Former SSA ALJ Sentenced To Jail For Trading Sex For Benefits

     From the Alabama Media Group, which is probably a newspaper or group of newspapers:

A former Alabama Social Security Administration judge was sentenced to federal prison today for trading social security benefits for sex.

Paul Stribling Conger Jr., 73, was sentenced to 12 months and one day in prison by U.S. District Judge Virginia Hopkins. Because of the additional one day, he will be eligible for early release. ...

Court documents show in 2013, Conger was presiding over the hearing of a claimant who was approved for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) monthly payments and benefits. The claimant, who is only identified in records by her initials T.M., approached Conger in Nov. 2013 about receiving her retroactive benefits in a lump sum of about $10,000.

The two then engaged in a sex act and other sexual contact that day at the federal courthouse in Tuscaloosa, documents show. T.M. and Conger remained in contact by phone, and Conger invited her to return to the courthouse later that month. She didn't go back. ...

Members Of Congress Ask That Social Security Be Exempted From Hiring Freeze

     Fifty members of the House of Representatives have written a letter to the President urging that the Social Security Administration be exempted from the hiring freeze he ordered for most of the federal government. They're all Democrats so they probably won't even get an acknowledgment letter in response.

Congressional Hearing On Rep Payees

     There will be another Congressional hearing tomorrow on representative payees at Social Security. 

     I'm a bit mystified. There have been no important developments concerning representative payees. There's no clear path to Social Security doing a better job with representative payees even if they had the manpower to do so, which they don't. It's messy. It's always been messy. It's going to remain messy. It's unlikely this will attract media attention or lead to significant legislation. What's the point of the hearing?

Waiting In The Heartland

     From the Kansas City Star:

The tumors and cysts that blinded Barbara Sales in her left eye and, years ago, lodged in her brain have robbed her of far more than her sight and memory. ...

Three seizures forced Sales, 53, a former Lenexa resident, to lose a job she’d hoped to get full time. Her maladies and medications, treatments for a rare genetic disease, have made her short-term memory so faulty that she once drove 100 miles in the wrong direction before realizing her mistake. ...

Despite these difficulties, one question has for four years consumed the thoughts of this college-educated woman who worked full time for 25 years while raising her daughter as a divorced, single mom.

Why is it taking the government so long to decide whether she is eligible to receive Social Security disability?

“This is not right,” Sales said, coming to tears. “This is not what we pay into Social Security for. This is not the American dream. This is certainly not what I went to college for.”

Sales’ situation goes to the heart of problems that have plagued the Social Security Administration for years: Underfunded and overwhelmed, it operates with a workforce that has remained all but flat for more than 20 years in the face of a rising population and an explosion of disability applications. ...

“Eight thousand people died during fiscal year 2016 who were waiting for a (disability) hearing,” [Lisa] Ekman [of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives, NOSSCR) said. “That’s 23 people a day, almost one an hour to get a hearing. … We see people who lose their homes. We see people who are evicted. We see people who can’t afford to pay for medications, who become very debilitated while they wait. It creates people who are homeless.” ... 

When fiscal 2017 began in October, the number of first-time claims that had not been processed from the year before stood at more than 560,000, according to the Office of the Inspector General’s semi-annual report to Congress.

The backlog of cases being reconsidered, waiting to be heard by an administrative law judge, ballooned from 700,000 in 2010 to more than 1.1 million cases at the end of June 2016, the report showed.

In that same period, the average processing time it takes to see and get a decision from a judge has stretched from 426 days to more than 530 days. ...

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy“Eight thousand people died during fiscal year 2016 who were waiting for a (disability) hearing,” Ekman said. “That’s 23 people a day, almost one an hour to get a hearing. … We see people who lose their homes. We see people who are evicted. We see people who can’t afford to pay for medications, who become very debilitated while they wait. It creates people who are homeless.”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpyThree seizures forced Sales, 53, a former Lenexa resident, to lose a job she’d hoped to get full time. Her maladies and medications, treatments for a rare genetic disease, have made her short-term memory so faulty that she once drove 100 miles in the wrong direction before realizing her mistake.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpyDespite these difficulties, one question has for four years consumed the thoughts of this college-educated woman who worked full time for 25 years while raising her daughter as a divorced, single mom.
Why is it taking the government so long to decide whether she is eligible to receive Social Security disability?
“This is not right,” Sales said, coming to tears. “This is not what we pay into Social Security for. This is not the American dream. This is certainly not what I went to college for.”
Sales’ situation goes to the heart of problems that have plagued the Social Security Administration for years: Underfunded and overwhelmed, it operates with a workforce that has remained all but flat for more than 20 years in the face of a rising population and an explosion of disability applications.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy“Eight thousand people died during fiscal year 2016 who were waiting for a (disability) hearing,” Ekman said. “That’s 23 people a day, almost one an hour to get a hearing. … We see people who lose their homes. We see people who are evicted. We see people who can’t afford to pay for medications, who become very debilitated while they wait. It creates people who are homeless.”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy“Eight thousand people died during fiscal year 2016 who were waiting for a (disability) hearing,” Ekman said. “That’s 23 people a day, almost one an hour to get a hearing. … We see people who lose their homes. We see people who are evicted. We see people who can’t afford to pay for medications, who become very debilitated while they wait. It creates people who are homeless.”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article139229938.html#storylink=cpy

OMB Director Wants To Cut Social Security Disability

     From CBS News:

Office of Budget and Management Director Mick Mulvaney said Sunday [on Face the Nation] that President Donald Trump’s budget is cutting costs in the administration ...

