Amid reports that the Social Security Administration (SSA) considered eliminating its national telephone services, U.S. Reps. Jared Moskowitz and Al Green are partnering to lead a coalition of 60 House Democrats urging the administration to safeguard these critical services for millions of Americans who depend on them.

Moskowitz, who represents Florida’s 23rd Congressional District, and Green, of Texas’ 9th Congressional District, sent a joint letter to Acting Social Security Commissioner Leland Dudek expressing “grave concerns” over the potential policy shift. While they commended the SSA for ultimately walking back the proposal, they stressed the need for clear, long-term protections against any future cuts to telephone-based assistance.

Their push follows reports that Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency — a Donald Trump administration advisory task force — floated the idea of eliminating SSA’s phone services as part of a wider move toward automation and digital-only platforms. The lawmakers warned such a move would have devastating consequences for vulnerable populations, particularly older adults, people with disabilities, and Americans without reliable internet access.

“Eliminating or reducing phone services would leave these individuals without the support they need to access and manage their earned benefits,” the lawmakers wrote. “We strongly urge you to consider the individuals who may be harmed, as eliminating or reducing phone services would create unnecessary barriers for the most vulnerable populations, at a time when they already face so many challenges.”

In their letter, Moskowitz and Green outlined the stakes: In Fiscal Year 2024 alone, the SSA received nearly 80 million calls to its national 1-800 number. Phone-based claims accounted for about 40% of all claims processed by the agency. For millions of Americans — especially those who can’t easily navigate online platforms or travel to SSA field offices — phone services are not optional; they are essential.

The lawmakers also highlighted the economic vulnerability of many Social Security beneficiaries. More than 7 million seniors rely on Social Security for at least 90% of their income, and any interruption in payments could leave them struggling to afford basic necessities like food, housing and medical care.

Moskowitz and Green emphasized that the SSA is already grappling with staffing shortages, which have led to increased wait times and backlogs. They warned that eliminating phone services or closing in-person field offices would only worsen these challenges and further delay access to vital benefits.

“Social Security benefits are earned entitlements that individuals contribute to throughout their entire working lives,” the lawmakers wrote. “Every American deserves the opportunity to access those benefits in a way that is accessible and equitable.”

For Floridians, the issue hits especially close to home. Nearly 160,000 residents in CD 23 rely on Social Security benefits, and the state’s large senior population makes safeguarding SSA services a critical concern.

The lawmakers concluded their letter with a direct call to action: “We trust that you will take these concerns seriously and work to preserve essential services that allow Social Security beneficiaries to access the benefits they have earned and rely on.”

For the full text of their letter, click here.

Post Views: 0

The Florida Society of Ophthalmology (FSO) is urging lawmakers to nix a bill that would expand optometrists’ scope of practice.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Alex Rizo (HB 449), would allow optometrists to “perform board-approved laser and non-laser ophthalmic procedures” and hold themselves out as “optometrists certified in ophthalmic procedures” in advertising.

Ophthalmologists and optometrists have battled for years over the scope of their respective professions, with the former staunchly opposing scope expansion for the latter.

Ophthalmologists are medical doctors who have completed a residency to specialize in eye care, including the diagnosis and treatment of all maladies affecting the eyes. Optometrists, while highly trained, do not attend medical school and are primarily focused on eyesight and the prescription of corrective lenses.

Allowing optometrists to perform more advanced procedures would endanger patients, ophthalmologists argue. Similar to other scope of practice battles, those backing the change say it would boost health care access.

“Optometrists play an important role in eye health care, providing essential services such as vision testing, prescribing corrective lenses, and detecting certain eye conditions. However, their scope of practice typically does not include surgical procedures involving lasers, scalpels, or injections on or around the eye. These advanced interventions require the specialized medical education, extensive surgical training, and clinical expertise of ophthalmologists,” said Dr. Raquel Goldhardt, the President of FSO.

“Patient well-being should remain the paramount consideration in any decisions affecting eye care practices. It is advisable to maintain the current system of collaborative care between optometrists and ophthalmologists, which has proven effective in providing comprehensive eye health services to patients.”

FSO pointed to research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association on a type of laser surgery to treat glaucoma. It found that patients who receive the treatment from an optometrist are significantly more likely to require additional surgery. FSO further cited incidents of “sight threatening complications” following optometrist-administered procedures in other states, including Oklahoma, Louisiana and Kentucky.

The association said that if a patient ultimately requires a second or subsequent surgery to rectify complications from the first, patients will invariably pay more for care.

“Health care costs are already high enough and this bill would increase incurred costs for patients, which could result in driving insurance rates even higher,” said Dr. Darby Miller, legislative Co-Chair of FSO. “We urge lawmakers to reconsider this costly legislation and ensure that patients can receive safe and affordable eyecare.”

HB 449 is scheduled to go before the House Health Professions & Programs Subcommittee Wednesday afternoon. It is the first of three committee references for the bill, which currently has no Senate companion.

Post Views: 0