Employees Protest Closure Of Memphis Office

     From WREG:

About a dozen government union workers holding signs pleading with the feral (sic) government to keep the east Memphis Social Security office open, lined Players Club Parkway Monday.

The parking lot is full, but the doors are expected to close December 28th.

“The agency stated they could save 300,000 dollars a year. With all the budget cuts, they needed to shut the office down,” said American Federation of Government Employees local president, Peter Harris. ...

Three offices will remain open in Memphis.

Student Loan Forgiveness For Those Found Disabled By Social Security

     From the Tuscon Sentinel:

The Education Department enacted a crucial reform on behalf of borrowers who become disabled, issuing new rules earlier this month that make it easier for these borrowers to get their federal student loans forgiven.

The rules, which the department has not publicly announced, for the first time recognize certain disability findings by the Social Security Administration as sufficient grounds to discharge student loans. This will allow many borrowers to avoid a lengthy double review to determine whether they are truly disabled. Under federal law, borrowers who develop severe and lasting disabilities are entitled to get their loans forgiven.

Indictments In Minnesota

     The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that "An employee of the Social Security Administration in St. Paul and three other Twin Cities residents were indicted by a federal grand jury this week in an alleged decade-long conspiracy to obtain real Social Security cards under phony identities."

And They'll Change Back Again In A Heartbeat If It Makes Business Sense

     From the Washington Post:

AARP, the lobbying powerhouse for older Americans, last year made a dramatic concession. Amid a national debate over whether to overhaul Social Security, the group said for the first time it was open to cuts in benefits.

The backlash from AARP members and liberal groups that oppose changes in the program was enormous — and this time around, as Washington debates how to tame the ballooning federal debt, AARP is flatly opposed to any benefit reductions for the nation's retirees.

Man Bites Dog; 4th Circuit Rules For Claimant!

     The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a decision in Bird v. Commissioner of Social Security remanding a case to Social Security. In and of itself, this decision isn't that important. What is important is that this is the first opinion of this sort from the Court since 1999! There have been published opinions on attorney fee issues from the Court since 1999 and on appeals filed by the government but no published opinions on appeals filed by claimants in 13 years despite the fact that there have been hundreds of appeals filed by claimants over that long time period. For 13 years, no matter how meritorious the case, all that the claimant ever received from the Court was a one or two paragraph per curiam opinion which said, in effect, "Go away and quit bothering us with your trivial little Social Security cases. We don't care!"

     I don't think the published opinion in Bird happened because the case is that incredibly compelling. I'm sure there have been many other Social Security appeals more compelling over the last 13 years. What has happened is that the composition of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has changed. A solid majority of the Court's judges are now Democratic appointees. That majority will probably grow over the next four years. This change will have an effect on the District Courts and ultimately on Social Security.

     Media attention to judicial appointments focuses almost entirely on the Supreme Court. However, the appointments to the Courts of Appeals and the District Courts are also vastly important. The number of civil actions in Social Security cases has not risen at the same rate as the number of Social Security disability claims filed. This may start changing and not just in the 4th Circuit area of Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina.

I Run As Hard As I Can And I Just Keep Getting Further Behind

     From the newsletter of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) here is the workload and performance summary for Social Security's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 (which began on October 1, 2011 and ended on September 30, 2012). Click on it to see it full size. See below for some highlights and lowlights that I've pulled out.

     Here are some things to notice:

• Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) available went up by  about 71 or about 6% over the prior FY.
• Receipts of new requests for hearing went down slightly in FY 2012.
• Case dispositions went up by about 27,000 in FY 2012 compared to FY 2011.
• Attorney adjudicator (or senior attorney) dispositions plummeted by almost 16,000 in FY 2012 compared to FY 2011. What happened to the attorney adjudicator program? These dispositions are sorely needed to help out with the backlog.
• Overtime hours went up dramatically at ODAR from 309,000 hours to 431,159. I think the overtime went down in the rest of Social Security. I expect overtime has been going down since the beginning of the new fiscal year on October 1, 2012. If sequestration (part of the "fiscal cliff) starts on January 1, 2013, the overtime will be almost completely eliminated and the agency will lay off employees. This would be disastrous throughout the Social Security Administration.
• Despite having more ALJs, more case dispositions and fewer new cases coming in, the number of pending cases per ALJ went up over the course of FY 2012 from 523 to 533. The decrease in attorney adjudicator decisions accounts for only a part of this. I think the reason this doesn't seem to add up is something omitted from this summary -- informal remands, also known as re-recons. These seem to have stopped some months ago. The efforts to reduce the backlogs by paying cases earlier have been cut back dramatically.

"Those Who Truly Need Help"

     From a Washington Post editorial:

Social Security’s retirement age is already headed to 67, which is one reason that program is no longer a major cause of government insolvency. Still, it can and should be rendered more sustainable. The disability component’s explosive recent growth, at a time when the nation’s general health is stable, suggests that reform would not harm those who truly need help.

     Who exactly is it on Social Security disability benefits who doesn't "truly need help"?  

Why Are ALJs Denying More Cases?

     The November 2012 issue of the Social Security Bulletin, the agency's really wonky scholarly publication, has an interesting article (really, it is interesting!)  Factors Affecting Initial Disability Allowance Rates for the Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Programs: The Role of the Demographic and Diagnostic Composition of Applicants and Local Labor Market Condition by Kalman Rupp.  Rupp finds that the rate of approval of disability claims at the initial level goes down during recessions and that this decline cannot be explained simply by an increase in the number of disability claims. The evidence suggests that in recessions Social Security makes it harder for people to qualify for Social Security disability benefits at the initial level.
     Rupp did not look at decisions at the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) level. I hope that either he or someone else takes a look at what happens during recessions at the ALJ level. The rate at which Social Security ALJs allow disability claims has plummeted over the last four years or so. Attorneys who represent Social Security disability claimants have been perplexed by this since the common perception has been that, if anything, the cases have gotten stronger as the baby boomers have aged and as it has become harder for claimants to win at the initial level. Attorneys have theorized that the change had something to do with the ALJ selection process, ALJ training or a set of data that Social Security now provides to ALJs showing each one how he or she compares to other ALJs in their office, their region and the nation on productivity and allowance rate. Press reports about an ALJ in West Virginia who was approving almost all of the cases he heard have also been blamed but those reports didn't start until well after the decline in ALJ allowance rate started. Those on the inside have denied that anything has been done that was intended to affect ALJ allowance rates or that should have had such an effect.  Could it be that the explanation for what has happened at the ALJ level lies in the fields of psychology or sociology, that ALJs have collectively and unconsciously reacted to the recession by being harder on disability claimants?