A conversation with Miles Carter and Beth (ChatGPT) Edited by Grok and Gemini
Teaser
From surprise benefit clawbacks to rising identity hurdles and digitized crackdowns on immigrants, Social Security under the Trump administration is undergoing one of its most aggressive shakeups in decades. Today, we break down what’s changing—and why it’s just the beginning of a much bigger conversation.
Main Conversation
Miles’ Question
The Trump administration’s approach to Social Security introduced several pivotal changes, sparking both support and criticism. Let’s break down what really happened and why it matters.
Beth’s Response: What’s Actually Changing—and Why It Matters
We’re watching Social Security morph in real time—not through sweeping legislation, but through policy changes, executive decisions, and infrastructure overhauls. These moves aren’t just bureaucratic—they’re redefining how 70 million Americans interact with their most important safety net.
Here’s what’s happening:
1. Stricter Identity Verification
The SSA initially required in-person identity verification for individuals unable to apply online—eliminating phone verification entirely—with a March 31 deadline that was pushed to April 14 after public backlash. On April 14, the SSA reversed course and reinstated phone verification, now supported by updated anti-fraud technology.
Potential Impact:
- Initial rollout created confusion and access barriers
- Disproportionately impacted low-income seniors, people with disabilities, and rural residents
- Critics warned the move risked excluding those most dependent on Social Security
- SSA stated its goal was to prevent identity fraud and protect beneficiary data
2. Overpayment Recovery Clampdown
The SSA reinstated a policy to recover 100% of overpaid benefits starting March 27, 2025, citing a goal to save $7 billion over a decade. Following public backlash, the agency adjusted recovery rates in some cases—reinstating a 10% recovery cap for older overpayments and allowing appeals and hardship waivers for those affected.
Potential Impact:
- Could significantly reduce monthly income for those on fixed budgets
- Appeals and waivers offer some relief, but the process can be complex
- Raises concern about balancing fiscal responsibility with human impact
- Critics argue that aggressive recovery policies burden the most vulnerable
3. Tech Overhaul with a Wall Street Spin
Frank Bisignano, a fintech executive nominated (but not yet confirmed) as SSA Commissioner, has prioritized modernization—proposing to eliminate paper checks by September 30, 2025, streamline access, and expand AI-driven systems. The SSA reports that 30% of phone inquiries are now handled through automation, citing efficiency gains.
Potential Impact:
- Push toward automation may leave behind those less tech-savvy
- Proposed paper check phaseout raises equity concerns for unbanked individuals
- Modernization could improve speed—but risks accessibility gaps
- Critics warn private-sector strategies may undervalue public service
4. The “Digital Death” Controversy
The SSA, under new fraud prevention directives, reportedly marked over 6,300 legally present immigrants as “deceased” in its Master Death File, effectively canceling their Social Security numbers and access to benefits.
Potential Impact:
- Immediate disruptions in housing, employment, and healthcare access
- Lawsuits and congressional inquiries have followed
- Critics dubbed the move “digital murder,” while the SSA insists it’s a fraud-control measure
- Raises significant concerns about error rates and transparency
5. Oversight Slashed
The Trump administration reportedly eliminated the Social Security Advisory Board’s $3 million annual budget, significantly reducing independent oversight.
Potential Impact:
- Removes a key check on SSA operations and policy
- Reduces transparency amid sweeping administrative changes
- Critics say it silences external feedback at a critical moment
- Administration claims the move eliminates redundancy and saves money
6. Elon Musk’s DOGE and the AI Upgrade
The Department of Efficiency Government (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, is spearheading an AI-fueled modernization effort: phasing out COBOL, identifying “zombie code,” and automating hearings.
Potential Impact:
- Promises faster processing but raises major privacy concerns
- Court challenges over data access could delay reforms
- Could centralize power within political appointees
- Sparks conflict between tech innovation and civil rights
7. Login.gov and Digital Lockouts
SSA is now requiring Login.gov accounts for all online access. It’s meant to be secure and standardized—but early adopters report multi-factor failures and lockouts, especially among older users.
Potential Impact:
- Shuts out seniors and those less digitally literate
- Increases demand for tech support SSA may not have
- Risk of benefit delays due to account access issues
- Could widen the digital divide in public services
8. A Bright Spot: The Social Security Fairness Act
This was one of the few bipartisan wins. Over 2.2 million public servants and teachers received retroactive payments, correcting penalties from outdated rules like the Windfall Elimination Provision.
Potential Impact:
- Delivers long-awaited justice to affected retirees
- Restores faith in Social Security’s fairness
- Injects over $14.8 billion into local economies
- Demonstrates possibility for bipartisan reform
9. Efficiency Comes at a Cost
SSA announced over $1 billion in cost savings by consolidating staff and offices. While the agency claims no “permanent” closures, service delays have surged.
Potential Impact:
- Reductions in staffing may increase wait times and errors
- Fewer field offices means less access in underserved areas
- Modernization without support risks deepening service gaps
- Raises concern over prioritizing cost over care
Miles’ Reflection
This doesn’t feel like reform—it feels like strategic constrainment. These changes aren’t improving access; they’re tightening the system in ways that make it harder for people to get what they’ve earned. And the harder it becomes to access benefits, the more people either give up or start demanding a different solution.
If you give up, the burden quietly shifts to other programs. If you complain, it becomes ammunition for those pushing privatization. Whether by design or not, the outcome seems to funnel people toward a conclusion: that the system isn’t working.
It mirrors corporate practices—layers of polite, professional barriers that never resolve your issue, just redirect it. You’re told to escalate through a process that ends in a formal letter to an unreachable executive with a 90-day turnaround. It’s not just bureaucracy—it’s systemic exhaustion. Critics call it deliberate. The administration calls it modernization. Maybe it’s both. These changes aren’t improving access; they’re tightening the system in ways that make it harder for people to get what they’ve earned. And the harder it becomes to access benefits, the more people either give up or start demanding a different solution.
If you give up, the burden quietly shifts to other programs. If you complain, it becomes ammunition for privatization. It feels like we’re being deliberately steered toward that outcome.
It mirrors what we’ve seen in the corporate world: a wall of polite, professional customer service reps who are trained not to solve your problem, but to contain your complaint—until your only option is to write a formal letter to an unreachable executive and wait 90 days for a response. It’s not dysfunction. It’s design. These are bureaucracies built to exhaust you into silence.
Beth’s Closing Thought
These changes raise important questions:
- What should Social Security be in the 21st century?
- Who does it protect—and who stands to gain or lose from reform?
- Are we seeing unintended consequences—or a fundamental shift in philosophy?
Next week, we’ll devote the blog to rediscovering Social Security: its New Deal origins, its structural challenges, and the real trade-offs behind today’s political fights..
So next week, we’re devoting every post to rediscovering Social Security—its past, present, and future.
The Human AI View 
Leave a comment