Comment on FR Doc # E7-03782

My name is Josie McSwain-Levin, and I am currently a second-year student at the University of Denver, Sturm College of Law. My background experience is in mental health public policy and advocacy, direct care services to adolescents with mental health and substance abuse issues, and assessment of legal problems for low-income Colorado residents. I would like to provide you with my comments on your proposed rule, ?Methods for Conducting Personal Conferences When Waiver of Recovery of a Title II or Title XVI Overpayment Cannot be Approved,? (72 FR 9709). Section 404.506 addresses the Social Security Administration?s (SSA) rule regarding waiver of ?recovery of an overpayment if the individual [i]s without fault in causing the overpayment and if recovery would defeat the purpose of the Social Security Act or be against equity and good conscience.? The section also addresses the option of a personal conference for the individual if the waiver cannot be approved based on the information provided by that individual in support of waiving recovery of the overpayment. The proposed rule seeks to revise the regulations thereby allowing for personal conferences to be conducted ?face-to- face, by telephone, or by video conference.? I support this revision of the rule because it provides beneficiaries with practical options for presenting further evidence in favor of a waiver, even when they cannot appear at the SSA offices for a face-to-face conference. Additionally, it will allow the agency to conduct this procedure more quickly and more efficiently by utilizing the technological advances available to us today. More Options for Beneficiaries Too often people with disabilities are pushed to the fringes of society simply because they are unable to become involved in government processes in their traditional fashion. They may be unable to physically attend a hearing or conference due to their disability, whether it is a physical disability that prevents a person from leaving the house easily or an emotional disability that keeps one trapped in his/her house (such as anxiety or depression). Not having alternatives to a face-to-face meeting reduces their chance for prevailing on a request for a waiver of overpayment recovery. This is a consideration that is long overdue. My past experience in mental health public policy and advocacy allowed me to interact with people with serious mental health issues. Some so serious that they rarely left their homes because of the anxiety of dealing with the outside world. Many had never voted, or received a driver license, or seen their friends and families for months, and even years, at a time. The idea of appealing a denial of social security disability benefits in person, for one caller, so scared him that he just didn?t follow through with the process and never received the needed assistance. I can?t help but think that if he had been offered an alternative to a personal appearance at this appeal he might now have the benefits he so desperately needed. I helped another person, who had not left her house in almost a year, register to vote and complete an absentee ballot for the first time in her forty-five years. She said that she felt so empowered by being able to cast her ballot on her terms and truly felt a part of the democratic process. These two examples led me to dedicate a large portion of my remaining time at this particular job to researching ways to offer homebound people alternatives to face-to-face encounters, such as meetings with employees of the SSA. Unfortunately, I was not able to find much in the short time I had before starting law school, but I set a good foundation for my successor to work from in the future. More Efficient Agency Operations Our government has long stressed the importance of saving money where it can in agency operations. Many programs do not get the funding they need because of this mandate; thus, those agencies end up running inefficiently anyway. The cycle of inefficiency is never ending because the federal government has yet to find a way to successfully fund many programs in a prudent fashion. Offering alternatives to face-to-face meetings will reduce the cost of employee travel, time away from the office and avoid difficulties with scheduling meetings. When beneficiaries who cannot attend a personal meeting are provided with the option of a phone or video meeting, they have the flexibility they should be afforded when it comes to requesting a waiver of overpayment recovery. And, if the agency is not really assured that it will get the money returned if the waiver is not approved, because the beneficiary is judgment-proof then this, again, wastes money if the employee spent a lot of time trying to recover this money. And, time is money here! The technology available to us today has allowed people around the world to connect with one another for business and personal reasons. It is ridiculous to not take advantage of these advancements, which have been proven to save time and money. Utilizing technology benefits both sides of this situation ? agencies can run more efficiently and save money, and beneficiaries can choose the method that best suits their needs when requesting a waiver for recovery of an overpayment. Allowing beneficiaries more than one option empowers them to take action in situations where there may be a mistake in their favor. Conclusion I am in favor of the proposed rule, ?Methods for Conducting Personal Conferences When Waiver of Recovery of a Title II or Title XVI Overpayment Cannot be Approved,? (72 FR 9709). It is commendable when an agency understands the obstacles facing many Americans, which prevent them from interacting with our federal government, and takes steps to fix the problems. These rule revisions will make the waiver process more fair, and will allow the agency to operate more effectively and efficiently. Thank you for your consideration of my comments.