Amazing Op Ed Piece In The Washington Post

     From an Op Ed piece in the Washington Post yesterday by Charles Lane with some comments by me in brackets:

The Americans With Disabilities Act, passed with bipartisan support in 1990 at the urging of then-President George H.W. Bush, enshrines the notion that every American can and should hold a job regardless of physical or mental limitations. 

Under the ADA, employers who refuse to hire or promote the disabled may be liable for money damages in federal court.  [Whoa. Time out. That is not what the Americans with Disabilities Act says. That's what a lot of "disability advocates" wish it said.What it actually says is that employers must give "reasonable accommodation" to people with disabilities. There is nothing in the ADA that says or suggests that "every" American can or should hold a job. That would be absurd. If the Washington Post advertises a data entry job does it have to hire a quadriplegic who applies? Of course not. It doesn't have to hire the quadriplegic for that or any other job unless it could do so with only reasonable accommodation and that sure wouldn't be the case for a data entry job. Hire the quadriplegic for an editorial writing job such as Mr. Lane holds? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet on the courts being willing to enforce such a right. The words "reasonable accommodation" are awfully vague and the courts have been almost completely unwilling to enforce them. The Americans with Disabilities Act doesn't even mean what it appears to mean and what it appears to mean is vastly less than what Mr. Lane thinks it means.]

Social Security Disability Insurance, however, pays people who can show that they are too mentally or physically impaired to remain in the labor force. In short, for many workers, SSDI creates a quasi-right not to work. [Yes, just as it should since there are many people who are too sick to work. Ever call in sick, Mr. Lane? Why? You are of the opinion that no illness should ever prevent a person from working. Why would you be so lazy as to call in sick?]...

In 1960, however, Congress removed the minimum age requirement [of 50], and in 1965, it allowed people to qualify if they suffered from a condition rendering them unable to “engage in substantial gainful activity” for a year or more, including mental and musculoskeletal ailments.  [No, what Congress actually did in 1965 was to eliminate the requirement that disability be permanent. Now disability has to have lasted or be expected to last at least a year. Mental and musculoskeletal ailments that were permanent -- and most were and are -- were already covered before 1965.]

After that, the rolls swelled with people claiming crippling back aches and depression. Both the Carter and Reagan administrations tried to cull undeserving cases, but the resulting backlash was so strong that Congress actually liberalized the rules in 1984. [What makes you so sure they were undeserving? Try to cut huge numbers of people off disability benefits in 2013 and see what happens. It will be 1984 all over again. Go ahead, I dare you, Mitt Romney.  Follow Lane's advice if you're elected President.] In 2010, mental and musculoskeletal conditions accounted for 54 percent of all new SSDI cases, according to the CBO [Congressional Budget Office]. ...

I don’t mean to imply that all, or even most, SSDI beneficiaries are malingering. [So kind of you, Mr. Lane, to acknowledge that not everyone on Social Security disability benefits is a malingerer. Honestly, I think you need to meet a cross section of those receiving Social Security disability benefits before you start suggesting that many people receiving Social Security disability benefits are malingerers. Essentially no one who has contact with Social Security disability recipients on a regular basis would agree with you. You don't know what you're talking about.] Indeed, some of the recent increase in enrollment would have occurred anyway due to the aging of the population.

Failure To Follow Up On Failure To Cash Checks

     Here's another of the many ways that Social Security has trouble fulfilling its mission because of lack of staff. An Inspector General report shows that Social Security is having a hard time dealing with situations in which a claimant fails to cash his or her Social Security check. The failure could indicate many things that Social Security should address, such as the claimant being dead, the claimant being mentally incompetent or a representative payee being irresponsible but the agency doesn't know unless it does an adequate follow up and that takes staff time but staff time is in short supply at Social Security. Social Security tries to follow up on these cases but isn't doing all that it should. 

     I suppose that switching to electronic payment might seem to be the solution for the problem but, if anything, electronic payment merely hides problems that need resolution.
     Congress may not like it, Social Security management may not like it, but the Social Security Administration cannot avoid social work duties. People's lives tend to get a bit messy when they get older or become disabled. Dealing with that messiness is an inherent part of the agency's mission. It's social work and it takes staff. Staff costs money. If you don't spend the money to allow an adequate staff, vulnerable people suffer and taxpayper money is wasted.

