Grid Regs On The Table

     Social Security is planning to issue an "Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the need to update the medical-vocational guidelines." Inability to speak English in Puerto Rico may be on the table but who knows what else.

     I understand the desire to head off destructive legislation but let's not get carried away. The Republican problem with Social Security disability isn't with the way the regulations are written. Their problem is with its very existence. Nothing the agency can do will mollify them. If anything they may see this sort of thing as a sign of weakness.

Clinton Muir 1918-2015

     Clinton H. Muir, the retired chief of Social Security's Mid-Atlantic Program Service Center, has died at age 93.

They're Starting To Worry That Democrats Might Be Serious About Increasing Social Security

     The Wall Street Journal is starting to be concerned that Democrats will actually run on increasinging Social Security benefits. Their concern about the effects on the budget of increasing Social Security might sound sincere until you realize that the Wall Street Journal always supports any tax cut regardless of the consequences.

Happy Easter

Is There An Answer?

    I'm reposting this since no one was able to give an answer to my questions -- the closest was an answer that referred to the agency's ability to impose sanctions against those who make false or misleading statements, which has nothing to do with a failure to submit evidence.

 Social Security is publishing new regulations in the Federal Register on the submission of evidence tomorrow. You can read them today.

    Some Questions: What's the enforcement mechanism for these requirements? If there's no enforcement mechanism, is this anything more than precatory language? As vague as these regulations are, even if there is an enforcement mechanism, is it practical to enforce them? How can you punish someone for failing to live up to a standard that you can't define in a meaningful way? Is the lack of enforceability the reason that Social Security insisted on pressing ahead with regulations that were universally condemned for vagueness and overreaching? Why worry about what these regulations say if you have no intention of trying to enforce them?

Field Offices Complain Of Duplicate And Incomplete Forms

     From the newsletter of the National Council of Social Security Management Associations (NCSSMA):

Over the past decade, attorney and third party requests have increased at an alarming rate. Managers from all over the country are facing tough decisions as they struggle to maneuver valuable office resources and keep up with the steady stream of paper flowing from their fax machines and mailrooms....

According to a recent survey conducted by NCSSMA, offices are spending an hour and a half or more per day just sorting the influx of paper claims, appeals, 1695/1696s, and FOIA requests.

In addition, one-third of the paper received by fax and mail consists of duplicates or second requests. As stated by one frustrated Dallas Region manager: “The majority of the time, forms are submitted electronically, faxed, and then mailed to the field office. Not only do we receive them twice, but most often three times.”

Another issue challenging field offices is incomplete forms. A large majority of survey respondents said that only half the claims filed by third parties are fully completed, with a third needing more information in order to proceed with the application process. ...

According to a recent survey conducted by NCSSMA, offices are spending an hour and a half or more per day just sorting the influx of paper claims, appeals, 1695/1696s, and FOIA requests. 

     Let me give an explanation for at least some of the duplicates. Things get lost at Social Security.  That really bothers Social Security attorneys. To cover themselves, they submit duplicates.
     We need more reliable systems.

Class Action On Social Security Debt Collection Survives Motion To Dismiss

     There's a class action pending in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Grice v. Colvin, on Social Security's extremely aggressive efforts to collect overpayments, many of them ancient. The Court has denied a motion to dismiss. That doesn't guarantee the plaintiffs will win but it's certainly a sign that the case isn't going away anytime soon.
     You brought this on yourselves, Social Security. What you were doing was way over the top. I've been writing about this problem since 2007! I'm surprised it took so long for the public to realize just how abusive Social Security's debt collection policies have been.
     By the way, the link I'm giving to the Court's ruling is only valid until April 8.

Wonder How This Happened

    On March 5th, I posted this:

     An example added recently to Social Security's Program Operations Manual Series (POMS):

A 50-year-old claimant with a high school education and unskilled past relevant work has an RFC [Residual Functional Capacity] for standing/walking 2 hours of an 8-hour day and sitting approximately 6 hours of an 8-hour day. He is able to lift/carry/push/pull 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently. This RFC falls between rule 201.12, which has a decision of disabled, and 202.13, which has a decision of not disabled. In this case, use rule 201.12 as a framework for a decision of disabled because the definitions in DI 25001.001 (Medical-Vocational Quick Reference Guide) indicate light work usually requires walking or standing for approximately 6 hours of an 8-hour day. Since the claimant can only walk or stand for 2 hours, he has a significantly reduced capacity to perform light work and a sedentary medical-vocational rule applies as a framework for a determination.

      Guess what, that example has now disappeared from POMS. As best I can tell, they did this without listing the change on the page where they announce changes in POMS.