Document Actions
The “Fugitive Felon” Rules, Or Government Regulations as Absurdist Theater
In 1996, Congress passed welfare reform legislation that included a provision titled “fugitive felons.” This section denies certain government benefits to criminals on the run. Who could object to that? Certainly hardened criminals on the lam should not live off the public teat. Certainly hardened criminals on the lam should not live off the public teat. In practice by the Social Security Administration, however, the hunt for “fugitive felons” borders on satire. It is a triumph of language over logic.In 1996, Congress passed welfare reform legislation that included a provision titled “fugitive felons.” This section denies certain government benefits to criminals on the run. Who could object to that? Certainly hardened criminals on the lam should not live off the public teat. In practice by the Social Security Administration, however, the hunt for “fugitive felons” borders on satire. It is a triumph of language over logic. Here is how it works:
The Social Security Administration runs a check to see if there are outstanding arrest warrants in any state for recipients of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. If so, they notify the law enforcement authorities of that particular jurisdiction without notifying the SSI recipient. The law enforcement officials have 60 days to say if they are interested or not in pursuing the case. If they don’t reply within 60 days, it is logically assumed that they do not consider the matter worth pursuing
If the police enforce the warrant, SSI benefits are not affected by this provision.
But what happens if law enforcement doesn’t consider the warrant worth pursuing? Logic would suggest that since the police do not want to pursue the individual it’s a dead issue. But — you guessed it – exactly the opposite is true. Benefits are suspended for individuals who the police are not pursuing.
Does this actually happen in real life? You bet.
For example, a mentally incapacitated woman in Texas had her benefits suspended for over a year because there was an outstanding warrant in New York charging her with shoplifting a $7 item 20 years earlier. A man in a Georgia nursing home had his benefits suspended because of a motel bill that had not been paid a quarter of a century earlier in Washington State. He is one of at least three people in Macon, Georgia accused of fleeing to a nursing home to avoid prosecution. As pressure for the government to save money increases, so does pressure to deny benefits.
SSI benefits were designed for individuals in the most desperate straits. It is literally subsistence money to provide food and shelter. Only the very poorest elderly and severely disabled are eligible for benefits. Of course, these are also exactly the people with the least ability or resources to counter any criminal charges — no matter how ancient or petty — against them.
What is Congress’ response? They extended this provision to all Social Security retirement, disability and survivors’ benefits beginning in 2005. The Congressional Budget Office states this will cause the loss of Medicare Part B for many beneficiaries, thus resulting in extra savings for the government.
What better way to fight crime and save money?
For further information, contact:
Gerald McIntyre
National Senior Citizens Law Center
213/639-0930