Former Social Security Official Says Musk/DOGE Caused “Trauma and Chaos” at SSA
Laura Haltzel is the first former Social Security Administration (SSA) official who was present for the Trump administration’s takeover of the agency to speak out publicly in an on the record interview. In her first interview since leaving SSA, Haltzel told Entitled to Know that Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) “traumatized” SSA employees — and created “gross inefficiencies” in the system. Haltzel resigned her post as Associate Commissioner Office of Research, Evaluation and Statistics on February 28, accepting an early retirement offer that the administration extended to all SSA employees.
Haltzel describes an atmosphere of chaos and fear at SSA headquarters, based on her own experience and communications with colleagues in other departments. (Haltzel was based at the agency’s DC office while the headquarters is in Baltimore.) She had worked at SSA for a cumulative 15 years when she exited her job.
When asked why she decided to go public, Haltzel explained, “I swore an oath to defend the Constitution against every enemy, foreign and domestic… and I witnessed illegal and unconstitutional activity by our top leadership in the Executive Branch, by President Trump, and by Elon Musk.”
Under the influence of Trump, Musk and DOGE, SSA leadership has taken several extreme steps to downsize the agency and undermine its ability to properly serve Social Security beneficiaries. These actions include:
- Radically shrinking the agency’s workforce when staffing already is at a 50-year low;
- Accessing the sensitive personal data of millions of Social Security beneficiaries;
- Closing SSA field offices around the country;
- Restoring an old policy of clawing back up to 100% of beneficiaries’ monthly checks in the case of overpayments;
- Eliminating entire divisions of the agency by illegally removing staff “for cause” despite any performance appraisals to the contrary;
- Proposing to severely reduce customer service on the agency’s 1-800 phone line;
- Trying to make it harder for parents to register newborns for Social Security
The former acting Social Security Commissioner, Michelle King, resigned in protest over Musk and DOGE’s demands for access to highly sensitive SSA data without following long-established protocols. (So did her deputy, Tiffany Flick, who submitted a court affidavit about Musk/DOGE abuses.).
Haltzel says she was horrified at the violation of precedent — and federal law. “As a department head, I did not have the right to access beneficiaries’ private data on a regular basis,” while Musk’s young DOGE minions (mostly IT people with no experience in government or auditing) were rushed through a scant ‘security clearance’ process and granted full access to SSA’s database. “These people were not vetted the way they should have been,” Haltzel says.
She points out that any SSA employee who accesses Americans’ personal data without permission is subject to a maximum 5-year prison sentence and up to $5,000 in fines. Yet, Musk’s team of unqualified outsiders was granted access in a hurry, a move that Haltzel characterizes as illegal. She is deeply concerned about potential abuse of private data by DOGE.
According to Haltzel, Musk and DOGE’s chief tactic at SSA, as with other federal agencies they targeted, is intimidation of employees and sowing chaos to create an untenably stressful workplace — in hopes of driving out long-term workers and shrink the payroll. “There’s only one word for it: trauma,” says Haltzel.
“There was a daily barrage of conflicting directives… and we were constantly responding to deadlines by 5pm every day. It was hard to get real work done where every day you’re trying to comply with some new directive from the top, and then they would reverse course the next day. It created whiplash.”
Haltzel says that one person on her staff lost 20 pounds because they were sick to their stomach every day from uncertainty and “threatening emails essentially telling federal employees that they are worthless and disposable.” That staffer took up the administration’s offer of early retirement, according to Haltzel.
By Haltzel’s account, Musk and DOGE clearly have made the agency less efficient — even though their stated goal was to root out inefficiencies — along with supposed “waste, fraud, and abuse.” In truth, the Social Security Administration always has been one of the most efficient federal agencies, with overhead costs of about 1% of its operating budget.
