OMB Proposals For Social Security

     From the Social Security part of government reorganization plan (page 127) recently issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the White House:

Eliminate In-Kind Support and Maintenance and the Holding Out Policy for SSI 
This proposal simplifies administration of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program and reduces improper payments. The proposal eliminates the counting of In-Kind Support and Maintenance (ISM) in lieu of a flat rate benefit reduction for adults living with other adults. The proposal also ends the intrusive and burdensome “holding out” policy, which currently reduces benefits for couples that present themselves as married to the community. 

Eliminate Services to Claimant Representatives 
This proposal would eliminate the Federal Government as the middleman in the relationship between applicants and the representatives they voluntarily hire. It would eliminate administration of fee agreements, fee petitions, and claimant representative travel. The current workload is expensive, error prone, and not SSA’s core mission. In FY 2016, SSA spent about $122 million on the activity, but collected only about $30 million (due to a statutory fee cap) to reimburse the trust funds. The $30 million collected is not currently part of SSA’s administrative resources. ... 

Eliminate SSI Dedicated Accounts 
This proposal facilitates financial independence by eliminating dedicated accounts for past-due benefits to SSI youth recipients. It also reduces the administrative burden of monitoring expenses from dedicated accounts. ... 

Additional Footprint Reduction 
SSA continues to find ways to increase real property efficiency and reduce the size of its real property portfolio. SSA will continue to co-locate offices, consolidate space while merging components, and ensure space savings when implementing telework.

     Note that none of this other than the "Footprint Reduction" can be implemented without legislation and that's not likely to happen and closing offices is certainly unpopular.

Delays In South Jersey

     The South Jersey Times isn't happy with the lengthy delays in processing Social Security disability claims:

Between the poles of allowing fraudulent Social Security disability applications to proceed unfettered, and holding up benefits from the deserving during an excruciatingly long process, there must be a "sweet spot" for regional Social Security Administration offices.

Whatever is going on, the South Jersey office is not hitting that sweet spot. ...

Average waits for a decision there are, stunningly, the third longest among the nation's 168 offices. ...

So why isn't this being treated by Congress or the public as a scandal ... ? ... [T]here's that little twinge of concern within most of us that injured, working-age non-veterans who ask for government benefit checks might really be trying to pull one over on Uncle Sam.

It happens, of course. We love watching videos of "injured" middle-aged guys who say they can't work, working the dance floor or shooting hoops in the driveway.

The Supplemental Security Income/disability process, which can result in multiple denials until someone finally the hires "right" lawyer, creates even more suspicion. For years, SSI payments were derisively known in some down-and-out areas as "crazy checks," obtained -- not always honestly -- by citing psychological disorders.

Large-scale commercial fraud, like the $550 million conviction of a Kentucky country lawyer and a plea from his administrative law-judge accomplice, requires monitoring of waves of unusually easy benefit approvals from the same jurisdiction. But how hard is it to separate these odd patterns from individual cases with no apparent irregularities? ...

SEC ALJs Unconstitutional

     The Supreme Court decision in Lucia v. SEC is out. ALJs, at least at the SEC, have been found unconstitutional. The decision leaves wide open the question of whether Social Security ALJs are constitutional. Social Security is not discussed at all in the opinion. You can find a distinction if you want in the fact that SEC ALJs hear adversary adjudications but I don't know if that's going to be enough.
     There's going to be an eruption of litigation concerning ALJs at every agency that employs them. Indeed, there will also be litigation over non-ALJ adjudicators across the federal government, including Social Security -- think Administrative Appeals Judges at Social Security's Appeals Council.
     We might wish that Social Security would defend the constitutionality of its ALJs but that is far from certain. The Trump Administration may have more general aims and Social Security ALJs may get caught in the crossfire.
     This is a seminal moment in the history of administrative law in this country.

Paying Bounties

     From an Emergency Message that the Social Security Administration (SSA) released yesterday:

... On July 2, 2018, SSA will mail a one-time advance notice to participating correctional and mental health reporters and facilities to inform them of a recent legislative change to Title XVI incentive payments. ...

Social Security Act requires that the institution enter into a written agreement with SSA. ... 

Beginning August 09, 2018, the legislation effective date, the Prisoner Update Processing System (PUPS) will pay incentives using the new Title XVI incentive payment rules for inmate admission information that result in the suspension of monthly benefits to our SSI recipients. The new Title XVI incentive payment rules provide the following: 

For every Title XVI recipient we suspend due to the inmate information provided, we will pay the institution:

• $400 for information received within 15 days of the confinement; or
• $200 for information received after 15 days but within 90 days after confinement. 

We will continue to pay for inmate information for our Social Security beneficiaries as we normally do under our current incentive payment law: 

For every Title II beneficiary we suspend due to the inmate information provided, we will pay the institution:

• $400 for information received within 30 days of the confinement; or
• $200 for information received after 30 days but within 90 days after confinement. ...

Disability Claims Decrease

     From the New York Times:

The number of Americans seeking Social Security disability benefits is plunging, a startling reversal of a decades-old trend that threatened the program’s solvency. It is the latest evidence of a stronger economy pulling people back into the job market or preventing workers from being sidelined in the first place.

The drop is so significant that the agency has revised its estimates of how long the program will continue to be financially secure. This month, the government announced that the program would not run out of money until 2032, four years later than its previous estimate last year. Two years ago, the government had warned that the funds might be depleted by 2023.

In addition to stronger economic growth, the drop reflects newly tightened standards for eligibility and the increasing number of baby boomers who are leaving the program because they have become eligible for Social Security retirement benefits and Medicare. ...

Social Security Bill To Be Marked Up Tomorrow

     The House Ways and Means Committee will be marking up a very minor Social Security bill tomorrow having to do with the coverage of Indian Tribal Council members.

Facebook Use Of Social Security Numbers Draws Concern

     From CT News Junkie (whatever that is):

New rules that Facebook has adopted regarding political ad buys have raised concerns within the House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee where John Larson is the ranking Democrat.

The panel has sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg expressing reservations that the social media company plans to collect the last four digits of Social Security numbers of those purchasing political ads on its web platform.

“Given the bipartisan concerns about the problem of identity theft, including the risk associated with SSNs being stolen, it is important for us to understand how these numbers will be used and how they will be protected,” wrote Larson and Texas Republican Sam Johnson, who chairs the panel. ...

Onlike AC Appeals

     An announcement from the Social Security Administration:

We are pleased to announce a new online process for filing a Request for Review of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) hearing decision or dismissal (i520). 

The new online i520 process accepts both medical (disability) and non-medical (non-disability) appeals of an ALJ hearing decision or dismissal. 

There are many benefits to using the new i520. 

• Requests for review at the Appeals Council can be filed online. 
• The online appeals application is simple, convenient, and secure; it guides claimants and their appointed representatives through every step of the process, including uploading any necessary documentation. 
•  The HA-520 and documents are automatically routed to the correct branch in the Office of Appellate Operations, which improves the appeals process. 

 While the preferred method for filing a Request for Review is the new online i520 process, we will continue to accept requests by mail or fax. Please be sure not to submit multiple review requests by filing online and also by mail or fax, as it could delay processing. Additionally, please note that this new online process cannot be used to request an extension of time to file a civil action, Federal court review, or an ALJ decision in a case remanded by a Federal court. 

We encourage you to share this information with your colleagues.