i understand that the budget has resources to mail out individuals hard copies. i encourage you to continue to make that information available as easily as possible. it is very important for people to know where they are in the social security system. i want to talk about the issue that you have raised to visit the work force in maryland. these are dedicated people working very hard. you pointed out that

productivity is up 4% consistently. you have 6500 fewer workers. the numbers are increasing every day. the interesting point you raised is that if we lose a person through retirement, it takes you two years to get a person trained to do that work. you said as much as a year could be lost in productivity as a result of losing people. we have a projected increase of less than what would normally be required. we have a tax on requirement which has been an impact. changing the retirement rules, it seems to me that some people have the ability to retire. it might be wondering, why should i put up with this? the disability determinations

be done more timely? there is a tax coming all the time. >> i would say that i am close to panic to holding onto our people. they are the one that do the work. we would be nothing without them. it is hard to find the right people and to train them properly. for a lot of what we do, you often need several our experience to do it well. i will tell you another factor for many people on our front lines. we have invested in the physical security in our offices. i read every violence report that comes in to the agency. that was not a big deal five years ago as.

there were only about 500 attacks or serious threats or assaults. the have gotten worse. most of our people are out in front line on a regular basis. the attention during the recession for people have been more violent, more people have been anti-government. that is a real factor in losing people as well. that is taking a toll on people in the front line. that is why did we have invested in security more than we have in the past. >> i know that we will have disagreements. the gentleman disagrees on budget priorities. i think we all want to make sure that our federal work force is safe and has supported needs.

i do not know a member of the senate who does not believe that the benefits provided by the social security administration is vital to our country. i do not know if any member does not want to see work being done in a more timely and efficient way. the productivity you have been able to achieve, that you are being asked to do more with less. the least we can do is make sure that we provide the kind of support that you need in order to get the job done i am certain that our language has been done counterproductive. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman and mr. astrue for your work. you made some reference in your

opening statement about online application that has helped deal with the claims. this raises the question of whether disability insurance program has become an alternative on and on employment benefits. those receiving benefits were not disabled. they are obviously contributing to the insolvency problem. two specific questions. why should the economy have a significant impact on the number of claims? our people claiming claims because the economy is bad or because they are actually disabled?

second, what are the total number of applications for the fiscal year 2011? how many of those were not approved? >> ok. senator, there has been a fairly body of economic research over the years that shows in times of recession, with a bit of a because of unemployment lag is a ability claims rise. but does not mean that there are not legitimate applications, but there are people who are on the margins and decide to take a chance. as much as we try to make this as black and white as possible, there is a random elements that these are human beings making difficult calls.

people decide to take a chance. typically what should happen and what does happen in most cases is that those claims are rejected, but we do not stop people from applying. it is not just this recession. if you look historically at other periods of high recession, the workload goes up. i will give you the precise record numbers for the record, but 2011, we had summer between to buy two and 2.3 million applications, if i remember correctly. let me double check. i am very close. i will provide a precise number for the record. let me respond to what you are trying to get out.

if you are concerned about the system not being tight enough, there are some things that i think this committee should consider looking at. over time, i think the courts have had a sympathy for claimants who have expanded statutory language beyond your intent. in particular, we have inconsistent rulings in the circuit on the treating physician rule. that is critical to a lot of our cases. in the ninth circuit, it is particularly broad. it cannot all be right. it is potentially a way of blowing open the system and allowing cases that should not be allowed if that standard is not consistent with what i believe was congress's original content. that scenario is looking at the area of what constitutes improvement on continuing disability reduce.

courts of us to a higher standard than what congress originally intended. also, i think it is important that as admiral, it has been a disappointment in its outcome. it is not costs affected debt. part of the reason for that, i think, is that congress has agreed 5-10 years layered on work incentives. it is so complex that i think it overwhelms people who even do want to come back to work. we think we should have a program authorized to talk to people to come back to work. let's simplify the program.