Haltzel criticizes the leadership of acting Commissioner Leland Dudek, who took over after Michelle King resigned and appeared sympathetic to Musk and DOGE’s mission. In fact, before being promoted, Dudek reportedly had been placed on administrative leave for cooperating with Musk and DOGE’s requests for access to sensitive data. According to the Washington Post, Dudek told Social Security advocates at a closed-door meeting that Musk and Trump were “calling the shots” at SSA and he was merely implementing their policies.
She did not personally interact with Dudek, but Haltzel was told by colleagues that his personal style was “very mercurial and dismissive.” She says that Dudek seemed uncurious about the workings of the agency he had just taken over. When staffers would brief Dudek on their departments’ operations, Haltzel says, he would “cut them off after one minute and say, ‘I’ve heard enough.”
According to Pro Publica, Dudek defended himself by telling advocates, “I’ve had to make some tough choices, choices I didn’t agree with. But the president wanted it and I did it.”
When asked why she thinks Trump and Musk are trying so hard to disrupt the Social Security Administration, Haltzel said it is part of their effort to discredit the entire federal government. “There’s a narrative that they want to sell that government doesn’t work. Apparently, the best way to prove that narrative… is to make it so.”
She acknowledges that the administration also may be targeting SSA because of Musk’s apparent hostility to Social Security itself, which he recently called a “Ponzi scheme.” Musk told the media that there is $700 billion in waste, fraud and abuse in “entitlement programs,” and that he intends to slash spending by that same amount — even though his baseless claims about Social Security fraud have been thoroughly discredited.
Underfunded and understaffed, SSA already was struggling to provide adequate customer service to beneficiaries before Trump and Musk took over. DOGE’s raiding of agency resources will only worsen SSA’s ability to serve the public. “The reduction in customer service ironically reinforces the Musk/DOGE narrative of government dysfunction. It has the potential to become self-fulfilling prophecy,” says Haltzel.
While the media have quoted unnamed SSA staffers in reports about Musk/DOGE interference, no agency officials who were there at the beginning of the Trump administration have gone ‘on-the-record’ with their criticisms until today. Haltzel believes that by being outside the Agency now — and having freedom of speech — she has a special duty to ensure that she speaks on behalf of those still within SSA, for whom doing so would put their jobs at risk. Haltzel realizes that going public is a risk to herself and her family, though she notes that they have taken precautions against retribution by Trump and Musk’s supporters.
“I have taken the oath of office multiple times at multiple agencies. Just because I’m not a federal employee does not diminish the oath I took. It has no expiration date,” she says. “I believe you are either a person of integrity and speak up — or you are not. I will continue to be a person of integrity. I’m not going to change who I am.”
Former Official Reveals Recklessness of Musk’s Meddling in Social Security System
The Social Security Administration (SSA) is facing mounting scrutiny after a lawsuit was filed by labor unions seeking to block Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing Americans’ sensitive personal data. According to the Washington Post, the legal challenge includes testimony from Tiffany Flick, a former senior SSA official, who warned in court filings that DOGE’s interference poses a serious threat to the security of data belonging to millions of people. Flick, who resigned her post at SSA after three decades, cited these actions as part of broader concerns over mismanagement and policy risk brought on by interference in the agency by Trump, Musk, and DOGE.
“DOGE’s requests were unprecedented and reckless,” Flick stated in her affidavit. “They demanded immediate access to taxpayer data without completing standard security checks or following any established protocols. Ignoring these safeguards is more than just careless; it’s a direct threat to the privacy of millions of Americans.”
Tiffany Flick resigned her job as acting chief of staff at SSA at the same time as acting commissioner Michelle King quit in protest of DOGE’s requests for sensitive data. A former long-time SSA staffer who did not wish his name to be used in this article, says, “Flick’s principled approach, along with former acting commissioner Michelle King, shows courage and professionalism in the face of illegal and inappropriate access requests. She and Ms. King were quite brave and paid a heavy price to adhere to the rule of law.”
What Drove Her to Leave?
Flick’s resignation stemmed from repeated attempts by DOGE to gain unauthorized access to critical databases containing highly sensitive taxpayer information. These databases were safeguarded under strict protocols designed to ensure privacy and data security. When DOGE sought to bypass these safeguards, Flick and King pushed back, risking their careers for what they believed to be the right course of action.
