Major ERE Upgrade

     Social Security had made no secret of its intention to add a report feature to its Electronic Records Express (ERE) system that allows attorneys and other representing Social Security claimants to review their clients' records online. With no fanfare, Social Security added this feature today.  Previously, one could only look at one case record at a time. Now, an attorney can look at a list of all of his or her cases and see their case statuses listed. It's not ideal (the ability to click on a listed case and go to that case record would be nice) but it's a big step forward.

    I like the concept of underpromising and overdelivering. It's a nice change from what we saw when ERE was being planned and first implemented.

What Would You Expect?

     From a study by Adele Kirk of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College:

This study uses SSA [Social Security Administration] administrative data linked with National Health Interview Survey data (NHIS) to examine health status, labor force participation at time of NHIS interview, and linked mortality data to examine mortality during the period following NHIS interview. The self-reported health status data present two strong and consistent patterns: denied applicants report being in considerably worse health than non-applicants, and beneficiaries appear to be sicker yet.

Unemployment Benefits And Social Security

     Stephan Lindner and Austin Nichols at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College have done a study, dealing, in part, with the effects of receipt of unemployment benefits on Disability Insurance Benefits claims at Social Security. The result, which is no surprise to me, is that the receipt of unemployment benefits decreases Disability Insurance Benefits claims.
     What I have observed is that many people delay, delay, delay in filing claims for Disability Insurance Benefits. They make do with whatever other income they can find and only apply for Social Security disability benefits when they are near the end of their rope. I think the reason in most cases is an unwillingness to accept that they are disabled -- people tend to have unrealistic recovery hopes -- and because the prospect of dealing with the Social Security Administration is too daunting. As an attorney who represents Social Security claimants, I then have to tell people who are desperate for income and medical care that they are starting a process that may take two years with an outcome which cannot be reliably predicted.

Commissioner's Broadcast Message On Budget

From: ^Commissioner Broadcast

Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 5:18 PM

Subject: COMMISSIONER'S BROADCAST--02/08/12

A Message To All SSA And DDS Employees‪

Subject: Budget

I just wanted to take a few moments to talk to you about the rest of this fiscal year in light of our budget. The good news is that Congress passed the omnibus appropriations bill four months earlier than it did last year. We were surprised that Congress did not stick to the substantially higher level of continuing disability reviews called for in the debt ceiling legislation passed last August. This lower level of funding, combined with substantially more people filing hearings requests, requires us to shift resources. I have asked some employees who have been helping the State agencies to redirect their support to hearing offices. That transition has started smoothly, and I want to thank everyone who is helping our fellow Americans who have been waiting too long for a hearing decision. In addition, we hope to start the next administrative law judge class by June.

It can be hard for people outside the agency to appreciate just how much more work we have and how rapidly our work force is contracting. We had a net loss of over 4,000 Federal and State employees in FY 2011, and we expect a net loss of over 3,000 employees this fiscal year. As we continue to lose staff, it means that in 2013, we will likely have about the same number of employees we had when I arrived in 2007, even though the volume of our work continues to increase.

While we are doing some very limited hiring, we are relying on retired annuitants and overtime at least until next year’s budget situation clarifies. I appreciate the help our recent retirees are giving us, and I encourage newer employees to learn as much as possible from these experts. Given the budget uncertainty, we are delaying a decision about offering early out retirement. We will revisit this issue in the fall when we have a better sense about our FY 2013 resource level.

There is no silver bullet, but we can’t ignore fiscal reality and assume that we can go on doing business as usual. As Deputy Commissioner Colvin has said, we will do less with less. We continue to look for ways to streamline and simplify work and identify what work we can stop doing. We have put forward several workload simplifications, and we are hopeful that they will receive support. We will also continue to consolidate offices where it makes sense—facing a choice between buildings and people, I’ll take the people every time.

I know you are familiar with some of the recent simplifications, such as elimination of subsequent disability applications and giving disability examiners the flexibility to move from Step 4 to Step 5 in the disability determination process when it is appropriate to do so. A more recent initiative is mandating authorized claimant representatives to file appeals online using our improved iAppeals application. This change, which will take effect on March 16, will eliminate work in field offices and speed the progress of cases for claimants.

