Now We Know What Happened To Conn's Files

Files stored in Conn's former office

     One nagging issue with the redeterminations of disability for Eric Conn's former clients is the files that Eric Conn kept on his clients. While Conn may not have done that much development of medical records on his clients surely some fell into his lap, brought in by his clients. Did he bother to give any of this to Social Security? There had been reports that Conn had burned many files. However, recently photos and videos surfaced showing the client files still in his former offices.
     A local media outlet contacted the Department of Justice concerning those files. This is an e-mail from an attorney with the Department of Justice in response to that inquiry:

Sorry for the delayed reply. It is inaccurate to report that the United States is moving forward with the redetermination process while simultaneously denying claimants access to the records needed to appropriately litigate their claims. It is also inaccurate to report that the Justice Department advised individuals that the files were destroyed. The U.S. government has not forfeited Conn’s law office yet. Those proceedings are pending before the Court. Therefore, the Justice Department does not have custody of the law office and have neither the authority to admit or deny anyone from entering the property. Moreover, the contents of the law office, including the claimant files, are not subject to forfeiture, thus, the United States does not and will not possess or have access to the claimant files. However, the Department is assisting in the process of having a receiver appointed by the Kentucky Bar Association, who has constructive possession of the files, to gain actual possession of the files, and return them to clients for their SSA redetermination hearings.

     By the way, it's long settled law that the files that an attorney keeps on his or her clients don't belong to the attorney but to the clients. It's the same with medical records maintained by physicians.

Oh, The Hypocrisy

     From Michael Hiltzik writing for the Los Angeles Times:

One would have thought that after saddling the U.S. economy with a tax cut costing $1.5 trillion over 10 years, conservatives and their patrons in corporate America would soft-pedal the usual attacks on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. 

One would be wrong. 

Recently, the drumbeats for cuts in social insurance benefits have been sounding louder. As is traditional, the call for cutbacks is placed in the context of concern about rising federal deficits. ... 

The politicians unsheathing their paring knives for Social Security and Medicare undoubtedly are hoping that Americans' memories are short — that when they claim that it's social programs like these that are driving the deficit, no one will recall that the single biggest driver of red ink is that tax cut delivered to the very members of society who needed help the least.

Why Do These Regional Differences Persist?

     Social Security has posted an updated dataset giving the average processing time at each of its hearing offices. Here's the list of the offices with the top ten longest processing time, in days:

• San Juan 864
• National Hearing Center Chicago 820
• New York 772
• Buffalo 764
• Bronx 760
• Philadelphia 756
• National Hearing Center Falls Church 755
• Queens 738
• South Jersey 736
• Miami 725

     Note that using the average number may understate the problem. Cases that are quickly dismissed because a request for hearing was filed too late go into that average. The typical case that actually goes to hearing will take longer than the stated average.

     Here's a list of the top ten shortest processing time, again in days:

• Providence 325
• Boston 352
• Houston North 360
• Manchester 375
• Portland, ME 400
• Dallas North 428
• Oklahoma City 431
• Fort Smith 434
• Springfield, MA 434
• Middlesboro 436

     It looks like things are going very nicely in Social Security's Boston Region, which has five of the top ten best offices, while things are going very badly next door in Social Security's New York region, which has six of the top ten worst offices. Why such big differences between regions? I thought that once we had video hearings these differences would go away.

Cage Match Looming In Lucia?

     The National Law Review reports on what it calls a "cage match" possibly looming before the Supreme Court in the Lucia case on the constitutionality of Administrative Law Judges.

NADE Newsletter

     The National Association of Disability Examiners (NADE), an organization of the personnel who make disability determinations at the initial and reconsideration levels for Social Security, has posted its Spring 2018 newsletter.

I'm Not Buying It

     Workers comp insurers are trying to dispute the widely held belief that they've been increasingly successful in shifting the costs of workplace injuries on to Social Security and Medicare. I'm not buying it. It's obvious at ground level that they're able to settle cases for vastly less than the true costs of lost wages and future medical care.

Milwaukee Fighting Back

     The controversy over the closing of a Social Security field office in Milwaukee isn't going away.

Why Does Social Security Need To Capture Biometric Data?

     From a contracting notice recently posted by the Social Security Administration:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is seeking a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) eyetracker software tool that will allow SSA to measure and collect users' eye position and eye movements to expand on the dynamic of our usability and user testing studies. The eye tracking system will increase our capability to capture biometric data that we are currently lacking and allow us to incorporate the biometric layer into our results analysis. In addition to the usability testing, eye tracking system can also be used in market research.

     I'm not the only one who finds this kind of creepy.