The methods employed by DOGE were described by Flick as “unorthodox and alarming,” undermining established security procedures. The risks were too great for her to ignore, and rather than compromise the values she had built her career upon, Flick chose to step away. “It became clear that the safety and trust SSA relies on were deliberately being disregarded,” she noted in her affidavit.
An Agency Facing Growing Challenges
Since Flick’s departure, reports indicate that DOGE’s interference has only intensified. Acting Commissioner Leland Dudek has announced plans for radical downsizing (at an agency where staffing already is at a 50-year low), including firings, coerced early retirement, and the closure of field offices that service the public. Seniors’ advocates warn that these decisions could jeopardize the agency’s ability to serve its beneficiaries effectively, particularly those who rely on in-person assistance. Adding to these difficulties, many of Dudek’s decisions appear to be heavily influenced by DOGE. According to the Post, he admitted to advocacy groups that Musk and his team are “calling the shots” at SSA.
“This is about more than just internal disputes,” Flick declared in her affidavit. “It’s about whether the SSA can remain a trusted institution, or whether it becomes a tool for external agendas that put the public at risk.”
A Warning About the Risks
According to Maria Freese, senior Social Security expert at the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), the ongoing interference and mismanagement represent a profound threat.
“What billionaire Elon Musk does not seem to understand is that accessing federal records is not a game. Security procedures are in place for a reason – the Social Security Administration collects Americans’ most personal and private information including Social Security numbers, banking information, work histories and in many cases, troves of personal medical records. The American people share this information with SSA because they have been assured that the government employees who have access to it have gone through rigorous screening to ensure they can be trusted.” – Maria Freese, NCPSSM senior legislative representative, 3/9/25
Musk claims all these employees have ‘security clearances,’ but Flick’s affidavit shines a bright light on the perfunctory process the DOGE staffers underwent before being cleared. “The process was clearly a ‘security clearance’ in name only – under intense pressure from Musk to approve his acolytes quickly – with little attention to whether they truly could be trusted to safely handle our personal information,” says Freese.
Freese emphasizes that any diminishment of the SSA’s ability to protect this information not only risks significant harm to individuals but also damages the trust that is fundamental to public support of Social Security. Compromising the system, she warns, is a direct threat to beneficiaries.
The Importance of Stability at SSA
Social Security serves as a vital safety net for retirees, disabled individuals, and families who rely on survivor benefits. Disruptions to this system could have devastating consequences for millions of Americans who depend on their earned benefits for financial Security. Former SSA Commissioner Martin O’Malley warned that Musk and DOGE’s meddling in SSA could damage the system and result in missed payments “within 30 to 90 days.”
Tiffany Flick’s decision to speak out serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of integrity and courage when public trust is at stake. “The SSA’s mission is not a commodity to be traded for political convenience,” Flick stated in her affidavit. “It’s a promise, one that must be defended for the sake of Americans today and for generations to come.”
LISTEN TO OUR PODCAST here.
JOIN THE NATIONAL COMMITTEE here.
Trump & Musk Tried to Make it Harder for Parents to Register Newborns for Social Security
It started as a baffling and alarming decision. The Social Security Administration (SSA), under the influence of President Trump’s campaign to gut the federal government and Elon Musk’s DOGE team, announced the termination of Maine’s Enumeration at Birth (EAB) program. For 35 years, the EAB program had allowed parents to register their newborns for Social Security numbers right at the hospital. But suddenly, without warning, SSA moved to rescind this critical service, which would have compelled parents to register their children for Social Security with an SSA representative after leaving the hospital, at a time when Trump and Musk are closing SSA field offices and radically reducing the agency’s workforce.
Tellingly, SSA offered no reason for the original policy change — or its reversal shortly after. – NCPSSM, 3/7/25
Thankfully, after blowback from media reports and pressure from the Maine Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the SSA reversed its decision and rescinded the new policy. This quick reversal is good for Maine families, but make no mistake, the attempt itself speaks volumes about the Trump administration’s apparent agenda to dismantle Social Security from within.