i know the way the budget trends are going. we cannot continue to do business as usual. i would ask the committee to consider ways to simplify the statute and responsibilit. we have introduced complexity that has had ai unintendedes and negative consequences. i think working on it would be very positive for us to go. >> one more question. and you could send your answer. >> good morning. i want to follow up on the question of publishing names and social security numbers of deceased people that you and i have talked about. what is happening is we have a new kind of crime.

it is not a crime with a gun or a knife or a crowbar. it is use of a laptop. once the social security numbers, particularly of deceased people, have been acquired, which is published by social security, they file in the name of the deceased or in the case of a deceased child. in the morning and this news, a deceased child lost the battle to cancer. the name was published. the social security was published. the social security number was used as a dependent on a false tax return, asking for a refund.

what is happening in communities like tampa and orlando, street crime, drugs, theft, burglaries are going down because it is easy for the criminals to get all of this money from income tax refunds because they have gotten some the's social security number. one of the sources as pointed out from the morning news in memphis is deceased social security being published by social security. when i talked to mr. astrue about this, and he says he has a lawsuit settlement regarding the freedom of information act that these numbers have to be published.

he says that we can only change this by statute. of course, i found the statute, but in the meantime, the criminals are having a field day. now, i disagree with him and i want to bring to his attention some change suggestions. in the first place, and he is operating with legal counsel in a lawsuit that was settled in 1980. it was settled regarding the names of the social security numbers. it was supposed to be published only once a year. he publishes names, social security numbers and other information every day.

that is a big difference. i would ask you to consider that. the publishing their address, their date of death, date of birth, a whole set of information that was not required by the original lawsuit in 1980. mr. chairman, i would also bring to the committee's attention that since 1980, there has been a lot of cases that have found the deceased has a privacy interest. let me give you more that i have familiarity with. people were trying to get all kinds of information about astronauts. that case ruled that the victims have a privacy interest that can be protected.

mr. astrue, i would ask what this additional information, would you please consider until we passed the statute, to change the law and that you do not have to publish all of this information and not do it on a daily basis so that it would not be easy for criminals to get their hands on this and do this new type of crime and still millions of dollars of american taxpayers' dollars? for the more, would you consider under the current lawsuit settlement that you would only publish the names and the last four digits, so that would help prevent criminals from carrying out this new crime?

>> senator, you and i talked about this personally. we are in disagreement about full law. with all due respect, this is something i have look at personally. this is an area of the law i know something about. you and the congress have said the statutory deadlines for disclosure under the privacy act and the free information act was severe penalties. so, no. i cannot release them once a year because you have decided that i cannot do that. as we have discussed before, i do not think we have statutory authority to withhold that information.

it is a strong presumption of release under the statutes. you need an exemption. the challenger case is the only one on the other side. i do not believe it has brought application. no court since the challenger case has applied are broadened that exception in this way. i do believe that is available to me. even if i were wrong on that, as a practical matter, you have to understand that the carter administration settled this case under a judicial decree in 1980. i cannot just go back and thumb my nose at a federal court order. first, i have to get the department of justice to challenge it. i do not believe they will.

the have no basis for going back and opening it. this is why they support the administration. it would probably be a four-year process to get a definitive decision, even if the justice department were to do that. i do not think it is appropriate or practical. what has to happen is that congress needs to act. they need to work together in a collaboration. in the house, the lead has been on the republican side. you and another senators have introduced bills here. i would say to you, i think this committee and senate ought to take it up as a personal challenge this year to get this bill passed this year. this is one of the relatively few areas where i do not think there is a big disagreement on principle. i would say, this is the congress's responsibility and not executive branch.

i would urge you to fix it as quickly as possible. >> this is the kind of bill that would be considered in other bill. since it touches on taxes and social security, in this political context of the election year, this is imperative. if you would request of the justice department, their interpretation so that if perhaps you might be wrong in your considered judgment as a former legal counsel, we might

get some relief until we can pass this statute. mr. chairman, thank you very much. >> thank you, senator. that is clearly a problem. i think it would be worth our while to pick up this legislation. we are both geared to resolve the same problem. i recognize some of the difficulties that can occur, but we cannot accomplish anything if we do not try. let's see what we can do to work with the administration. it is an outrage of people taking advantage of social security numbers and filing fraudulent tax returns. it is an outrage.

