DOGE's reckless SSA cuts may have created a problem too big to fix
The Trump administrations colossal cuts to the Social Security Administration in the name of efficiency are sowing chaos and dysfunction throughout the agency. Even attempts to fix these new problems are akin to rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship because they fail to address the core problem: staff shortages.
The Washington Post reports the SSA is temporarily reassigning about 1,000 customer service representatives from field offices to work on the swamped toll-free phone line, increasing the number of agents by 25 percent. And when the Post reports the phone line is swamped, what that means in practice is that people are complaining about dropped calls and previously reported wait times of up to five hours.
But theres one little oversight: There is no one in place to do the work that the reassigned representatives had to leave behind. According to the Post, Jessica LaPointe, president of Council 220 of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), said the move will slow responses to the complex cases that the field office employees handle and be only a temporary bandage for the phone problems.
The 1-800 number they do offer a critical role at the agency, but its triage, whereas customer service representatives actually clear work for the agency, LaPointe told the Post. So its just going to create a vicious cycle of work not getting cleared, people calling for status on work thats sitting because the claims specialists now are going to have to pick up the slack of the customer service representatives that are redeployed to the tele-service centers.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/doge-s-reckless-ssa-cuts-may-have-created-a-problem-too-big-to-fix/ar-AA1Ivwe3

RockRaven
(17,619 posts)This isn't an "oops," it is a "mission accomplished."
Ritabert
(1,331 posts)lostnfound
(17,082 posts)He.Is.There.To.Break.Things.
He is breaking things for the TechnoBrats.
He is breaking things for Vlad.
He is breaking things for the Profiteers / Vulture Capitalists.
He is breaking things for the sheer joy of it.
Stop pretending that an of this is a little oversight, a mistake, a side-effect.
If it happened once in one agency, it could be an oversight.
It is happening over and over; and it fits with the M.O. of a Putin-sycophant and the pattern of Shock-Doctrine tactics.
Break it, then pillage.
SheltieLover
(71,407 posts)
CousinIT
(11,626 posts)Then, people will hate it. People in general love Social Security and the SSA. The intent is to destroy it so people hate it.
Then, say it should be privatized or shut down.
That's the Republican M.O. for EVERYTHING our government does; every service they offer to the American public that our tax dollars pay for.
Ligyron
(7,948 posts)Then say, see, government sucks, privatize it!
CousinIT
(11,626 posts)Medicare Advantage - WISER act argues with what doctors recommend to avoid paying. https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/files/document/wiser-model-frequently-asked-questions
ALSO, the Medicare Reform Act SHUNTS Medicare applicants (Part B) into the cheapest Medicare Advantage program possible (NO option for plain Medicare), for THREE YEARS. And it's almost impossible then, to get on normal Medicare.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3467/text
Ms. Toad
(37,283 posts)So you can opt out and enroll in traditional Medicare.
Second, this is a bill, not an act. In other words, it is a proposal, and seems to be going nowhere. Is has been introduced, it has no cosponsors, and no further action has been taken.
CousinIT
(11,626 posts)It has not passed yet, which is why I included the link so they can see the bill and its status.
As for the "opt-out", I suspect it will be done in a tricky manner, so that most people will think they have no other options or cannot find the option to stick with traditional Medicare. They'll make it as confusing and as obfuscated as possible. It is a change - and a very bad one - intended to push Medicare further toward privatization by simply auto-adding subscribers to a cheap MA plan by default.
My intent was awareness. In this case, understanding and action BEFORE this crappy thing (along with its payment limits) is passed.
Ms. Toad
(37,283 posts)I think the intent is two-fold:
1. To promote MA over traditional Medicare (by making the default an MA plan)
2. To make sure everyone is enrolled in some add-on to part B, since part B only covers 80% of costs - so that people aren't stuck with nothing if they miss the enrollment period.
I agree with the latter intent - but it could be addressed by making the auto-enrollment occur after the last date by which they can choose a supplement (say 6 months after they enroll in part B, for example). In other words full choice first then, after they no longer have full choice, enroll them in something.
Skittles
(165,954 posts)that is the entire purpose of MA, but too many people are catching on so the auto-enrolling will start and they will likely make it very difficult to "opt out"
Ms. Toad
(37,283 posts)So getting rid of Medicare would also get rid of Medicare Advantage.
I wish they would end Part C, and they definitely should not be making Part C opt out.
Skittles
(165,954 posts)WHY do you think they are pushing the "Advantage" crap?
Ms. Toad
(37,283 posts)It doesn't change the reality that Medicare Advantage is Medicare.
I'm not disagreeing with you as to what they want, and I think the Medicare Advantage option should be removed - or, at a very minimum, clearly disclosed at a 5th grade reading level - including the consequences of signing up for Medicare Advantage (you can't ever - in most states - get back to traditional Medicare; your out of pocket maximums are high, the companies offering Medicare Advantage win when they deny care, limit your ability to choose your own physician, etc. It's a disgusting perversion of traditional Medicare.
But it is part of Medicare. And, while you are relatively young and healthy - and especially when the consequences aren't disclosed - it is an option many choose because in many states supplement plans are more than many can afford.
But it shouldn't be the default, and no one should be enrolled without opting in.
Skittles
(165,954 posts)but THAT doesn't not help on the road to privatization
when enough people have been converted MEDICARE WILL BE GONE
Ms. Toad
(37,283 posts)Medicare Advantage is, unfortunately, Medicare. (It is Medicare Part C.) So enrolling everyone in Medicare Advantage doesn't get rid of Medicare.
It might get rid of the option to enroll in a Medicare Supplement plan, but it doesn't get rid of Medicare - they are just all just enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and C, rather than Medicare Parts A, B, and a supplement plan.
Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #18)
Skittles This message was self-deleted by its author.
maspaha
(557 posts)
erronis
(20,570 posts)Straight out of VC 101. (Required for MBA - replaces macro-economics.)
IronLionZion
(49,433 posts)They will efficiently choose companies owned by Trump donors.
Hekate
(98,530 posts)ananda
(32,566 posts)Because I do.
Karasu
(1,590 posts)The staff simply isn't there. They knew what they were fucking doing.
yellow dahlia
(2,607 posts)Lack of information and misinformation have people naive to the reality. (And it is not just about Social Security.)