Max Richtman, President and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, captured the severity of the situation when he noted, “The attempt to end the EAB program in Maine was the latest effort by Trump, Musk, and DOGE to incapacitate the agency that administers Social Security benefits for 73 million Americans. Even though they’ve backtracked in Maine, this obviously is part of a policy aimed at undermining the program.”
The Broader Strategy to Chip Away at Social Security
While the decision to reinstate EAB in Maine is welcome news for now, other states—including Arizona, Maryland, Michigan, New Mexico, and Rhode Island— are listed on the DOGE website as having their EAB contracts terminated as part of Musk’s “cost cutting” efforts.
Trump and Musk’s intentions are becoming increasingly obvious. This is part of a systematic effort to make Social Security harder to access and, in the process, shrink the program as a whole. “By closing field offices, coercing experienced employees into early retirement, and cutting over 7,000 jobs, the administration is methodically stripping the SSA of its ability to serve Americans efficiently,” said Richtman.
“Trump clearly has his priorities backwards. First, he makes the absurd claim that 360 year-olds may be collecting benefits, then he tries to strip parents of the ability to easily register their children for Social Security.” – Max Richtman, NCPSSM President and CEO
Temporary Reprieve in Maine, but an Ongoing Threat
The reversal of the EAB policy in Maine shows what media exposure can accomplish. The fact remains that SSA thought it could quietly eliminate this program with little to no accountability.
Policies like this create barriers. Barriers discourage participation. Discouraged participation weakens the system. It’s a chain reaction designed to dismantle Social Security — not in one master stroke but piece by piece.
This strategy isn’t just cruel; it’s deliberate. Richtman summed it up perfectly:
“Why on earth would the administration want to make it harder for parents to register their children for Social Security unless the aim was to shrink the size of the program?” – Max Richtman, 3/7/25
A Bigger Pattern of Sabotage
At the heart of this issue lies a deeper truth. Trump and Musk have long criticized Social Security. Musk recently called it a “Ponzi Scheme,” and Trump dismissed it as a “scam.” Their solution? Slash one of the government’s most effective and efficient programs, which currently has an overhead of less than 1%. By targeting EAB programs, shuttering field offices, and radically reducing staff, they’re advancing this goal. It isn’t just bad policy. It’s a blatant betrayal of Trump’s promise “not to touch” Social Security.
Millionaires Are Done Paying Into Social Security for 2025
Millionaires stop paying into Social Security for the year this week — and billionaires already stopped contributing wages to the program in January. The rest of us continue paying into the system for the entire year. Is it fair that Elon Musk, Rupert Murdoch, Charles Koch, and Tim Cook of Apple don’t have to contribute to Social Security for the rest of the year while most Americans do? We don’t think so. Our Social Security expert, Maria Freese, explains why we need to scrap — or adjust — the payroll wage cap.
Q: For those who don’t know, what is the Social Security “payroll wage cap?”
FREESE: Most people have no idea that there’s a limit on how much of your wages are subject to Social Security payroll taxes because they don’t make enough money to ever reach the cap. This year the cap is $176,100. Once you reach that amount in wages, you stop paying into Social Security for the rest of the year.
Q: So the slogan is: “Scrap the Cap” and we support adjusting the payroll wage cap. Why? Why do we support that?
FREESE: High-income earners pay a significantly smaller percentage of their wages into Social Security than the rest of us. That’s not only patently unfair; it deprives Social Security of much-needed revenue, and we believe that the best way to infuse new revenue into Social Security is to ask the wealthiest among us to pay their fair share.
Q: In years past, 90% of wages in this country fell below the cap, so that income was captured. Today, only about 83% of those earnings are subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That’s because of widening wealth inequality, correct?
