The Ryan Plan On Social Security

     Paul Ryan's budget plan would:

• Means test Social Security
• Raise full retirement age to 70
• Allow workers the right to divert one-third of their F.I.C.A. taxes to optional private Social Security accounts
• Alter the way in which average wages are computed for determining the Primary Insurance Amount (PIA), the amount one receives upon retirement, in such a way as to reduce benefits for all but the lowest wage workers

Educational Loans Eating Into Social Security Benefits

     From Smart Money:

According to government data, compiled by the Treasury Department at the request of SmartMoney.com, the federal government is withholding money from a rapidly growing number of Social Security recipients who have fallen behind on federal student loans. From January through August 6, the government reduced the size of roughly 115,000 retirees' Social Security checks on those grounds. That's nearly double the pace of the department's enforcement in 2011; it's up from around 60,000 cases in all of 2007 and just 6 cases in 2000. ...

Many of these retirees aren't even in hock for their own educations. Consumer advocates say that in the majority of the cases they've seen, the borrowers went into debt later in life to help defray education costs for their children or other dependents.

Spending Money To Save Money -- Is It Really So Hard To Understand?

     Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has done a study using a database of persons who are receiving Social Security retirement benefits but who have not used Medicare in the preceding three years even though they are 96 years of age or older. OIG estimates that if Social Security contacted or attempted to contact these people, that they would find that the agency is paying benefits to several hundred deceased individuals. OIG estimates that $99 million could be saved if this were done.

     Unfortunately, it takes manpower to do this sort of thing and Social Security has less manpower and more and more work to do. Projects like this which would save money are deferred because the agency has to answer its telephones and deal with people filing claims. 

     There's no way around it. It comes up all the time. You have to spend a little money at Social Security to save a lot of money in benefit payments. Republicans in Congress have a hard time understanding a concept that any businessperson can quickly grasp.

Online Calendar For Hearing Availability Coming

     Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, federal agencies must obtain the approval of the Office of Management and Budget before using any new form, including electronic forms, that requires information from the public. Agencies must post notice of requests for approval of a new form in the Federal Register. This notice appeared in the Federal Register today:

SSA [Social Security Administration] is creating an online-based scheduling tool, the Automated Scheduling Application (ASA), to document the availability and special needs of participants for hearings before administrative law judges (ALJ). The respondents are disability applicants or recipients, ALJ staff, SSA Hearing Office employees, appointed representatives, medical experts, vocational experts, and verbatim hearing recorders who need to schedule or request special needs related to an ALJ hearing. All respondents will use the ASA system (via SSA's Intranet for SSA employees, and a public-facing Internet site for members of the public) to document their hearings availability and needs, and to view scheduled hearings in an electronic calendar.

A Very Bad Sign

     From the Federal Times:

The Social Security Administration on Monday offered early retirements to 9,000 employees, almost 14 percent of its workforce.

Anyone taking voluntary early retirement must retire by Sept. 30. The offers are effective immediately, SSA said in an e-mail to Federal Times. SSA is not offering buyouts.

To be eligible, employees must have completed 20 years of creditable service and be at least 50 years of age, or have at least 25 years of creditable service at any age. They must have been continuously on SSA’s payroll since Dec. 26, 2011. ...

SSA currently has more than 62,000 employees. The agency already is struggling with last year’s 6 percent reduction in staffing, which has forced it to rely on overtime or close field offices to the public a half-hour early.

SSA Commissioner Michael Astrue told the Senate Finance Committee on May 17 that further cuts in fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2013 would force the agency to cut its hours even further next year.

Staffing cuts also could hurt SSA’s ability to reduce its claims backlog, which has troubled the agency for years.

      This strongly suggests that the agency is trying to avoid or reduce furloughs once the new fiscal year begins on October 1.
     There's no question about who's responsible for this. It's Congressional Republicans.

Who Is This Guy?

    From an op ed piece in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

As a practicing psychiatrist in Pittsburgh, I have become all too aware of a disturbing and potentially dangerous way in which Social Security Disability is now being deployed for psychiatric patients.

In years past, a person who applied for SSI/Disability would have his or her psychiatric records requisitioned from a treating psychiatrist. The applicant would then also be evaluated by a second psychiatrist contracted to the Social Security Administration and not linked to the patient. In addition, the applicant was required to be seen by a contracted psychiatrist annually to ensure that he or she indeed remained disabled and qualified for the subsidy.

In recent years, however, I am finding patient after patient placed on disability, often after an initial evaluation with me, without any attempt made to check if that individual remains disabled, even years after the initial determination.

