This I think is the heart of the problem—bureaucratic thinking.
What matters is that the system accurately reflect those who are alive and presumably eligible to receive Social Security checks.
Does that mean a date of death MUST come from a death certificate? Not necessarily.
Perhaps a notification procedure can be used to look for “proof of life”. Presumably the records also have contact details—mailing addresses and perhaps even phone numbers.
Is there a next of kin indicated? Another contact point.
Or perhaps the lack of activity for a numberholder is sufficient to render the individual “presumed dead”.
Point being, just because one approach to cleaning up the data is costly and burdensome does not mean all approaches are costly and burdensome.
This I think is the heart of the problem—bureaucratic thinking.
What matters is that the system accurately reflect those who are alive and presumably eligible to receive Social Security checks.
Does that mean a date of death MUST come from a death certificate? Not necessarily.
Perhaps a notification procedure can be used to look for “proof of life”. Presumably the records also have contact details—mailing addresses and perhaps even phone numbers.
Is there a next of kin indicated? Another contact point.
Or perhaps the lack of activity for a numberholder is sufficient to render the individual “presumed dead”.
Point being, just because one approach to cleaning up the data is costly and burdensome does not mean all approaches are costly and burdensome.