FREESE: While middle-income workers’ wages have been stagnating for the last couple of decades, the earnings of the highest paid workers in the country have continued to grow disproportionately. This imbalance means that more and more of the income earned by the wealthy is exempt from paying into Social Security, while workers who are already suffering because their wages haven’t kept up with the cost of living over the past decades they continue contributing on every dollar they earn.
Q: Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative John Larson have offered legislation that would adjust the payroll wage cap, which would go a long way toward keeping the Social Security trust fund solvent beyond its projected depletion date in 2035. Tell us more about how these bills would do that.
FREESE: Both bills ask the wealthiest among us to pay their fair share. They just start at different thresholds. The bill by Senator Sanders reinstates Social Security payroll taxes for wages over $250,000 a year. The bill by Congressman Larson, on the other hand, begins the Social Security payroll taxes again for those earning over $400,000 a year. They did that intentionally, so that it would line up with President Biden’s commitment not to raise taxes on anyone earning under $400,000.
In addition to raising the wage cap, they also both impose a tax on investment income for the wealthiest, who, more and more, are living on the income produced by stocks and bonds rather than wages.
Q: In return for the wealthy contributing more, which they would under this legislation, they would get a higher benefit? Is that right?
FREESE: We believe they should, and in Congressman Larson’s bill, they do. Social security is an earned benefit. The taxes we contribute have a direct relationship to the amount of benefits we earn. For those who earn the least over their lifetimes, Social Security provides a higher proportionate benefit either in retirement or in case of disability — as a percentage of what they earned while they were working.
Q: To be clear, Congressman Larson’s bill does not raise payroll taxes for anyone earning less than $400,000 per year?
FREESE: That’s exactly right. And in fact, as I mentioned earlier, the bill by Congressman Larson does exactly that. It does not affect taxes paid by anyone earning under $400,000 a year. And that was done intentionally to align with former President Biden’s commitment not to raise taxes for anyone earning under that amount.
Q: If the Republicans oppose bringing in new revenue to Social Security by having the wealthy contribute a little more, what do the Republicans propose instead?
FREESE: That’s actually a very good question. Republicans have generally been unwilling to put any of their proposals on paper for obvious reasons. But they have floated proposals to raise the retirement age (a huge benefit cut), adopt a more miserly COLA formula, and even means-test benefits, which could seriously hurt middle class beneficiaries. Meanwhile, Donald Trump and Elon Musk appear to be hunting for revenue from the Social Security program by radically reducing Social Security Administration staff and claiming that there is “massive fraud” in the program. This is what we call “cutting benefits by cutting the SSA.”
Q: A recent survey that we did of our members and supporters indicates 96% support for raising the payroll wage cap. So I ask you again, if this is so popular, why hasn’t it been done?
FREESE: Republicans don’t support and have not supported in the past any proposals to raise taxes on their wealthy contributors or on corporations. So you can’t get any Republican support. You couldn’t get a bill through the current GOP-controlled House or Senate, let alone signed by President Trump.
Q: We have been beating this drum for many years now about adjusting the payroll wage cap. What do you think the likelihood is of this happening anytime soon?
FREESE: It’s really hard to get members of Congress to agree on anything unless they’re faced with a deadline or a crisis. And even then, it’s not easy to find consensus these days. Social Security doesn’t face that deadline until the trust funds become insolvent, which currently, as you mentioned, is projected to happen in the mid 2030s. It would be better for everyone if they were able to do it sooner rather than later, but Congress just doesn’t tend to work that way.
What the Heck is Going on at the Social Security Administration?
\
In the short period of time that Trump, Elon Musk and DOGE have had their hooks in the Social Security Administration, there have been alarming changes at the agency. The most obvious – and most egregious – is Musk and DOGE’s access to the sensitive personal data of some 70 million Social Security beneficiaries, creating the potential for enormous abuse. This was the first line of attack in Musk’s bogus campaign to expose fraud at an agency where improper payments are less than 1% of total benefits paid. (See his widely discredited claim that ‘150 year-olds are receiving benefits’ and other nonsense.)
