Thanks, Commissioner O'Malley

     From a recent "Dear Colleague" letter from Social Security to attorneys who represent claimants before the agency:

... We offer flexible repayment plans, including payments as low as $10 per month. If they are unable to meet their necessary living expenses due to the current repayment amount, or are unable to repay the debt within 60 months*, they can request a change in the recovery rate by completing form SSA-634, Request for Change in Overpayment Recovery Rate. *This is a recent policy change. Previous policy required the completion of the SSA-634 if the overpayment could not be repaid within 36 months. ...

    You know, that policy change means that it's harder to get a current repayment rate reduced. More overpayments can be satisfied in 60 months than in 36 months. Squeeze those debtors as hard as you can.

Achieving Social Security Equity For Black And Hispanic Americans

     From How Can Changes to Social Security Improve Benefits for Black and Hispanic Beneficiaries? by Richard W. Johnson and Karen E. Smith:

• ... Racial and ethnic differences in annual and lifetime Social Security benefits are substantial. We project that average lifetime benefits received by adults born between 2001 and 2010 are 19 percent less for Black beneficiaries than white beneficiaries and 14 percent less for Hispanic beneficiaries than white beneficiaries. Black and Hispanic beneficiaries ages 62 and older in 2080 are projected to be about 10 percentage points more likely to receive limited incomes in 2080 than white beneficiaries. 
• Various benefit enhancements, including creating caregiver credits, making the benefit formula more progressive, and adding a new minimum benefit to Social Security, would disproportionately help Black and Hispanic beneficiaries. 
• However, these benefit enhancements would only modestly narrow racial and ethnic disparities in Social Security benefits. Adding a new minimum benefit tied to years of covered employment would have a particularly modest effect, because relatively few beneficiaries receiving limited benefits complete long careers. 

The policy implications of the findings are: 

• The effectiveness of benefit enhancements depends crucially on how those adjustments are structured. Policy details, including eligibility for the enhanced benefit and the presence of any benefit caps, shape how much low-income beneficiaries would receive and how well targeted the adjustments are.
• Achieving equity in Social Security benefits for Black and Hispanic adults would likely require substantial progress toward equality in labor market outcomes. ...
  

A $500,000 Underpayment?

    From Newsweek:

A Kentucky woman said she is owed more than $500,000 after the Social Security Administration began underpaying her in the 1990s.

Wyonia Butler, 65, worked as a nurse in the 1990s, but at the young age of 32, she was injured on the job and wound up unable to work. ...

While Butler said she initially received workers' compensation, the payments ceased after just seven months. ...

In June of 1997, Butler received a letter saying she would get only 80 percent of her earnings due to the workers' compensation, despite the payments having stopped. That totaled $1,620 taken out of her benefits, which has easily surpassed $500,000 in lost money today.

While Butler immediately went to correct the error, confirming that she did not receive any workers' compensation anymore, the past 27 years have left her without answers and a heavy hit to her financial situation. ...

She initially received a letter saying they needed to secure more information and she needed to complete a few forms. She mailed them out and followed up but was told the forms were in backlog. The SSA representatives she spoke to said they weren't sure why her account still said she receives workers' compensation. ...

"I did as I was asked," Butler said. "However, to this date, it's never been done or addressed. They are still withholding $1,625 out of my check every month. I called, of course, and was told each time to be patient, it's being worked up."

After five years of failing to get answers, Butler said she stopped. It was affecting her health, but 27 years later, she still is unsure where a half-million dollars is and why it's been withheld from her. ...

In the meantime, Butler said she has been deprived of at least $500,000 in payments and lost her farm. ...

"I should have continued every day until I got an answer," Butler said. "I should have called more. Due to health reasons, I had to stop. I did call last year and this year. The line just rings and rings."

She received a denial of reconsideration after five months despite having immediately corrected the Social Security error. ...