>> we have had two hearings on this on the subcommittee i have had the privilege of chairing. the record is there. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for calling this hearing. mr. astrue, thank you for being here. the report found that social security can sustain full benefits falling for a few mergers. that means that it will exhaust its trust fund reserves by the year 2033. if this happens, benefits will be automatically cut from current beneficiaries. there has been meaningful

entitlement reform to help future generations. it is troubling to hear about a fraudulent program. we have to ensure that the programs are operating efficiently. i like to go back something that senator hatch mentioned. last december, there was a report of potential fraudulent practices on the part of law firms representing claimants for disability, particularly in the fields process. the report, which i would like to submit for the record, found that claim representatives have little medical evidence that could prove their claims.

they should not be eligible to receive disability benefits. we have done a lot of work in this area. i want to recognize his work on this regard in shedding light on this issue. i am disappointed to learn that the social security administration has refused to take actions to address the actions of this law firm. i believe that continuing medical reviews should be performed on claimants so that we can be sure that only eligible claimants qualify for benefits. in my view, this review should be done not only on do allegations, but on prior allegations as well. is it not within your priority to prioritize the social security and ministration's program within your existing

budget to ensure that there is a proper response to these claims? >> senator, i would have to disagree with an number of claims of your question. first of all, i am familiar with that article. we did not take no action. if you have questions about that, i would encourage you to talk to the inspector general. that article is relatively thin in terms of the content of allegations. there really was not very much there, in my opinion. there is this assumption that there is a requirement for all relevant medical evidence to be provided to the judge. right now, that is not the law. but previous to the commission's try to make that the law. it had received a lot of opposition. first of all, the wall street commission had a dead wrong. third, it would be unprecedented to go back and review all cases

by law firm on evidence anywhere near -- if you have proved a real fraud, i have no real information from the inspector general to suggest that we have that. it would be totally unprecedent to do that. any court that would look at that would throw it out. it would be an enormous waste of taxpayers' dollars for me to do that. >> can you summarize for us the inspector general's findings? there is no findings our report on it. >> there is a public report. i do not have much more than that. please read the article very carefully.

pass that, there is not very much there in terms of evidence. there is here say. it may be true. in order for us to take action, we need to have proof and evidence. >> i am sure that we will revisit that issue. last month, there was a social security administration disability claims judge that was seeking information from social media sites for cases. the media provided an important info to gather evidence about program applicants. in law enforcement, they are using some of those meetings for investigative purposes.

the recent decision work begins program integrity? >> no. just the contrary. first of all, you need to understand that to protect the public privacy and to protect hundreds of millions of dollars investment, we have one of the toughest firewalls in the world. it is not that we do not allow the judge to use facebook, none of our employees use it. i cannot go on to my computer and go onto facebook unless i use a complicated work around from the tech people. we do that to protect the privacy of individuals. we do that to avoid damaging now we're getting into the systems that could cost millions of dollars to fix.

second, in my opinion, i have to run a very tight and efficient operation to meet the public and congress's expectations. you allow social immediate time on government time, i think that becomes a big issue of productivity. how come your employees are spending all of their time on facebook and other social media sites? the final thing is, if a judge becomes aware something that looks a fraudulent in social media, we have not told them to ignore it.

but we have been consistent with our long standing policy. tell the to refer it to the inspector generals we can do a proper investigation. social media sights are not exactly clear and reliable evidence. it is complex sometimes to figure out exactly -- i have never signed up for facebook, but i am constantly asking tech people to take down profiles that claim to be mine. that is why you need professional fraud investigators to take circumstantial evidence and see if it is real. i think we're doing exactly the appropriate thing to do. >> ok. thank you, mr. chairman.