Romney Praises Government Run Health Care

     I suppose this is off topic but I cannot resist posting this from BuzzFeed Politics:

“Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the GDP in Israel? eight percent," Romney told donors at a fundraiser at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, speaking of a health care system that is compulsory for Israelis and funded by the government. "You spend eight percent of GDP [Gross Domestic Product] on health care. You're a pretty healthy nation. We spend 18% of our GDP on health care. Ten percentage points more. ... Our gap with Israel is 10 points of GDP. We have to find ways — not just to provide health care to more people, but to find ways to find and manage our health care costs."

What Is A Somatic Contractor?

     Can anyone explain this contracting notice posted by Social Security?

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is seeking to award three somatic RMC contractors to establish Regional Medical Contractors (RMC) Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs). Under a BPA, the contractor will assess and document impairment severity in SSA disability claims based on the listing of impairments in SSA'S Program Operations Manual System (POMS) Section DI 34000.000. Contractors may also be asked to provide additional services that are related to their area of specialization but not directly related to any particular disability claim.

Five Field Offices To Close

     From the Federal Times:

The Social Security Administration will close five field offices by the end of September, according to the union representing agency employees.

Those five, among almost 1,300 nationwide, are in Biloxi, Miss., Ketchikan, Alaska; Louisville, Ky.; Washington, D.C.; and Clinton, Iowa, the American Federation of Government Employees said in a news release.

The agency has already closed eight field offices since January.

In an email, SSA spokesman Mark Hinkle said the five offices are being consolidated with others and no worker will lose their jobs. The single employee in the Ketchikan office is retiring, Hinkle said. ...

“Given the tight budget situation, we’ve had to make tough choices, including consolidating a small number of our offices,” Hinkle said. ...

The latest step is already drawing protests from lawmakers who represent affected communities. Closing the Ketchikan field office would reportedly save only $100,000, members of the Alaska delegation said in a July 13 letter to Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue. They urged Astrue to consider “all feasible alternatives.”

Hearing On Removing SSNs From Medicare Cards -- What Do You Use Instead?

     From a press release:

House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX) and Health Subcommittee Chairman Wally Herger (R-CA) today announced that the Subcommittees will hold a joint hearing on removing Social Security numbers from beneficiaries’ Medicare cards.  The hearing will take place on Wednesday, August 1, 2012, in 1100 Longworth House Office Building, beginning at 9:30 A.M. ...

In 2008, the Social Security Administration (SSA) Inspector General found that displaying SSNs on beneficiary Medicare cards unnecessarily places millions of Americans at risk for identity theft and recommended that the SSN be removed from Medicare cards.  Also in 2008, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 6600, the “Medicare Identity Theft Prevention Act of 2008,” introduced by Representatives Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) and Sam Johnson (R-TX), directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish cost-effective procedures to ensure that SSNs are not included on Medicare cards moving forward.  This legislation passed the House by voice vote on September 28, 2008.  Unfortunately, the Senate did not act on this legislation. ...

To date, CMS [Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services] has not developed a plan for removing the SSN from the Medicare card to protect beneficiaries from identity theft and protect taxpayers from fraudulent billing.

Dayton Improving

      From the Dayton Daily News:

... T]he Dayton hearing office of the Social Security Administration has been one of the nation’s worst when completing applicants’ appeals for the benefits. 

For the past two fiscal years, the Dayton office was the second slowest nationally, trailing only Buffalo, N.Y., to process appeals.... [C]laimants who appealed last year to administrative law judges in Dayton had to wait an average 491 days to receive a ruling for benefits. Last year, the average wait time was 345 days at the 157 Social Security offices nationwide. ...

So far this year, the Dayton hearing office has improved its appeals process, is no longer ranked among the 20 slowest in country, and the average wait is about 200 days shorter than it was just two years ago. But the office still ranks as the slowest in Ohio.

Did You Watch The Olympic Opening Ceremony?

     Did you notice that Great Britain is so proud of the civil servants who work in its national health system that they were a major feature of the opening ceremony for the London Olympics? This leads to a couple of obvious questions. 

• Why aren't we in the U.S. proud of our civil servants, especially those who help people, like most Social Security employees?
• Why are some people so afraid of "Obamacare"? It doesn't even involve anything that can reasonably be described as nationalized health care yet Britons who are not so unlike us are so proud of their truly nationalized health care system that they feature it in their Olympic opening ceremony! Why shouldn't they be proud? They receive better health care than Americans at a lower cost.