Today, the American Prospect reported that Social Security’s acting commissioner asked that managers present him with a plan to cut the agency’s staff by 50%. The Prospect characterized this as “a mass firing that could affect tens of thousands of employees across the country.” This comes at a point when staffing at SSA is already at a 50-year low, with 10,000 Baby Boomers reaching retirement age every day.
“The idea of cutting the staff by 50% is outrageous and irresponsible — and would devastate customer service to the 70 million Americans on Social Security. There is no reason for slashing SSA’s workforce by half, other than the ideological crusade of Elon Musk, DOGE, and their sympathizers in SSA leadership to hollow out the agency that administers our most popular social insurance program and privatize as much of the federal government as they possibly can.” – National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, 2/26/25
Other troubling developments this week include the closure of SSA divisions (or offices) that Trump and Musk likely oppose on ideological grounds. This week SSA announced the closures of the Office of Civil Rights and the Office of Transformation. Former Commissioner Martin O’Malley created the Office of Transformation to spearhead the improvement of customer service at the understaffed, underfunded agency. By closing that office, Trump and Musk are signaling that improving service to beneficiaries no longer is a priority.
The closure of the Office Civil Rights and Equal Opportunity no doubt is part of the Trump administration’s crusade to eliminate protections for groups that have traditionally faced discrimination.
According to a former SSA employee who wishes to remain anonymous, the Office of Civil Rights “spent most of their time processing sexual harassment complaints, race and sex discrimination complaints, and advising on administrative issues, such as reasonable accommodation (RA) requests from staff with physical disabilities.”
SSA disingenuously claims that this office was ‘redundant’ and is shifting responsibilities to different departments. This move seems more symbolic than pragmatic — and is consistent with the mean-spirted MAGA campaign against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). “So much for the land of equality,” said one of our grassroots volunteers in Florida.
“This is an ideological campaign, not a good faith effort to improve government. What Musk & DOGE are trying to do is discredit our most popular social insurance program that has been doing its job quite well for almost 90 years. Perhaps they hope not only to question the value of Social Security, but lay the groundwork to cut benefits going forward. – NCPSSM President and CEO Max Richtman, 2/26/25
It’s noteworthy that these changes are all being made before a confirmed Social Security commissioner takes over. President Trump nominated financial services executive Frank Bisignano, but he has yet to be confirmed or sworn in. In the meantime, Leland Dudek, a GS-15 employee not in the ranks of upper management, was elevated to acting commissioner after the previous person in that post resigned in protest. Dudek, who is considered sympathetic to Musk and DOGE’s crusade, is the one who reportedly is considering firing 50% of the agency’s staff, and who presided over this week’s other alarming changes.
Social Security’s controversial new acting commissioner, Leland Dudek
On Monday, the union representing most SSA employees (AFSCME), filed suit in federal court “to stop DOGE’s unlawful seizure of people’s personal, sensitive data from the Social Security Administration.” The only apparent public resistance to the Musk/DOGE takeover of Social Security has come from unions, advocacy groups, and Democrats in Congress; but congressional Republicans and the President himself seem fine with the unelected billionaire Musk and his minions taking a wrecking ball to the Social Security Administration — one of the most efficient agencies in the federal government.
Former Social Security Official Says Musk/DOGE Caused “Trauma and Chaos” at SSA
Laura Haltzel is the first former Social Security Administration (SSA) official who was present for the Trump administration’s takeover of the agency to speak out publicly in an on the record interview. In her first interview since leaving SSA, Haltzel told Entitled to Know that Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) “traumatized” SSA employees — and created “gross inefficiencies” in the system. Haltzel resigned her post as Associate Commissioner Office of Research, Evaluation and Statistics on February 28, accepting an early retirement offer that the administration extended to all SSA employees.
Haltzel describes an atmosphere of chaos and fear at SSA headquarters, based on her own experience and communications with colleagues in other departments. (Haltzel was based at the agency’s DC office while the headquarters is in Baltimore.) She had worked at SSA for a cumulative 15 years when she exited her job.
