Shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack, Congress decided that every Social Security office in the nation needed a full-time guard.
So for the past six years, the federal government has been shelling out more than $60,000 annually to cover the tab for having a guard watching over the 5-person Social Security office in Bristol.
That office is slated to close Nov. 2 so that the Social Security Administration can save about $113,000 annually, officials said.
More than half the savings will come from eliminating the need for a guard in Bristol.
The requirement “makes no sense,” said state Rep. Frank Nicastro, a 79th District Democrat.
“It seems so ridiculous,” said state Rep. Bill Hamzy, a Plymouth Republican whose 78th District includes part of Bristol.
John Leone, president of the Greater Bristol Chamber of Commerce, said it is “like shooting a fly with an elephant gun” to combat terrorism by hiring full-time security for a tiny Social Security office.
The other Social Security workers who are currently in Bristol will simply transfer to a New Britain office that is likely to be moving to new,larger quarters soon.
Local officials and aides for congressional offices who gathered at the chamber offices Friday afternoon said that one way to fight for the Bristol office to remain open may be to reduce its hours so that it would be open only four days a week instead of five.
Apparently, they said, the guard wouldn’t be necessary under the law if the office is less than full-time.
The federal Department of Homeland Security hires the guards and charges the Social Security Administration the cost of paying the guards along with a 15 percent management surcharge.
“It’s overkill,” Leone said, and clearly isn’t necessary in Bristol.
Mayor William Stortz, city councilors, state lawmakers and others said Friday they’re going to push hard to keep the office open.
“Once it’s closed, it’s closed,” said city Councilor Mike Rimcoski. “It would take an act of God to reopen it.”
Nicastro said he can’t understand the priorities in Washington.
“One bomb in Iraq” costs more than it would take to keep serving more than 12,000 people yearly at the Bristol office, Nicastro said.
He said, “We can spend that kind of money overseas - and we don’t seem to be getting anywhere, looks like another Vietnam - and we can’t this office open?”
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
6 comments:
If George Carpenter owns the property and collects rent then he should pay for the security guard.
That makes sense.
He earns a bit less than $37K in rent and he's supposed to pay the $70K tab for a security guard?
In any case, the law requires the Department of Homeland Security to hire the guard. It bills the Social Security Administration for the cost, and adds 15 percent to the tab to cover its managerial expenses (which, by the way, is a ludicrous administrative charge).
Does Carpenter plow the snow or does the government, or does Carpenter charge the government? How much is Carpenter really making on this rental?
Can't they move the office to a government owned property?
The article has numerous inaccuracies. All social security ofices have had security guards since well BEFORE 9/11. The reasons for guards have little to do with terrorism. The public is unaware of the fact the SSA suspends THOUSANDS of beneficiaries annually for outstanding felony warrants. We routinely deal with violent individuals with serious mental illnesses. We regularly deal with illegal aliens who visit SSA offices with false immigration documents attempting to get valid social security numbers. SSA employees are assualted every year. In my small suburban office alone I have dealt with: two escaped prisoners who visited our office asking that their benefits be reinstated, one individual with an outstanding warrant for raping an 11 year old girl, one individual suspended who had a warrant for homicide, dozens of individuals with warrants for drug violations, too many illegal aliens to count, one individaul wanted by the Secret Service for sending a threatening letter to the White House, two individuals who were restrained by the guard and arrested by the police for throwing chairs at my employees. There is more. I could go on. You get the point. Again, I work at a suburban office, not an inner city office (where things are even worse). I don't know any SSA employee who would be willing to work in an office without a guard. Most of the public has no idea what goes on at Social Security Offices throughout the country, least of all the politicians who are completely clueless.
I'd love to know what the anonymous writer thinks is inaccurate. All of the information came from U.S. Rep. John Larson's office staff, Larson or Connecticut's two U.S. senators.
I did check up on their claim that the guard was added after 9-11 and I believe that is true.
Here is what Larry Massanari, the acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration, told the House Ways and Means Committee on Oct. 18, 2001:
"As for the security of our facilities, we are now screening visitors more thoroughly and increasing our inspections of packages, delivery vehicles, transit buses, and we are carefully screening all vehicles that use underground parking. We have also placed guards in the 322 field offices that did not previously have security guards."
I believe, though I can't find solid proof yet, that Bristol's office did not have a full-time guard until then.
As for the anonymous person's larger claim that guards are needed, I think whoever it is made a good case for it. I don't know if Bristol's Social Security office staff would agree or not about the need for one.
Post a Comment