i think my time is expired. i think we are all aware of the social need platform and those sorts of things. it seems to me that in ruling beneficiaries in the program if we do not need -- if they do not meet the requirements is not a good excuse. like you said, law enforcement is using these mediums for their investigative purposes. we should be doing everything we can with every tool available to us. in this day and age, in particular with the challenges to get rid of fraud and abuse at every turn. >> that, i actually agree with. the inspector general does use social media and other sites to start fraud investigations.

they investigate and video those suspected of fraud. they investigate this kind of fraud. in addition to making a pitch for my budget, when you look at the budget, they have cut back on units. that is the most effective front-line unit we have on fraud. i would ask if you could take a look at that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. hatch. >> i have a number of questions that i will submit to you. this borders a little bit on senator nelson's concern. there is also a question that has risen from a utah constituents.

as i and instead, the social security administration is seeking accessibility to information sometimes called the death master file. it releases info. the specifications in this regard call for modifications and specifications in leaking certain information. there can be peace, audits, and inspections. there is the need to balance security concern would user data interest. data on deceased individuals are sometimes used in tax fraud. some fraudulent activities are deterred. i also believe that there are legitimate uses of the data by purposes of genealogical research and forensic data. in the specifications however, it explicitly says that data as genealogical purposes is not sufficient.

mr. commissioner, will you be having new rules for accessibility or are you indicating a statutory change for legislative change? in either case, we are assuming that you tend to work with the rest of the committee on any proposals to change accessibility. >> i think we are in agreement. i think i was trying to be clear with senator nelson that i do not view this as a problem that i can solve administratively.

i do not think i have the authority to do it. the difficult balance is that you are pointing out, which i agree with completely, help prove my point. that is classic legislative balancing. that is not something that the congress has empowered me to make. it has raised some concern. i did the administration credit for listening to those concerns. it means of the legislative language has been delayed. i do not think they are approaching this from a rigid point of view.

i think they are figured out the best way to balance it. i will be quite candid. the reason why did we do not have precise language is because we are thinking some provisions. i do not know for sure on a couple of things how they will come out in the end. whatever happens, there is enough overlap between the bills that it is 90% overlap. i think everyone realizes that the most important thing is to get moving to make sure that the major abuses do not continue. i look forward to working with you to accomplish sap. >> i want to thank you for the good work that you do. hopefully we can work out the language. you are one of the few people that i think we can work well with. i want to thank for the hard efforts that you made.

we appreciate your work. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> just curious, you started out under a different administration. what are your thoughts near the end of your term? >> it has been an interesting experience to straddle this administration. for the first time, it is a constitutional experiment. i want to give credit to the administration for trying to approach what i am sure what they did not wish would happen. i have tried to respond in kind.

i think it has worked out pretty well. i will be honest, even though it has worked well, it is definitely still something to think about for the future. it has been an extraordinary, rewarding, and draining time. i am very grateful to president bush for having given me this opportunity. i am grateful to the committee for having given me this opportunity. it is an incredible group of people to try to lead. the dedication to the mission is remarkable.

almost everyone comes out of high school or college to begin their career with the agency. it is remarkable. >> i worked for a commissioner in the mid 1980's. everyone thinks about what they would do if they could have the boss's job and i certainly did then and i never thought i would have the chance to do it. it has been a great blessing to have that opportunity. i thank all of you. this is probably my last appearance before the committee. i think it is time for me to go home to massachusetts. i started working with this committee as a very young person in 1985. and i really did get to know senator moynihan and senator dole quite well. some first-class staff people. the committee treated me extraordinarily well when i was

confirmed in 1989. it has been in the same spirit since. the two of you have been spectacular. the staffs work more collegially than is common in congress these days. i guess i feel blessed all the way around. >> we are blessed to have you working for us. especially the american people. you set a very good tone of cooperation and working together. you are a very good role model. something we will keep in mind. thank you. >> thank you.

