Lucia Doesn't Pose A Catastrophic Threat

     The prospect of huge numbers of Appeals Council remands as a result of the Supreme Court decision in Lucia v. SEC worries a lot of people. It would certainly add to the severe backlogs at the hearing level but let's not get carried away. As of the end of June there were 89,157 cases pending at the Appeals Council. So far this fiscal year, Administrative Law Judges are disposing of an average of 60,746 cases per month. This means that if every case pending at the Appeals Council is remanded for a new hearing as a result of Lucia, the backlog at the hearing level would increase by about one and a half months. Certainly, any increase in the backlog is undesirable but a one and a half month increase in the backlog is hardly catastrophic. Ending the backlog at the Appeals Council level would be a good side effect. Appeals Council employees who suddenly lack regular job duties could help with the decision writing backlog at the hearing level. Large numbers of Lucia remands wouldn't destroy the system -- not that the system is anything to brag about.

Are ALJs A Bunch Of Liberal Democrats?

     Based on limited experience, Paul Mirengoff believes almost all Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) are liberal Democrats, a group he certainly doesn't want hearing cases.

     Some real ALJs beg to differ.

     I don't talk much with ALJs about politics and never at a government office. I rarely interact with ALJs other than at a Social Security office. My impression is that the veterans preference assures that ALJs as a group aren't particularly liberal, particularly for lawyers. Of course, it's more than possible that Mr. Mirengoff regards anyone who doesn't wear a MAGA cap regularly as a liberal Demicrat.

SSA Failing To Initiate Overpayment Withholding On A Timely Basis In Some Cases

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

SSA did not always appropriately withhold overpayments from individuals receiving OASDI [Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance] or SSI benefits. We reviewed a sample of 50 OASDI beneficiaries and 50 SSI recipients who were receiving a monthly benefit and had a total outstanding overpayment balance greater than $1,000. We found SSA missed opportunities to recover overpayments from 31 of these individuals’ benefits (28 OASDI beneficiaries and 3 SSI recipients). ...

Had SSA initiated withholding timely, we estimate it could have already collected over $114 million in overpayments from almost 25,000 individuals. ...

Senators Object To Treatment Of Employee Unions

     From the Baltimore Sun:

Maryland’s U.S. senators say the Social Security Administration is demonstrating “hostility towards its workforce” in the way it is implementing recent executive orders signed by President Donald J. Trump.

Trump signed the orders in May with the stated goals of promoting accountability, rooting out poor performers and negotiating union contracts more advantageous to taxpayers and the federal government.

But labor groups have characterized the orders, which reduce the time available for union business, as an attack on long-held civil service protections.

The Baltimore-based SSA has gone beyond the orders’ reach and is trampling workers’ rights, Democratic Sens. Chris Van Hollen and Ben Cardin said in a letter Thursday to acting commissioner Nancy A. Berryhill and other officials. ...

The Argument For Trump's Order On Federal Employee Unions

     From Bob Gilson writing for FedSmith:

I admit to fascination at the statements made by many union representatives in response to recent Executive Orders addressing their use of government time, space, equipment, and services.

When the Civil Service Reform Act went into effect in 1979, no one on either side of the aisle in either house on the Hill or down the street on PA Avenue would have seen as remotely possible the complete payment of all employee/union representatives, some getting 100% of their work time doing union work. Also incredible in 1979 would have been the current practice in many Agencies of paying for all union communications, computing, office space, meeting space and other costs. ...

     Gilson goes on to detail the facts that some union money has been used to pay for a lobbyist (a pittance by D.C standards) and that union dues have paid for only a fraction of the union's true operating costs. It's directed specifically at the union local that represents most Social Security employees. It's a harshly anti-union piece but there's certainly an argument to be made in favor of Trump's order on federal employee unions.

LTD Industry Take On Social Security Subcommittee Hearing

     People like me who represent disability claimants may think that we're the only ones interested in how the Social Security Administration handles appeals of disability claims but that's not right. Some non-profits are interested but so are insurance companies handling long term disability (LTD) benefits.  LTD is generally reduced because of Social Security disability benefits received giving the LTD insurers a huge interest in the adjudication of Social Security disability claims. The more claims get approved, the less their liability.

     Allison Bell has written an article summarizing what took place at this week's hearing before the Social Security Subcommittee, apparently for people in the LTD industry.

OIG Report On Milwaukee Field Office Closure

     There's been a controversy over the closure of a Social Security field office in Milwaukee. The Office of Inspector General at Social Security has done a Congressional Response Report on the situation. According to the report, advance warning of the office closure was given to local leaders. It sounds like the major reason the office was closed was the crime rate in the area.

Reinstating Recon Unpopular

     From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

In an effort to reduce its massive backlog of disability determination appeals, the Social Security Administration plans to reinstate an additional step in the appeals process for Pennsylvania and nine other states.

Social Security officials say the extra step — called reconsideration — would create a more uniform system across the country and help the administration reach its goal of resolving disability appeals within 270 days. Critics have said it could have the opposite effect, possibly lengthening the appeals process.

“While some people might get a decision sooner under reconsideration, for others this step is effectively a rubber stamp of the initial decision,” Rep. Sam Johnson (R., Texas),  who serves as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Social Security subcommittee, said during a Capitol Hill hearing Wednesday. “It simply further delays their hearing with an administrative law judge.” ...