Wall Street Journal Article of July 11, 2011:
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303812104576440514261188124.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5Text of the article:
High-Paying Disability Judges Cost Taxpayers $1 Billion a Year, Official Says
By DAMIAN PALETTA
WASHINGTON—Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue said judges in his agency who award disability benefits more than 85% of the time cost taxpayers roughly $1 billion a year.
Speaking at a House hearing into the role of judges in approving benefits, Mr. Astrue also said he had little power to address the problem because federal law prohibits him from interfering with judges' decisions.
The revelation came after the agency and its inspector general's office have launched multiple investigations into judges who award benefits in a high percentage of cases.
The probes were prompted by a May article in The Wall Street Journal about a judge in Huntington, W.Va., who awarded benefits in every case he saw in the first six months of fiscal 2011.
That judge—David B. Daugherty—was put on indefinite administrative leave after the article ran. He has said in a recent interview that he did nothing wrong. A criminal investigation into the situation in Huntington is ongoing.
On average, judges award benefits in roughly 60% of their decisions
At a congressional hearing Monday held jointly by subpanels in the House Judiciary and Ways and Means committees, Mr. Astrue said he has statistical evidence of a number of judges who pay or deny a disproportionate number of cases compared with their peers, but his "hands were essentially tied" by federal law.
There are roughly 1,500 administrative law judges in the Social Security Administration, and they hear appeals in disability cases that have been denied at least twice before.
The number of people receiving disability benefits has soared in recent years, with one of the two Social Security programs paying out $124 billion in benefits to 10.2 million people in 2010. Government estimates predict the Social Security Disability Insurance program will run out of money in 2018 if actions aren't taken to shore up its trust fund.
Judges say they are under enormous pressure to move cases to reduce a backlog, with the system now designed to make it easier for them to approve benefits rather than deny them because their approvals are rarely questioned, appealed, or scrutinized.
"I find it interesting that there is so much wringing of the hands about a judge who pays almost 100% of his cases, as if the agency didn't know about it, as if the agency wasn't complicit in it, as if the agency didn't encourage it," said Marilyn Zahm, a Social Security judge in Buffalo who is an executive vice president of the judge's union, speaking in an interview after the hearing.
Mr. Astrue, a Republican, said the agency was also looking into judges who deny a disproportionate number of claims compared with their peers. He said judges who deny benefits in 80% or more of their cases end up saving taxpayers $200 million each year, though he wasn't suggesting this was a practice he condoned.
Republicans at the hearing criticized Mr. Astrue for not moving more quickly to address problems with the judges before they became public.
The situation in Huntington "starkly reveals how the near complete lack of accountability offers an abundance of chances for abuse," said Rep. Howard Coble (R., N.C.), who chairs the judiciary subcommittee overseeing courts. "Meanwhile, the claimants who suffer, not to mention the American taxpayer, get stuck with the bill."
Rep. Sam Johnson (R., Texas), who oversees a separate subcommittee overseeing Social Security, said lawmakers should consider new federal laws that prevent abuses in the disability programs from occurring.
But Rep. Hank Johnson (D., Ga.) said Republicans really wanted to dismantle the Social Security program and were using administrative law judges as a scapegoat.
"I fear that this hearing is really just a backdoor attempt to undermine Social Security by those opposed to having a social safety net," he said. "The ALJs are being used as whipping boys and girls," referring to the acronym for the administrative law judges.
The hearing included several tense exchanges between Mr. Astrue and lawmakers, with Democrats frustrated the agency hasn't done more to reduce a backlog of applicants and Republicans questioning abuse in the system.
Mr. Astrue, at one point, lashed out at lawmakers for threatening to cut his agency's funding, which he said will make it harder for judges to move more cases and erase a large backlog of pending cases.
"We're on the verge of getting there. And if we miss it, it's not because I have failed," Mr. Astrue said. "It's because Congress chose to fail, and it's up to all of you."