>> meeting is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

that quacks this morning on -- >> this morning on "washington journal." rajiv shah. hector barreto will host -- will talk about the issues facing small businesses. .e'll take a look deprogram "washington journal" airs every morning at 7:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. live today on c-span at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the national ministration is marking small business week. then at noon, the u.s. navy

undersecretary will outline the surface combat fleet. at 2:00, remarks from former u.s. supreme justice john paul stevens. justice stevens a step down in 2010 after 35 years in the course. again, you can watch live coverage here on c-span. >> consumers are very frustrated right now. their mobile devices and smartphones are working so slowly. >> competition for wireless space and two commissioners tonight at 8:00 a.m. eastern on "the communicators." >> world leaders are in chicago for the two-day nato summit. >> president obama and afghan president karzai are among nato summit in chicago. earlier today, the two spoke briefly about the strategic partnership agreement reached

between the two nations earlier this year and the a--- the transition of a party to the afghan people. >> good morning, everybody. it is a great pleasure to welcome president karzai to my hometown of chicago after he extended his hospitality to me during my stay in kabul recently. during that trip, we were able to finalize a strategic partnership agreement reflects a future in which two sovereign nations, the u.s. and afghanistan, are operating as partners to the benefit of our country's citizens and also for the benefit of peace, security, and stability in the region and around the world. i want to thank president karzai for his cooperation and his delegation's hard work in helping us to achieve this

agreement. the nato summit is going to be largely devoted to ratifying and reflecting the broad consensus that some many of our partners and isaf members have agreed to. one, in which, we're working with the afghans over the next several years to achieve a complete transition for afghan security where we continue to provide support for the afghan national security forces that have made excellent progress over the next several years and also painting a vision post- 2014. are committed to friendship and partnership with afghanistan continues. the strategic partnership agreement, this nato summit, are all part and parcel of a shared vision that we have in which afghanistan is able to transition from decades of war tree transformational decade of

peace, stability, and development. ida's want to express my appreciation for the hard work president karzai has done. as well as the troops of our other coalition partners. we recognize the hardship that they have been through in these many days of war. both the was recognized that we

still have a lot of work to do then there will be great challenges ahead. the loss of life continues in afghanistan. there will be hard days ahead. we are confident we are on the right track again this nato summit reflects the the world is behind the strategy that we have laid out. now it is our task to implemented effectively and i believe that we can do so in part because of the tremendous strength and resilience of the afghan people. i think they desperately want peace, security, and development. so long as they are reflecting their hope for a better future, they will have a friend in the united states of america. welcome, president karzai. i'm confident this will be a productive nato summit and i look forward to continue to work and implement the plans we have laid out.

>> thank you, mr. president. we have had a good meeting today. afghanistan reaffirmed its commitment to the transition process and to the completion of it in 2013 and the completion of the withdrawal of partners in 2014 so that afghanistan is no longer riverton on the shoulder of our friends in the international community -- is no longer a burden on the shoulder of our friends and allies. as you have very rightly put it, mr. president, afghanistan is looking forward to an end to this war and a transformational decade in which afghanistan

will be looking forward to institutional building of an economy and we will be taking steady steps towards self- reliance in all aspects of life. afghanistan will be conducting its own reviews. in the meantime, the world community, and a particular -- in particular the u.s. and our nato partners, make sure they take a steady steps and have our back towards 2024. largely defending itself from others. mr. president, the partnership

that we signed a few weeks ago in kabul has turned a new page in our relations. it is a page of two sovereign countries working together for the mutual interests, in security and in other areas. mr. president, i bring to you and the people of the united states the gratitude of the afghan people for the support that your tax pair's money have provided to afghanistan over the last decade and for the difference that has made it to the afghan people, education, health, and the building of the afghan government.

mr. president, afghanistan is fully aware of the task ahead and of what afghanistan needs to do to reach the objectives that we all have of stable, peaceful, and a self-reliant afghanistan. in the meantime, until then, thank you for your support. >> thank you, mr. president. >> all right. thank you, guys. thank you. we will have a press conference at the end of the summit. thanks. >> the nato summit wraps up in chicago later today. >> later in the day, the president spoke at the nato's summit where he also address security in afghanistan.

