Social Security Drafting Rules Touching On Gun Control

     From the Los Angeles Times:

Seeking tighter controls over firearm purchases, the Obama administration is pushing to ban Social Security beneficiaries from owning guns if they lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs, a move that could affect millions whose monthly disability payments are handled by others. ...

A potentially large group within Social Security are people who, in the language of federal gun laws, are unable to manage their own affairs due to "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease." 

There is no simple way to identify that group, but a strategy used by the Department of Veterans Affairs since the creation of the background check system is reporting anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary.

If Social Security, which has never participated in the background check system, uses the same standard as the VA, millions of its beneficiaries would be affected. About 4.2 million adults receive monthly benefits that are managed by "representative payees." ...

Though such a ban would keep at least some people who pose a danger to themselves or others from owning guns, the strategy undoubtedly would also include numerous people who may just have a bad memory or difficulty balancing a checkbook, the critics argue.

"Someone can be incapable of managing their funds but not be dangerous, violent or unsafe," said Dr. Marc Rosen, a Yale psychiatrist who has studied how veterans with mental health problems manage their money. "They are very different determinations." ...

About 2.7 million people are now receiving disability payments from Social Security for mental health problems, a potentially higher risk category for gun ownership. An addition 1.5 million have their finances handled by others for a variety of reasons.

The agency has been drafting its policy outside of public view. Even the National Rifle Assn. was unaware of it. ...

Ari Ne'eman, a member of the National Council on Disability, said the independent federal agency would oppose any policy that used assignment of a representative payee as a basis to take any fundamental right from people with disabilities.
"The rep payee is an extraordinarily broad brush," he said.

     By the way back in January 2013, I predicted this was coming.

Trustees Report Coming Next Week

     The National Academy of Social Insurance has scheduled an event for July 23 featuring Stephen Goss, Social Security's Chief Actuary, speaking on the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report. That means that the report will be issued next week, probably Wednesday or Thursday.

Congressman Believes Social Security Is Immoral

     From the Washington Examiner:

While the problem comes down to dollars and cents, the unsustainable nature of federal entitlement programs is also a moral issue, according to House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Ga.

"Our goal is to end the immoral practice of forcing more Americans into dependency on broken governmental programs," Price said. "Critics try to claim the moral high ground. They say that they're the ones looking after our seniors and those less well off. Let me ask you, where's the morality in committing seniors and low-income families to a health care system that can't deliver health care...? Is it moral to promise retirement security that the government knows it cannot provide?" ...

History Of Social Security Field Offices

     As part of its observation of the Social Security's upcoming 80th birthday, the Social Security Administration has posted a video on the history of its field offices.

VA Policy On Charging For Medical Records?

     I request lots of records on my Social Security disability clients. It's a major part of what I do. I'm curious. What's the policy or practice of the Department of Veterans Affairs on charging for copies of medical records on their patients? The VA hospital in Durham, NC charges for records but is very slow in responding to requests for those records. The VA hospital in Fayetteville, NC doesn't charge and is fairly prompt in responding to requests for records. What's going on elsewhere?

OIG Wants Social Security To Keep Trying To Collect Those 50 Year Old Debts

     Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has done a study on the agency's practice of collecting ancient debts -- many over thirty years old and some as old as fifty years -- via offsets of tax refunds. OIG doesn't see any problem with this and basically urges the agency to keep doing it, regardless of the age of the debt. 

     The report says that "for all debts, SSA’s beneficiary records contained detailed information to establish how and when the overpayment occurred." Any field office employees want to comment on this statement?

     The lack of a statute of limitations on collection of overpayments by administrative offset is a disgrace in my opinion. This needs to be addressed by Congress.
     Update: The Washington Post is reporting on this issue.

Isn't 19 Years Of Testing Enough?

     The Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB) has released an Issue Brief on the Single Decision Maker Pilot. In the Single Decision Maker (SDM) Pilot a single disability examiner can process a disability claim at the initial or reconsideration levels without having a medical consultant sign off on the determination. The agency has been testing SDM since 1996. So, why has it taken 19 years to test SDM? Is Social Security finally ready to either cancel SDM altogether or make it national? Oddly, neither SSAB nor Social Security seems to have an answer for either question. Probably the reason that Social Security doesn't want to go national with SDM is that it leads to a slight increase in the allowance rate and that's a huge negative as far as Social Security and SSAB are concerned. The reason that the SDM Pilot isn't cancelled is that SDM decreases processing time which is a positive. So it looks as if we'll just continue with the SDM Pilot indefinitely.

The Great Recession Caused Big Problems For Social Security Disability But Not What You Think

     Kathy Ruffing, Senior Fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, has an interesting observation. The Great Recession hurt Social Security's Disability Insurance Trust Fund badly but not in the way people think. The problem wasn't that the Great Recession caused an increase in benefit payments. Any effects on that side were minor. The problem has been that the Great Recession caused a dramatic decrease in the Disability Insurance Trust Fund's income. If the Great Recession hadn't occurred, the Disability Insurance Trust Fund's income and spending would be in rough balance.