Tom Margenau: “Do you really want a shrunken SSA?”

Former Social Security employee Tom Margenau makes an interesting point about recent Social Security Administration budget cuts in a column today at creators.com.

Referencing a recent email, Margenau notes a logical disconnect between Americans who support downsizing federal government and simultaneously expect increased and improved services from federal entities, like the SSA.

Similarly, the author draws attention to those who lament the loss of programs and services from which they’d personally benefit (Social Security retirement benefits), and support cuts in programs from which they don’t (Social Security disability benefits).

While everyone is entitled to their opinions regarding the role and size of government, we feel there is an important takeaway to this piece.

As Margenau explains, the Social Security Administration is a historically financially efficient organization struggling to downsize in accordance with budget cuts while keeping customer service quality high for a record high volume of claimants.

These federal budget cuts resulted in the loss of many field and phone staff members as well as field offices across the country.

Due to this staff and office reduction, Social Security beneficiaries now face long holds on the phone, absurdly long waits for appointments, and an extremely lengthy wait for disability appeal hearings (around 65% of first time disability claimants are denied–many of these applicants sadly pass during the 600-day wait time it can take to approve benefits).

Aggressive cuts to the SSA operating budget detriment the ability of beneficiaries to access important services included in Social Security. Though we tend to focus primarily on direct reductions to Social Security benefits when we talk about Social Security cuts, budget cuts to the SSA that prevent beneficiaries from receiving services are no less a cut.

And when it comes to Social Security disability insurance, a cut to disability is still a cut to Social Security–Americans fund SSDI via the same payroll tax as their retirement benefits. Though you may not need it now, you’ve still contributed and are entitled to protections of the program in the event of an injury or illness.

Supporters of Social Security protection and expansion should be aware of the many forms cuts and reductions can take–proposing a cut to the SSA budget for the purpose of “shrinking government” is much more palatable to the public than simply reducing checks and cost-of-living adjustments to beneficiaries.

Likewise, it’s much easier to cut SSDI than retirement benefits–we may not all need disability protection during our lives, but a vast majority of us will file for Social Security when we retire.

You can read the rest of Margenau’s article right here.