As for entitlements, Mulvaney said Mr. Trump’s budget is consistent with his promise not to take away anyone’s Social Security or Medicare -- and drew attention to programs such as Social Security Disability Insurance as potential areas that could be cut.

“Let me ask you a question, do you really think that Social Security Disability Insurance is part of what people think of when they think of Social Security?” he asked. “I don’t think so. It’s the fastest-growing program, it grew tremendously under President Obama, it’s a very wasteful program and we want to try and fix that.”

     Mulvaney may not think that Disability Insurance Benefits is part of Social Security but history suggests that most Americans do. Any Congressman who votes to cut Social Security disability is going to face political ads accusing them of cutting Social Security. And, no, cuts in Social Security disability won't be bipartisan.
     Mulvaney also said that as a way of saving money OMB is not providing business cards to its employees. They have to pay for them personally, if they want them. Is this going to end up with all public employees treated like teachers who have to buy their own supplies?

OIG Report On ALJ Oversight

     From a recent report by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG):

A claimant can appeal an ALJ’s [Administrative Law Judge's] decision to deny or dismiss a disability case. Claimants file these appeals through a request for review to SSA’s AC [Appeals Council] in the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR). If the AC grants a review of the case, it will issue a fully favorable, partially favorable, or unfavorable decision; or it may remand the case to an ALJ. If the AC does not grant a case review, the earlier decision remains unchanged. 

ODAR tracks the AC’s decision on every appealed case and calculates a quality performance measure for each ALJ. The decision agree rate represents the extent to which the AC concludes the ALJ decisions were supported by substantial evidence and contained no error of law or abuse of discretion justifying a remand or reversal. At the time of our review, the national agree rate goal for ALJ decisions was 85 percent. The national dismissal agree rate goal for ALJ dismissals was 72 percent, but less than 6 percent of the AC workload related to dismissals. ...

... Regarding the 11 ALJs whose decision agree rates were 65 percent or lower for 3 consecutive years, we found ODAR managers had taken action to improve the quality of their decisions. Five ALJs had undergone a focused quality review, three were scheduled for this type of review, and one had been nominated to undergo a review. Of the remaining two ALJs, one had undergone a regional quality review, and the other was scheduled for a one-on-one counseling session with the Regional Chief ALJ. A focused quality review involves an in-depth review of a sample of an ALJ’s decisions to ensure the decisions are policy compliant and legally sufficient. If managers find a pattern of error-prone cases, they offer advice on how to correct errors and determine whether the ALJ should take additional targeted training. Three of the five ALJs who underwent focused quality reviews had completed targeted training.

     Note that there is no similar system for tracking remands and reversals by the federal courts. I think some interesting patterns would be seen if that were studied.

Is This Legit?

     Here's a website that says it's figured out a path to follow when calling Social Security's 800 number so that one can get to a human with less delay. They say the average delay when calling that number is 36 minutes, which is a lot more than Social Security claims. They also offer, for a price that's not stated, to wait on hold for you and then call you back when there's finally a Social Security employee on the other end of the phone that you can talk with.

Republican Senators Want Time Limited Disability Benefits

     From Sunshine State News:

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., joined with two Senate conservatives on Wednesday to back a proposal reforming Social Security disability benefits. 

Noting that disability benefits are consuming more Social Security funds, Rubio and U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, are co-sponsoring U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton’s, R-Ark., “Return to Work Act" which places new applicants who qualify for Social Security disability benefits in four groups based on whether medical improvement is expected, likely, possible or not expected. 

Beneficiaries in the first three groups would be given a timeline to receive disability benefits while those who are not expected to recover would not. If beneficiaries in the first three groups have not recovered at the end of their timelines--two years for those deemed expected to recover, five years for those deemed likely to recover, longer for those whose recovery is possible--they will be able to reapply for disability benefits.

     The number of people drawing Social Security disability benefits is declining. That's a fact. There's no crisis for this bill to address.
     This bill is based upon the mistaken premise that many Social Security disability recipients get better over time and should be cast off benefits. However, beneficiaries are already subject to continuing disability reviews and are cut off benefits if they have improved to the point that they can work. What's wrong with this process? Not enough claimants are cut off benefits to satisfy these Senators. I think this should lead a reasonable person to conclude that few claimants actually get better. However, if you base your judgments not upon the facts that exist but upon what you think the facts should be, you might conclude that you just have to be much sterner about cutting people off. Don't worry about whether they've improved. Just make them prove over and over and over again that they're disabled. We'll get them off benefits!
     Forcing claimants to prove over and over that they are disabled would be cruel. How many people think that schizophrenics get better over time? Not many who are actually familiar with schizophrenia. However, if you subject schizophrenics to this plan, many would lose their benefits, not because they've improved but because they're too impaired to effectively pursue new claims. Would that result please these Senators?
     By the way, I was around when the Reagan Administration did wholesale continuing disability reviews without a medical improvement standard and without interim benefits, which is the functional equivalent of what these Senators propose. It was by far the most unpopular policy of the Reagan Administration. It's how we came to have a medical improvement standard we have today. These Senators weren't around for that. If they had been, they wouldn't be proposing this.