has an interest in charging or collecting money from the claimant is an assignment-like situation that violates SSA’s policy.  ...

Some representatives are authorized by third parties to ensure that debts beneficiaries owe to the third parties are repaid immediately after the beneficiary starts to receive benefits. There is no assignment-like situation if:

• The representative has no financial interest in the beneficiary’s direct deposit account (i.e.., he is not named on the account and/or has no authority to direct the money in the account); and
• The representative is not charging the beneficiary a fee; and
• The beneficiary pre-authorizes (according to his financial institution’s policy) a withdrawal of funds from his account to repay a debt to a third party; but
• The representative did not obtain the pre-authorization from the beneficiary through deceit, coercion, or intimidation; and
• The representative gets confirmation from the beneficiary (oral or written) of the pre-authorization to withdraw the money from the account after the funds are deposited into the beneficiary’s account and before a transfer of funds is made to pay the third party debt. This confirmation is necessary because a beneficiary may have signed the pre-authorization before learning whether he will receive benefits and the amount of past-due benefits he will receive (i.e., authorizing the representative to take benefit funds before the beneficiary has had any chance to exercise control over the funds). The beneficiary also may have signed the pre-authorization without specifying the amount of money that the representative will withdraw from the account. This circumstance is different than other pre-authorizations (e.g., mortgage payments, loan repayments, investments, nursing home fees, etc.) because, in most cases involving pre-authorizations, the beneficiary has an ongoing relationship with the organization that is making pre-authorized withdrawals, the beneficiary knows the amount of money they are pre-authorizing, and those pre-authorizations occur continuously after the beneficiary is receiving regular benefits.

     Right. Assignments are forbidden unless there is an ongoing relationship with the entity to which you are making the assignment and the assignments continue after you start receiving benefits.
     In my opinion, this is indefensible. This was a Bush era policy that should have never happened and which should be undone as soon as possible. If Long Term Disability insurers want this section of the statute amended, they need to lobby Congress.

You Can't Cut Social Security Without Hurting Current Recipients

From a press release issued by Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee:

Any cuts to Social Security imposed by the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction would be borne almost entirely by current Social Security beneficiaries and those who are very near retirement, a new analysis by Social Security Chief Actuary Stephen C. Goss makes clear. Three-quarters of all Social Security payments between 2012 and 2021 – the 10-year period in which the Select Committee is required to generate deficit reduction – will go to current recipients, while an additional 21 percent will go to Americans who are very close to retirement-age and will start receiving benefits between 2012 and 2019, according to the Actuary’s analysis.

The analysis highlights that there is virtually no way for the panel to use Social Security cuts to meet its target without harming current beneficiaries. Current retirees have struggled in recent years because there was no cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in 2010 or 2011. The Social Security Administration yesterday announced a 3.6 percent COLA for 2012.

Some Management Bonus Information

     The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the union that represents most Social Security employees has issued its October 2011 newsletter. AFGE routinely makes Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to find out about bonuses going to high level Social Security employees. This issue of their newsletter includes the following results of AFGE's most recent FOIA requests (and read to the end for some information on who did not get a bonus).

Atlanta Region:
Paul Barnes, Regional Commissioner 
Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Award 03/29/09 $23,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $19,750

Mary Ann Sloan, Regional Chief Counsel 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $19,000

Quittie C. Wilson, Assistant Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $7,600
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $8,000

Boston Region:
Manual Vaz, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $19,750

Susan Harding, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $15,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $15,000

Chicago Region:
James F. Martin, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $13,500
Commissioner’s Leadership* 09/16/10 $00.00*
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $17,500

Kim L. Bright, Regional Chief Counsel 
Individual Performance Award 06/21/09 $800
ECS Award 08/16/09 $400
Individual Performance Award 07/04/10 $731
Individual Performance Award 08/29/10 $500

Danny L. Byrns, TSC Manager 
Individual Performance Award 07/05/09 $1,400
ECS Award 08/30/09 $700
Individual Performance Award 06/06/10 $1,500
Individual Cash Award 08/29/10 $500

Donna L. Calvert, Regional Chief Counsel 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $10,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $10,000

Mary D. Mahler, Assistant Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $8,200
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $8,500

Marcia R. Mosley, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $10,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $10,000

Dallas Region:
Martha Lambie, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $8,500
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $10,000

Ramona Schuenemeyer, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $19,750

Tina M. Waddell, Regional Chief Counsel 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $20,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $10,000

Denver Region:
Nancy A. Berryhill, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $22,500
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $19,750
SES Rank Award 09/30/10 $34,995

Yvette Keesee, Deputy Regional Chief Counsel
Quality Service Award 05/12/09 $00.00*
Individual Performance Award 08/16/09 $3,500
Individual Performance Award 03/28/10 $1,200
Individual Cash Award 08/29/10 $500

Katherine E. Kintz, Deputy Asst. Regional Cmsnr.
Individual Performance Award 06/30/09 $1,800
Individual Performance Award 03/09/10 $1,100