For instance, I queried a middle-aged patient I've treated for four years as to how he is now supporting himself. "Well, I am on Social Security Disability," he replied.

I asked him why he remains on disability. "I have depression." But you are no longer depressed, I countered. Indeed, he has been free of symptoms since a few months after beginning treatment three years ago. ...

Here is a typical scenario: A patient makes an appointment with me for what are often, though not always, legitimate psychiatric symptoms. Then, within a week or two of my evaluation, I receive a request from Social Security for a copy of my report (the patient has signed a release for this information).

The patient has often applied for disability prior to seeing me, and hardly ever volunteers that he or she has done so. The patient is awarded the disability before our next visit! By the third visit, often within two months of the initial evaluation, the patient has fully recovered from the initial "disabling" symptoms.

     Here are a few comments on this piece:

• Social Security already does continuing disability reviews. The agency would do more of them and do them more intensively if the agency had decent administrative funding. Take your complaint up with Republicans in the Congress.
• There was never a time where all persons disabled by psychiatric problems were automatically sent to a second psychiatrist when they applied for Social Security disability benefits nor was there ever a time where all individuals drawing Social Security disability benefits by reason of mental illness were automatically reviewed every year. I'll be kind and say this man's memory is playing tricks on him.
• I'm getting schizophrenics denied in North Carolina even though they've been in psychiatric treatment for years and have had involuntary commitments but one visit to a psychiatrist can get you on Social Security disability benefits in Pennsylvania?

Can You Spot A Theme?

     From the final report of Social Security's Occupational Information Development Advisory Panel (OIDAP) (bolding in the original):

Central to OIDAP’s role as a Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Panel, is transparency in its process. ...

To date, transparency in the process of developing occupational data for SSA’s disability programs has been achieved primarily through the OIDAP. SSA’s decision to discontinue the OIDAP beyond its 6 July 2012 charter, presents the additional challenge of maintaining transparency with this project in the future. ...

The OIDAP held its last public teleconference on 4 June 2012 and strongly advised SSA to maintain all development of occupational data for disability programs in a transparent and public arena, and to adhere to scientific standards and scrutiny. ...

At the OIDAP meeting on 4 June 2012, the Panel unanimously developed General Recommendation #9 about the transparency and scientific activities for future efforts ...

The OIDAP has not been consulted or involved in efforts for the future direction of occupational data development beyond the public meeting on 4 June 2012. ...

The OIDAP brought transparency to SSA’s occupational information development process that impacts the lives of millions of Americans. We believe SSA must continue this transparency as it develops any occupational information that will affect decision-making in the disability programs. ...

Failure to fully ensure the scientific veracity of the occupational taxonomy, data collection instrument, sampling strategy, and sources of data or data collection methods, will make SSA vulnerable to legitimate litigation. ...

Further, SSA should consider external oversight, including establishing an oversight body involving technical experts and users, as part of future efforts and initiatives for occupational information development.

     And I didn't think that OIDAP itself was anywhere near transparent enough itself! Anyone still think I'm paranoid about what Social Security is up to with its occupational information system project?
     By the way, OIDAP sent this report out as an e-mail attachment to those on its mailing list. I've uploaded it to Scribd. Will Social Security post this final report online?

TRAC Report On Federal Court Filings In Social Security Cases

     The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) is a project of some part of Syracuse University. TRAC compiles data on various government functions. TRAC has recently released a report on federal court filings in Social Security cases. These are appeals from final agency decisions denying benefits. Almost all of these are disability benefits cases. They have gone up:

Number Latest Month	860
Percent Change from previous month	3.9%
Percent Change from 1 year ago	19.4%
Percent Change from 5 years ago	62.6%

  
     Here is a chart from the report showing the gross numbers on new federal court filings in Social Security cases:

     TRAC also studied which federal court districts had the heaviest rate of federal court filings in Social Security cases (sorry about this table not lining up so well -- the problems are caused by limitations in the way that TRAC presents the data and limitations in Blogger):

     The increase in the number of federal court appeals should surprise no one familiar with the way the program operates. Administrative Law Judges are denying more claims. The Appeals Council is remanding fewer cases. More claims are being filed. If anything, Social Security should be happy that it's not seeing a bigger increase in these appeals.

     By the way, note that the areas with the heaviest filing rate tend to be in the South. A lot of this has to do with demographics. The South produces more disability claims because of lower educational levels and work skills in its population and poorer access to health care.