Where Is The Trustees Report?

     Each year Social Security's Trustees release a report projecting the trust funds into the future. Basically, this is all the Trustees do and they really don't do the projecting themselves. It's done by Social Security's actuaries. Last year the report was issued on the Friday before Memorial Day. I think that was the latest it had ever been released. There was criticism over the late release. We're well beyond Memorial Day and there's no sign of the report. I have no idea what's going on but I'll guess that the delay isn't being caused by Social Security's actuaries. I expect their part was done several months ago. Maybe the delay is caused by wrangling over the verbiage that the Trustees add to the projections. Maybe the problem is the Medicare Trustees report which is released at the same time. Anyway, it's time for the report.

New Data Center Nearly Finished

     From Federal News Radio:

The Social Security Administration's new data center is almost finished after nearly two years....

 "We are merely a month and a half away from where we take possession of the new building. The building, itself, has come in under schedule and under budget, and at high quality. So we will begin the migration once we have the keys to start moving services over to the new data center," said Bill Zielinski, the Social Security Administration's chief information officer. "We are really looking forward to that time when we can take advantage of all the things the new technology will provide us."

A New Use For A Vacated Social Security Building?

     From CBS-DC:

Baltimore may soon be the home to hundreds of illegal immigrant children who were taken into custody at the border.

WBFF-TV reports that the former Social Security building, which has been vacant for months, could be designated to house hundreds of children crossing the border illegally with no adult supervision.

Contractors Complain

     Translation contractors in New York complain about a loss of Social Security business.

First Step Towards A Senate Appropriations Bill

     A Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee has reported out an appropriations bill covering the Social Security Administration. Here's an excerpt from the Subcommittee summary:

Preventing Improper Social Security Payments—The Committee recommendation includes $1,396,000,000 for the Social Security Administration (SSA) to conduct continuing disability reviews and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) redeterminations of non-medical eligibility, a $199,000,000 increase over the FY 2014 level. These periodic reviews ensure that individuals receiving Social Security disability benefits are still eligible to receive them. ...

Social Security Administration (SSA)—The Committee recommendation includes $11,921,040,000, a $224,000,000 increase, for SSA's administrative expenses. In FY 2015, SSA will administer approximately $950 billion in benefit payments to approximately 66 million Americans, SSA will process approximately 5.3 million retirement applications and 2.8 million disability applications, and SSA will provide services for over 40 million visitors to its field offices and 47 million callers to its 1-800 number. This increase in funding will help SSA keep pace with rising costs and improve basic services to the public that millions of Americans rely on every day.

     How does an 1.9% increase keep pace with rising costs much less improve service? Does the $199 million increase for preventing improper payments come out of the $224 million increase for Social Security generally? If so, there's no increase for general operations. Inflation is at a low level but it's not non-existent.
     And remember, this is the Senate with a Democratic majority. The House Appropriations bill, IF the House can produce one, will be much worse.

Hearing On Threat To Face To Face Service

     The Senate Special Committee on Aging has scheduled a hearing for June 18 on the threat to reduce or eliminate face to face service at Social Security.

Do People Retire At Age 62 Because They Want To Retire Or Because They're Sick

     From the Squared Away Blog of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College:

Are people who claim their Social Security retirement benefits when they’re 62 too sick or impaired to work? ...

 [R]esearchers, from the University of Michigan and Johns Hopkins University, examined Medicare claims from 1991 through 2008 for the four groups during the year following their 65^th birthdays. They found no evidence of persistent health problems that would have kept the 62-year-olds from continuing to work for a few more years. ...

Controlling for race, sex, education and other factors that have a bearing on health, the $287 annual difference in Medicare claims between people who started receiving retirement benefits at 62 and at 65 was not significant. Similarly, the healthcare spending of people who received disability benefits and those who were rejected was virtually the same.

But there was a large gap between the group who claimed a retirement benefit at 62 and the group on disability: Medicare claims for disability recipients were $4,400 more annually than the claims for early pensioners. 

It’s important to note that this analysis doesn’t capture any differences in healthcare spending that may’ve occurred prior to age 65.

     Because of the methodology problem indicated in the last paragraph quoted above, I don't think we can call this study definitive.

Unthinkable Interference With ALJ Independence

     From the Associated Press:

Amid complaints about lengthy waits for Social Security disability benefits, congressional investigators say nearly 200 administrative judges have been rubber-stamping claims, approving billions of dollars in lifetime payments from the cash-strapped program. ...

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., was incredulous that so many judges would rule that initial rejections were so often wrong.

"Are the people below you always wrong?" Issa asked Judge Charles Bridges of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

"I would say they are not legally trained," replied Bridges, who approved 95 percent of the cases he decided.

When pressed further about his approval rate, Bridges said: "I don't pay attention to those figures. All I do is concentrate on each case, one at a time."

Issa: "You don't notice that you're essentially saying 'approved, approved, approved,' almost all the time?"

Bridges: "I don't want to be influenced by that."

The committee's report found that 191 judges approved more than 85 percent of the cases they decided from 2005 to 2013. All told, those judges approved $153 billion in lifetime benefits, the report said.

     At some point in the future, I can't say when, Democrats will control the House of Representatives.  Should they hold hearings then and browbeat ALJs with low reversal rates?