this is about 10 minutes. >> ladies and jump, we have gathered here in chicago. i can think of no better place. it is diverse. dynamic and a determined. many hundreds of thousands of people from chicago, past and present, came from countries in europe and in canada. chicago is the perfect place to renew our commitment between europe and north america in the

21st century. to reaffirm our determination to defend our freedom and security and protect our shared values because in a fast-changing world, we remain each other's indispensable partners. together, we will chart the course for future engagements in afghanistan. we will make sure we complete transition to afghan security teams by the end of 2014 and make clear our commitment to the long-term partnership with the afghan people beyond 2014 so that afghanistan never again harbors terrorists that can attack us at home. and so that afghans can afford to a better future in a stable region. together, we will keep nato capable of responding to security charges because no

country and a no continent can be alone. we must embrace a new conscience to provide more security at at lesser cost to our citizens. together, we will make our partnerships deeper, broader, and a stronger because today's threats are no longer confined within national borders. it expands the globe from west europe to east asia and from north africa to the south pacific. for over 60 years, nato has kept us safe and it has helped keep the world secure. we know many of the challenges of the 21st century. we also know that the future is unpredictable, but together we can face the future with

confidence, what ever it holds. united by shared values and a shared purpose, we can find common solutions to common challenges. so much freedom, democracy, and prosperity that our generation has enjoyed will be passed down to the max. it is my pleasure to now press the floor to president obama -- pass the floor to president obama. >> thank you very much. i want to think this opportunity on behalf of all of us to thank you for europe stemming leadership these past years. i want to begin by welcoming each and everyone of you to my home town. i hope everyone has enjoyed themselves. i understand some took an architectural boat tour. chicago is a great place.

we look forward to having you back again. as i just mentioned, so many people here in chicago trace their roots back to nato countries. it is fitting that chicago is the first american city outside of washington, d.c. to host a nato summit. given the moment of silence we just observed, i want to take the opportunity to salutes all of our men and women serving in uniforms and especially those serving in afghanistan. for over 65 years, our alliance has been the bedrock of our security, and freedom, and our prosperity. all the times may have changed,

the fundamental reason for our alliance has not. our nations are stronger and more prosperous when we stand together. in good times and in bad, our alliance has endured because we share the unbreakable freedom and commitment. that is the spirit we need to sustain here in jakarta. -- here in chicago. we agreed to a bold plan of action to revitalize to make sure we have the tools that are required for a strategic landscape. here at this session, we can reaffirm our article 5 commitments and to investing in the defense capabilities and the

technologies that meet our collective security needs. in the steven -- in these difficult economic times, we can work together. nato is a force multiplier. it will allow each of our nation's to accomplish when none of us could achieve alone. we can all be proud that in lisbon we committed and in chicago we are delivering. we will meet, first as allies, to chart the next phase of our transition in afghanistan. just as we sacrificed together, we will stand together united in our determination. finally, i look forward to our meeting with nato's neighbors.

it will be a reminder that nato is truly a hub. there is nothing else like it on earth. again, thank you mr secretary- general for your outstanding leadership. thank you to all my leaders and friends who are here. welcome to chicago. i'm confident that the next two days will sustain and strengthen the strongest allianz the world has ever known. >> this morning on "washington journal" rajif shah joins us. hector barreto joins us to talk about the issues impacting small businesses. and with the house passing a

short-term extension, we will take a look at the program with carolyn kousky. "washington journal" there's every morning beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. live today on c-span, the small business administration is marking small business week with the impact made by small businesses and entrepreneurs. and then at noon, he will outline the service, but fleet. at 2:00, remarks from former- supreme justice, and john paul stevens. justice stevens set down in georgia 10 after 35 years in the court. you can watch live coverage here on c-span. >> i work a lot now with this

young girl generation of digital natives. from their point of view, they feel like old media is in significantly fact check. one of the things that drives them crazy is anything that does not have a link to the source. being in actor with your sourcing is much harder on line than it is in print because you can check that right away. i think the internet community tends to be a lot more honest. >> our panel on digital media was the most watched on the c- span video library with over 20,000 dues. watch it any time on line. plus you conclude portions of online. online.