I know that fiscal shortfalls create stress in our offices, especially when there are fewer of you to handle more work. Our inability to timely handle work makes the public more frustrated, and you endure that frustration. I also know that outcomes like pay freezes may cause you to question your career choice. Nevertheless, I know that you are proud to be part of our family, proud to be part of this venerable program, and proud to serve your communities. Please know that I, and more importantly, the American public, appreciate that you continue to deliver the best possible service.

It is because of you that I can say this year is off to an impressive start. Thanks again for all you do each day.

Michael J. Astrue

Commissioner

Posner On Templates

     Judge Richard Posner sits on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He is little known to the public but widely admired by attorneys for his original thinking and extraordinary writing skills. Judge Posner has taken a special interest in the Social Security appeals he hears. He finds the templates that Social Security is using for producing Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) decisions to be seriously troublesome. His most recent opinion on this subject is Bjornson v. Astrue, issued on January 31, 2012. The Bjornson case was remanded.

     Posner is not just admired by attorneys in private practice. He is admired by other judges. These templates are potentially a real problem for Social Security.

     By the way, Bjornson has a Chiari malformation. What is a case like this doing in the Court of Appeals, for goodness sake? Chiari malformations are a serious matter. This case should have been paid much, much earlier. Yes, I know there are people who have a Chiari malformation who have no symptoms but that does not change the seriousness of a Chiari malformation. Also, by the way, Chiari malformations aren't that rare.About one person in a thousand has a Chiari malformation.

Would Means Testing Title II Even Save Money?

From R.J. Eskow writing at Huffington Post:

Last week Republican Mitch Daniels once again pushed the "means testing" argument against Social Security, saying that we can no longer "afford to send millionaires pension checks" or "pay medical bills for even the wealthiest among us.".

Daniels and his fellow Social Security attackers are able to draw on a very reasonable-sounding (but completely deceptive) argument, one that's been honed and promoted by billionaire-funded think tanks and other anti-government organizations. The "means testing" argument does sound fair -- until you think about it.  ...


First of all, what's a "millionaire"? If you say that a millionaire is someone with $1 million or more in investable assets, past studies have showed that only about one American in one hundred meets that definition. After the collapse of the housing market and the decimation of private pension plans, the percentage of retirees who meet that definition is probably much smaller. And it's shrinking every year....

If you define "millionaire" in a more reasonable way -- say, as someone who earns at least a million dollars each year in investment and other income after retirement -- the number of people who fit the definition becomes extremely small.  ...


The Social Security Administration (SSA) is already cash-starved, especially by Republicans who have gutted its budget. These cuts have already delayed the processing of applications and appeals, and have threatened to slow the distribution of checks. These cuts hurt the disabled, children and seniors.

How is the SSA expected to handle this new means-testing function? Right now its overhead is admirably low because it's a simple cash-in/cash-out program. Will it now be forced to process new paperwork on every applicant? Will it have to link its computer systems with those of the IRS, creating a new electronic database of information on every American? Will every retiring senior be grilled by government officials as part of a screening process?

The cost of means-testing could well be greater than the amount of money saved. After all, there are more than 38,000,000 people over the age of 65 in the United States today. And every one of them will need to be screened every year.

I thought Republicans wanted to cut bureaucracy, not increase it....

Here's what would make sense: Tax those high earners so that they're contributing their fair share to the economy.

Don't Know What This Means

     Back in November, Social Security requested the approval of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the White House, for a proposal to:

... remove from our regulations the requirement that our adjudicators "consider the opinion given by one or more medical or psychological consultants designated by the Commissioner" when they make findings about medical equivalence to impairments listed in our Listing of Impairments (listings). We believe that this requirement is outdated and that we no longer need it. Removing it will allow us to issue some favorable disability determinations and decisions more quickly.  

      Social Security has now withdrawn that proposal, before OMB could act. This could mean that Social Security just changed its mind or it could mean that OMB made it clear to Social Security that the proposal would not be approved. OMB almost never officially disapproves a proposal. They just get withdrawn.

Language And Speech Listings In The Works

    Social Security is soliciting comments from the public on possible new listings for language and speech disorders. There is no proposal posted an this time so we do not know what Social Security is thinking about.