Little Screening For Medical Consultants

      From Actions Needed by SSA to Ensure Disability Medical Consultants Are Properly Screened and Trained, a report by the Government Accountability Office:

SSA cannot be sure that the state agencies’ consultants are qualified and trained to appropriately inform decisions on disability claims. SSA policy requires state agencies to screen their consultants by checking them against a database of individuals barred from participating in federal programs. Also, SSA policy sets requirements for state agencies to provide initial and follow-up training. However, state agencies told us they do not always do so.  

Of the 52 agencies:
• 14 said they did not consistently perform required checks on consultants either when hiring or annually, and

• Nine said they did not give consultants some element of required initial or refresher training.

     The only requirement is that they not have a history of involvement in defrauding the federal government and they don't always enforce even that minimal standard? Is that how you run a quality program? Are opinions from such consultants entitled to deference?

Veterans Day 2021

 

Yesterday's Supreme Court Argument

     After yesterday's oral argument before the Supreme Court I had expressed optimism that the Court would find it unconstitutional to deny SSI benefits to U.S. citizens who live in Puerto Rico. Others, including a writer for the highly-regarded SCOTUSblog, felt otherwise.

     Let me explain. There were a number of questions asked by the justices about whether finding this exclusion unconstitutional would trigger litigation claiming denial of equal protection because certain laws favor one state or one region over another. Although the attorney representing Mr. Vaello-Madero could have done a better job of expressing it, the answer seemed simple to me. This sort of lawsuit can already be brought but seldom is because all that is required to withstand an equal protection challenge is a "rational basis" for a law. That's a minimal requirement that would normally be met. It's just that in this case, the exclusion of SSI is so obnoxious that it cannot even meet a minimal requirement.  If a statute is found that is as obnoxious as this one, then by all means the Court should find it unconstitutional but such a statute should be almost nonexistent. The states have representation in Congress. Puerto Rico doesn't. My interpretation of the questioning was that the Justices want to make sure they write a narrow decision finding it unconstitutional to deny SSI in Puerto Rico and were inquiring about how they should do it. Another interpretation would be that the justices were expressing reasons why it would be too dangerous to give relief to Mr. Vaello-Madero.

     Anyway, listen to the oral argument yourself and tell us what you think.

Who Uses Online Filing And Who Doesn't

      The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College has issued a report titled How to Increase Usage of SSA's Online Tools. I don't know that the report presents any new ideas but it does include this interesting chart which shows what groups are and aren't filing online:

Click on image to view full size

Where Did This Come From?

     From KTLA:

Mamie Walker is sick and tired of the government abruptly cutting off her social security benefits, leaving her unable to pay her rent and buy food. She said it’s all because of a mistake no one can explain, KTLA sister station WFLA reported.

Walker hasn’t received benefits for the past two months. She received a letter from the U.S. Social Security Administration saying she owes over $237,000 in “overpayments” and won’t receive benefits again until September, 2034. She would be 100 years old. ...

This is the second time Walker asked for help after her social security benefits were cut. In 2019, the government claimed Walker owed over $200,000 in old student loan debt. Walker, who never went to college, had no idea what that was about. ...

A Social Security Administration representative said this would be investigated again and they’ll try to assist Walker in getting her benefits back.

Oral Arguments In Vaello-Madero

      I listened to the oral argument is U.S. v. Vaello-Madero. You can't always tell from oral arguments and maybe I heard what I wanted to hear but my impression was that the only issue was how broad the opinion will be -- that all or virtually all of the justices are ready to hold it unconstitutional to deny SSI to U.S. citizens who reside in Puerto Rico and other territories. 

     If you also listened to the oral arguments, what was your take?

     Update: The Supreme Court reporter at the Washington Post thinks the Supreme Court is reluctant to extend SSI to Puerto Rico.  However, court reporters at The Hill seem uncertain about how the Court will come down.

Reopening Plan

      Vague though it may be, Social Security has released its reopening plan. It certainly allows many employees to continue working from home every day. No one has to come into the office daily.

     I don't know how this is going to work. I'm pretty sure that there will be be far, far too much demand for in-person service at the field offices to allow field office employees to work from home three days a week. How do ALJs conduct all the hearings they are supposed to conduct coming into the office one day a week? Things I've read suggest that many ALJs think that most claimants will continue to accept telephone and video hearings in the future. That's incredibly naive. I don't care how wonderful you think telephone or video hearings are. I know better. My opinion and that of my clients matter. The self-serving opinions of public servants don't matter in this instance. Cramming video hearings down the throats of unwilling claimants won't be politically feasible after the pandemic is over. We're getting back to something like normal or there's going to be hell to pay.

Great Summary Of Upcoming SCOTUS Case On SSI For Puerto Rico

      Ian Millhiser has written an excellent summary for Vox of the legal issues presented by U.S. v. Vaello-Madero, which is to be heard by the Supreme Court tomorrow. Vaello-Madero presents the issue of whether it is constitutional to deny SSI benefits to U.S. citizens who reside in Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories. 

     The old precedents supporting the denial of SSI to Puerto Ricans, the so-called Insular Cases are so disreputable that they cannot be used to turn down Mr. Vaello-Madero. The Court could come up with new reasoning to justify turning down Mr. Vaello-Madero but would it? There probably won't be some liberal-conservative split on this case. Every amicus brief filed supported Mr. Vaello-Madero.