Slashdot Mirror


Database Error Costs Social Security Victims $500M

Hugh Pickens writes "The Washington Posts reports that the Social Security Administration has agreed to pay more than $500 million in back benefits to more than 80,000 recipients whose benefits were unfairly denied after they were flagged by a federal computer program designed to catch serious criminals. At issue is a 1996 law, which contained language later nicknamed the 'fleeing felon' provision, that said fugitives were ineligible to receive federal benefits. As part of its enforcement, the administration began searching computer databases to weed out people who were collecting benefits and had outstanding warrants. The searches captured dozens of criminals, including some wanted for homicide, but they also ensnared countless elderly and disabled people accused of relatively minor offenses such as shoplifting or writing bad checks and in some cases, the victims simply shared a name and a birth date with an offender." (Read more, below.) "The lead plaintiff in the class-action suit, Rosa Martinez, 52, of Redwood City, Calif., was cut off from her $870 monthly disability benefit check in January 2008 because the system had flagged an outstanding drug warrant in 1980 for a different Rosa Martinez from Miami. Officials said it is difficult to estimate how many social security recipients might be affected by the agreement but said the number is fewer than 1 percent nationally. 'What's remarkable about this case is thesheer number of individuals who were unfairly denied benefits and the size of the financial settlement they will receive,' said David H. Fry of Munger, Tolles & Olson, one of the pro bono attorneys who represented victims."

9 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. Not a database error by abshack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is human error. When will people learn not to make peoples' name the primary key... :/

    1. Re:Not a database error by e9th · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Social Security benefits are paid regardless of where you live, which might be a country that can't/won't extradite you back to the U.S.

    2. Re:Not a database error by chrb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem was not the choice of primary key. The problem was the way in which the people in charge of the process failed to consider the possibility of false positives.

      more than 80,000 recipients whose benefits were unfairly denied... The searches captured dozens of criminals

      "dozens?" Let's be generous and say 50. 50 out of 80,000 is a 99.9% rate of false positives. Not good.

  2. And that's what happens by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 5, Interesting

    when you make everybody do the job that the police are supposed to be doing. Who thought it would be a good idea for Social Security people to be screening criminals? (Newt Gingrich and his Contract on America congress in 1996, that's who). Screening criminals is what the police should be doing. What's next? Is the FBI going to be paving the roads?

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  3. What a stupid law. by pavon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not getting this law. First off, social security isn't some charity program, paid for by other taxpayers. It is money that the citizens/criminals paid into the system and deserve to get back, regardless of what else they have done in life. Besides, are we really doing ourselves a favor by denying ex-cons their own money that they need to survive in their old age?

    Furthermore, if it really is about current fugitives, then wouldn't the government love to know a mailing address for these people so they can arrest them, rather than just refusing SS payment?

  4. Re:How on earth... by greed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thing about UNIVERSAL public health care is...

    It's actually not very important if you correctly identify who is getting health care.

    Your doctor needs to know who you are, and lab results need to be correctly tied to samples, and so on. But that's not a function of who's paying the bills.

    But for determining if the doctors and labs get paid? Not so much.

    Basically, all you really need to know is, "is this person a citizen or lawful immigrant?" and "is this procedure covered by the system?". It's not so important to know WHICH citizen or lawful immigrant. It's nice to get it right, but your medical history doesn't need to be part of your public health insurance ID, so it's not critical to treatment.

    Different keying problem.

    That being said... I'm amazed at how many people think there's some huge government conspiracy out to get them when they can't get simple stuff like this right. Sure, they can listen in on all cell phone calls... but they can't keep a list properly?

  5. Um - No, not yet at least by HiChris! · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, even SSN are not 'unique'. They try and keep it unique for each generation, but they've already started reusing numbers.

    SSNs are not currently re-used. They may potentially be reissued but we are talking 50+ years from now. See http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html

    1. Re:Um - No, not yet at least by dwreid · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I suppose by "re-used" you mean reissued. I currently have 3 illegal aliens using my SSN right now. I've spoken to the Social Security Administrtion. They know about these people. They confirmed it. They also told me that they can't do anything about it because they don't pass information to law enforcement agencies. I spend untold hours every year correcting entries into my credit reports from these lawbreaking, bad check writing, no bill paying assholes. It's a great system we have.

  6. By 'Social Security victims' do they mean... by DustoneGT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the people who are forced to pay into the unsustainable scheme?