    What happened here? I think the most likely explanation is that Ms. Butler was receiving her full, unreduced benefits. She thought her payment was reduced by the workers compensation offset but she was just confused about how much she was owed each month. She was certainly confused about what that 80% that she heard something about meant. It's complicated but while 80% is part of the workers compensation offset, it doesn't mean that there's an 80% reduction. The actual reduction could be more or less than that. Even though Ms. Butler seems confused -- as well she should be since this is all so complicated -- there is the real possibility that she has been underpaid all these years. Social Security has a hard time administering the complex workers compensation offset. I don't think that Social Security would deny that they make a lot of workers compensation offset mistakes but 27 years of mistakes is at the extreme end of what would be imaginable.

    If I were representing her, I'd like to see that reconsideration determination she received and I'd like to know what she did after receiving it. I'd like to see any other paperwork she has. Was there a settlement of her workers compensation case with a lump sum benefit payment? Was this paid by an annuity? Did her benefit payments change when she turned 62? If it did, that would suggest that the agency was still applying the workers compensation offset until then. I'm not going to explain why age 62 matters other than to say that I'm talking about the RIB-DIB election. If you don't know what the RIB-DIB election is, you don't know enough to be commenting on any of this.

No Attorney Fee Numbers Released In A Year

     I used to post newly released numbers on payments of fees to attorneys and others for representing Social Security claimants. Something like a year ago I posted that the agency hadn't released any new numbers in months. In an apparent response, Social Security finally updated the numbers on their website. However, Social Security hasn't updated its numbers since then. No new numbers on fee payments have been posted since February 2023.

    There really is interest in these numbers. I'm sure the agency hasn't stopped collecting the data. It may well be posted on Social Security's intranet. Please release the data to the public.

Monthly OHO Report

 

Click on image to view full size

Why Does Social Security Keep Relying Upon Ancient Occupational Data?

    Andrew Van Dam at the Washington Post has written a "Department of Data" piece on the Social Security Administration's continuing reliance upon incredibly old data in the adjudication of disability claims. He asks whether the Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics could be the answer. Van Dam gives examples from the ORS but concentrates only upon the heaviest and lightest jobs in the economy and the ones that require the most and least training. That's fine but Social Security needs to concentrate upon those jobs that have both low physical AND mental demands. That's where the action is at Social Security.

The Effects Of Incarceration On Disability Benefits

     From The Impact of Past Incarceration on Later-Life DI and SSI Receipt by Gary V. Engelhardt:

• Past incarceration reduces the career years of employment, in general, and the likelihood of meeting the DI [Disability Insurance] duration test, in particular, reducing eligibility for DI. 
• Given the likely reduction in eligibility, however, past incarceration leads to a 30-percentage-point increase in the likelihood of applying for DI or SSI benefits, with an 18-percentage-point increase in the likelihood of benefit receipt. 
• Past incarceration raises by about 20 percentage points the likelihood the individual is in poverty as measured by the federal poverty threshold. 

 The policy implications of the findings are:

• At the aggregate level, DI rolls are about 300,000 higher for 50-61-year-old men because of past incarceration; SSI rolls are about 50,000 higher. 
• Incarceration has resulted in about 375,000 additional men between 50 and 61 years of age being under the federal poverty threshold in the 2010-2016 period.  ...

    What I've seen over the years is that imprisonment is bad for your health. Unhealthy food, incredibly stressful living conditions and poor medical treatment are a big part of it but probably not all. Certainly, many convicted felons arrive in prison already suffering from significant health problems, both physical and mental.

Appropriations Bill Covering SSA Delayed Until At Least March 22

     Since the beginning of the federal Fiscal Year (FY) on October 1, 2023 the Social Security Administration has been operating under a Continuing Resolution (CR) that allows the agency to spend money at the rate they spent it in the prior FY. This is because Congress, or to be more accurate, the House of Representatives, or to be more accurate still, the Republican majority in the House of Representatives can't agree on what they want in several FY 2024 appropriation bills, including the Labor-HHS bill that includes Social Security's administrative budget. Congress is now kicking the can down the road with a new CR on the Labor-HHS bill that goes to March 22. There's a solemn promise from Congressional leaders, including Republican leaders, that they'll get it done by March 22 but don't count on that holding. It's impossible to overestimate the dysfunction within the Republican majority in the House of Representatives. A sizable number of them would never vote yes on any Labor-HHS appropriations bill. Even if they got everything they wanted, they'd still vote "no" since they'd believe they didn't ask for enough!