[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 79 (Friday, June 14, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1056-E1057]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       INTRODUCTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. GEORGE W. GEKAS

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 13, 2002

  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, today I introduced an important bill, the 
``Administrative Law Process Enhancement Act of 2002,'' that reforms 
the organization of the administrative judiciary within the Social 
Security Administration (``SSA'') by establishing an Office of 
Administrative Law Judges (the ``Office'') within SSA that is 
administered by a Chief Administrative Law Judge (``Chief Judge'') who 
reports directly to the SSA Commissioner.
  The national ALJ hearings function and hearings field operation that 
presently is within the SSA Office of Hearings and Appeals (``OHA'') 
would be transferred to the office by the proposed legislation. The 
Chief Judge would be in charge of the office, be appointed by the 
Commissioner for a term of six years that is renewable once, and be 
subject to removal only upon a showing of an enumerated cause. The 
Associate Commissioner of OHA would continue to administer the Appeals 
Council. The changes proposed in the bill provide for a reorganization 
of the SSA that will not result in any additional costs to SSA or the 
government.
  Currently, the SSA is without a functioning Office of the Chief 
Administrative Law Judge. The functions for both the adjudication of 
administrative claims by SSA administrative law judges (``ALJs'') and 
the appellate process for the review of ALJ decisions by the Appeals 
Council are located within the OHA. The ALJ portion of the OHA is under 
the dual leadership of a Chief Judge and an Associate Commissioner of 
OHA. The position description of the Chief Judge places the Chief Judge 
in charge of the national ALJ hearings function and hearings field 
operation of OHA. The Associate Commissioner of OHA is placed in charge 
of the national ALJ hearing function and the Appeals Council, and has 
major policy-making and policy-implementation responsibilities for OHA. 
The Chief Judge reports to the Associate Commissioner of OHA, who in 
turn reports to the Deputy Commissioner for the office of Disability 
and Income Security Programs (``ODISP''), who in turn reports to the 
SSA Commissioner.
  In the current organization of SSA, the OHA and the ALJ function are 
submerged in the bureaucracy and are far removed from the Commissioner. 
The Social Security Advisory Board recently prepared a report on the 
Social Security disability system that expresses concern about the OHA 
functions being buried too low in the agency, the need to elevate these 
functions to direct oversight by the agency leadership, and the need 
for greater ALJ function independence. Charting the Future of Social 
Security's Disability Programs: The Need for Fundamental Change, 
January 2001, p. 19. The current structure prevents the Commissioner 
from having effective oversight of the ALJ hearing process. The ALJ 
adjudication function should not be treated as a staff responsibility 
in SSA. The ALJ adjudication function is a major program of the agency 
with every individual in this Nation being a potential claimant within 
the SSA system. The SSA ALJ hearing system protects a constitutional 
right of our citizens and provides a constitutionally protected due 
process hearing to members of the American public. This vital process 
should have direct oversight from the Commissioner and the Chief Judge 
should have direct interaction with the Commissioner.
  Another major defect in the current OHA is created by the dual 
leadership responsibilities of the Chief Judge and the Associate 
Commissioner. Frequently, these two leaders are competing for power to 
control the administrative and/or policy decisions for the ALJ hearing 
component of SSA that has deprived OHA of strong, effective leadership. 
Several years ago, the Associate Commissioner attempted to reorganize 
the responsibilities of the Chief Judge and divest the Chief Judge of 
most of the powers of that office, leaving the Chief Judge with some 
minor duties relating to judicial education and staff support for the 
Associate Commissioner. The Associate Commissioner and the Deputy 
Commissioner of ODISP also tried to compel the Chief Judge to resign 
because he resisted the inappropriate diminution of his duties. This 
scheme was thwarted by the efforts of interested individuals and 
organizations together with the oversight action of the Congress.
  The lack of effective leadership and direction of the OHA and 
reduction of the Chief Judge function also has resulted in an 
organization that has been deteriorating in its efficiency. For over 10 
years, several reforms have been imposed on the SSA hearing process. 
Each attempt has resulted in failure. Subsequent to the latest reform, 
the HPI reorganization in the hearing office process that was 
implemented in January 2000, the number of case depositions have 
dropped while the case processing time and the case backlog have 
increased. The result has been poorer service for the American public.
  Better service for the American public by increasing case 
dispositions, reducing processing times, reducing case backlogs, and 
improving decision quality will result from the proposed legislation, 
which will ensure effective leadership of the ALJ hearings component of 
SSA. The ALJ hearings component of SSA will be treated as an 
organization that is responsible for administering a major agency 
program. It no longer will be organized as a staff function within SSA. 
The Commissioner will have direct oversight of the ALJ hearings 
component of SSA, which is necessary to effectively administer this 
important program that provides constitutional due process hearings for 
the American public. The ALJ hearing component of SSA will have one 
individual responsible for administrative operations and policy

[[Page E1057]]

making: a Chief Judge who reports directly to the Commissioner. The 
bill will improve leadership, efficiency and quality in the ALJ 
hearings component of SSA by eliminating the possibility of detrimental 
political struggles between the Chief Judge and other subordinate 
leaders within SSA, which will prevent changes in the ALJ hearing 
process that are motivated by the negative force of intra-agency 
infighting and ensure that the American public receives fair 
constitutional due process hearings.
  Establishment of the office of Administrative Law Judges within SSA 
significantly would increase the speed and quality of the disposition 
of Social Security Act claims for the American public and increase 
public trust and confidence in the integrity and independence of 
decisionmaking by SSA ALJS. This effort should be a bipartisan activity 
of the Congress in the interest of good government, and to that end, I 
invite my fellow colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in 
sponsoring this bill and in making the office of Administrative Law 
Judges within SSA a reality this year.

                          ____________________