TOPICS
TOPICS
Coalition calls for more Social Security funding and oversight
The American Federation of Government Employees and advocacy groups representing progressives and senior citizens called on Congress Tuesday to increase funding for the Social Security Administration and to pass legislation that would give lawmakers greater oversight of the agency's staff levels, office closures and budgets.
"In fiscal 2008, we received a slight increase over the president's budget, but the previous 10 years, Congress appropriated less than the president asked for, and the president asked for less than what we need to service the country," AFGE Council of Social Security Administration Operations Locals President Witold Skwierczynski said. "Our staffing levels are the lowest they've been since 1972; we have slipped below 60,000 employees."
SSA officials did not return requests for comment Tuesday afternoon.
President Bush proposed an $8.4 billion budget for the agency in fiscal 2009, a 5 percent increase from his fiscal 2008 proposal, but Skwierczynski said the groups would like to see $11 billion in funding to make up for staff cuts and the closure of 17 field offices last year. Ed Coyle, executive director for the Alliance of Retired Americans, said the latest budget proposal was $100 million less than Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue requested.
Brad Woodhouse, president of Americans United for Change, a liberal advocacy group in Washington that grew out of opposition to Bush's failed attempts at Social Security reform in 2005, said budget cuts and office closings amounted to a covert attempt to change the nature of the agency.
But the president's fiscal 2009 budget request would target the extra funds to areas directly impacting beneficiaries. For instance, the proposal would fund efforts to expedite benefits to the neediest applicants and to hire more administrative law judges and support staff to improve processing of disability appeals.
H.R. 5110, a bill introduced by Rep. Brian Higgins, D-N.Y., and supported by AFGE, Americans United and ARA, would require the Social Security commissioner to submit a budget directly to Congress and the president, but eliminate the president's power to change that request, notify Congress 90 days before revising the agency's workforce plan and justify office closures 180 days before they would go into effect.
The provision related to closing offices is particularly important to AFGE, Skwierczynski said.
"Populations affected by these closings are seniors, widows, the disabled or the poor who are least likely to possess alternative means of transportation and less likely to use Internet services," he said. "SSA emphasizes that bricks and mortar are expensive, security guards are expensive, but the union says people deserve the option of face-to-face service when filing complex claims for benefits that will affect their financial security for the rest of their lives."
COMMENTS
- Mr. Incardona, you don't know anything about me and you either refuse to look at the facts or you insist on remaining ignorant. I do have friends and relatives that are recipients of SS benefits. Most of them paid their entire lives into SS and are getting a pittance in return. I know one couple who together paid in over 40 years into SS. He recently died and she is left alone. Does she get the benefit of all he paid in? Hell no! The government got it and spent it long ago. If they had been able to invest that money on their own, she would be able today to take care of her needs. As it is, she barely gets by. And!, those who receive benefits are TAXED on those benefits. Mr. Incardona, you seem an inteligent guy, would you invest in a plan that pays back a negative return? Mr. Incardona, You also made another judgement error. You assumed I don't care about the poor, the disabled, the widows, the orphans, and the down trodden. It is because I do care that I would like to see SS eliminated. There are better methods and means for us to care for our weakest citizens. SS has been, and still is simply a terrible system that costs us all a lot but gives out very little. If this was a private system, the owners and managers would now be in prison. Charles Thompson Posted February 15, 2008 3:44 PM
- I feel sorry for Mr. Thompson since he is so cynical. Does he really believe Social Security is a miserably failed system? Does he believe it really came from a sewer pit? Maybe he should ask a child whose parent or parents tragically died leaving him/her orphaned with no financial support. Maybe he should inquiry with seniors who rely on their check every month in order to make ends meet. Perhaps he should tell a widow who receives benefits, due to the sudden death of her spouse, the money she receives came from a sewer pit. I suspect Mr. Thompson may have a friend or relative one who might be out on the streets if not for the social security check that provides a roof over their head and a decent meal. Lastly, I suspect Mr. Thompson would like to go back to the days when our seniors were among the poorest in our nation. We are better than that and Mr. Thompson knows better! Scott Incardona Posted February 13, 2008 2:30 PM
- Here is an idea. Dump Social Security in the sewer pit from whence it came. We Pay nearly 9 BILLION Dollars to support a miserably failed system!! This does not include the pitiful benefits paid to our seniors and needy! Social Security is like a nasty stinking bloated spider that traps everyone in its web - takes much and gives back practically noting in return. And our government treats it like it is a holy artifact. Shame on them! Charles Thompson Posted February 13, 2008 10:53 AM