Sean P. Brune, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $10,000

Kansas City Region:
Michael Grochowski, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $16,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $17,500

William K. Powell, Asst/Deputy Regional Cmsnr. 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $11,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $12,500

New York:
Beatrice Disman, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $26,500
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $19,750

Paul M. Doersam, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $18,500

Anne Jacobosky, Assistant Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $8,400
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $9,000

Teresa C. Rojas, Acting Deputy Regional Cmsnr. 
ECS Award 08/02/09 $1,000

Philadelphia Region:
Laurie Watkins, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $21,500
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $18,000

Lewis H. Kaiser, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $9,000

Paula M. Newcomer, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $8,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $8,300

San Francisco Region:
Peter D. Spencer, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $26,500

Stephen J. Breen, Assistant Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 03/29/09 $9,000
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $9,000

Patricia A. Robidart, Deputy Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $8,550

Seattle Region:
Stanley Friendship, Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $10,000

Alan W. Heim, Assistant Regional Commissioner 
SES Performance Award 01/03/10 $8,500

James P. Burkert, Deputy Asst. Regional Cmsnr. 
Individual Performance Award 07/05/09 $1,700
ECS Award 07/06/09 $500
Individual Performance Award 05/09/10 $1,750

Robert Pagan, Acting Deputy Regional Cmsnr. 
QSI (Quality Step Increase) 07/05/09 $0.00*
Individual Performance Award 06/06/10 $1,600

* Honor Award

     And from the Newsletter:

It’s also worth noting that San Francisco Regional Commissioner Pete Spencer apparently did not receive any award money in Fiscal Year 2010. Spencer sponsored “Management Tango” in 2009, an event that cost more than $675,000 and generated a great deal of bad publicity for Social Security. ... Spencer recently announced his retirement from the agency.

Susan Daniels

Susan Daniels, who served as Social Security's Deputy Commissioner for Disability and Income Security Programs in the Clinton Administration, died earlier this week. She had helped with the Obama transition team for Social Security.

New Rules On Partially Favorable Attorney Advisor Decisions

From today's Federal Register:

We are revising the procedures for how claimants who receive fully favorable revised determinations based on prehearing case reviews or fully favorable attorney advisor decisions may seek further review. We are also revising our procedure to provide that we will notify claimants who receive partially favorable determinations based on prehearing case reviews that an administrative law judge (ALJ) will still hold a hearing unless all parties to the hearing tell us in writing that we should dismiss the hearing request. These changes will simplify our administrative review process and free up scarce administrative resources that we can better use to reduce the hearings-level case backlog.

Social Security Is Doomed, I Tell You, Doomed!

     From McClatchy:

The leading safety-net program for America's disabled workers is in a financial death spiral in the aftermath of the Great Recession.

The sour economy, weak eligibility standards and a wave of aging baby boomers are driving an explosive increase in the number of injured workers who get disability benefits through the Social Security Disability Insurance program.

At the current growth rate, the SSDI trust fund, which pays for benefits, won't have enough money to meet its obligations in 2018.

     And from The Atlantic:

One out of every five Social Security dollars is spent in the disability insurance program. The problem isn't so much that we've paying disabled people too much but that we're probably paying too many people who claim to be disabled. Since 1985, Social Security Disability applications have doubled as a share of the population. It is possible, but unlikely, that Ameica's disability population has doubled since the mid-1980s. The more reasonable explanation is that more disabled workers in tough times have figured out that they can get paid to not work.

     These articles goes on and on with endless quotes from the same right wing sources. I have seen other articles along the same lines. 

     Reporters are notorious copycats. They see an article in one newspaper or magazine that they find interesting. They find a way to redo that piece for their own newspaper. This may be all that is going on but my strong impression is that someone is deliberately planting these stories. There are too many statistics given. Reporters sometimes dig out statistics like these but not often. Usually when you see a statistical compilation, it was given to the reporter. Most likely this is coming from one of the Koch brothers financed "think tanks" in an effort to defame Social Security. It is a sign of just how much money that these "think tanks" have that they can go to these lengths to damage Social Security's image.

DOT Replacement Not Available In Full Until 2016

     One important question about Social Security's effort to develop a replacement for the Dictionary of Occupational Titles is when the work will be completed. Here is something of an answer. This is from the transcript of the July 27, 2011 teleconference meeting of Social Security's Occupational Information Development Advisory Panel (pages 29-30)

This is Andy Wakshul [Panel Member]. I have a question. As I look at the Plan I was impressed certainly with the breadth and the scope of it, and how detailed it was. But I notice that the timeline extends out pretty far, five years at the bottom of the chart, and that's only for data collection. Do you have an idea when this will be an instrument that adjudicators will be able to use in making disability determination? It's got to be after 2016.

MS. KARMAN [Director]: This is Sylvia. We anticipate that through a program evaluation and any information that we have collected through 2016 if, in fact, we are targeting, for example, occupations that are frequently presented to us in claimant's vocational work histories, there may be the possibility that the Agency would be in a position to begin using that  information for those areas of work.