When asked why she decided to go public, Haltzel explained, “I swore an oath to defend the Constitution against every enemy, foreign and domestic… and I witnessed illegal and unconstitutional activity by our top leadership in the Executive Branch, by President Trump, and by Elon Musk.”
Under the influence of Trump, Musk and DOGE, SSA leadership has taken several extreme steps to downsize the agency and undermine its ability to properly serve Social Security beneficiaries. These actions include:
- Radically shrinking the agency’s workforce when staffing already is at a 50-year low;
- Accessing the sensitive personal data of millions of Social Security beneficiaries;
- Closing SSA field offices around the country;
- Restoring an old policy of clawing back up to 100% of beneficiaries’ monthly checks in the case of overpayments;
- Eliminating entire divisions of the agency by illegally removing staff “for cause” despite any performance appraisals to the contrary;
- Proposing to severely reduce customer service on the agency’s 1-800 phone line;
- Trying to make it harder for parents to register newborns for Social Security
The former acting Social Security Commissioner, Michelle King, resigned in protest over Musk and DOGE’s demands for access to highly sensitive SSA data without following long-established protocols. (So did her deputy, Tiffany Flick, who submitted a court affidavit about Musk/DOGE abuses.).
Haltzel says she was horrified at the violation of precedent — and federal law. “As a department head, I did not have the right to access beneficiaries’ private data on a regular basis,” while Musk’s young DOGE minions (mostly IT people with no experience in government or auditing) were rushed through a scant ‘security clearance’ process and granted full access to SSA’s database. “These people were not vetted the way they should have been,” Haltzel says.
She points out that any SSA employee who accesses Americans’ personal data without permission is subject to a maximum 5-year prison sentence and up to $5,000 in fines. Yet, Musk’s team of unqualified outsiders was granted access in a hurry, a move that Haltzel characterizes as illegal. She is deeply concerned about potential abuse of private data by DOGE.
According to Haltzel, Musk and DOGE’s chief tactic at SSA, as with other federal agencies they targeted, is intimidation of employees and sowing chaos to create an untenably stressful workplace — in hopes of driving out long-term workers and shrink the payroll. “There’s only one word for it: trauma,” says Haltzel.
“There was a daily barrage of conflicting directives… and we were constantly responding to deadlines by 5pm every day. It was hard to get real work done where every day you’re trying to comply with some new directive from the top, and then they would reverse course the next day. It created whiplash.”
Haltzel says that one person on her staff lost 20 pounds because they were sick to their stomach every day from uncertainty and “threatening emails essentially telling federal employees that they are worthless and disposable.” That staffer took up the administration’s offer of early retirement, according to Haltzel.
By Haltzel’s account, Musk and DOGE clearly have made the agency less efficient — even though their stated goal was to root out inefficiencies — along with supposed “waste, fraud, and abuse.” In truth, the Social Security Administration always has been one of the most efficient federal agencies, with overhead costs of about 1% of its operating budget.
Haltzel criticizes the leadership of acting Commissioner Leland Dudek, who took over after Michelle King resigned and appeared sympathetic to Musk and DOGE’s mission. In fact, before being promoted, Dudek reportedly had been placed on administrative leave for cooperating with Musk and DOGE’s requests for access to sensitive data. According to the Washington Post, Dudek told Social Security advocates at a closed-door meeting that Musk and Trump were “calling the shots” at SSA and he was merely implementing their policies.
She did not personally interact with Dudek, but Haltzel was told by colleagues that his personal style was “very mercurial and dismissive.” She says that Dudek seemed uncurious about the workings of the agency he had just taken over. When staffers would brief Dudek on their departments’ operations, Haltzel says, he would “cut them off after one minute and say, ‘I’ve heard enough.”
According to Pro Publica, Dudek defended himself by telling advocates, “I’ve had to make some tough choices, choices I didn’t agree with. But the president wanted it and I did it.”
When asked why she thinks Trump and Musk are trying so hard to disrupt the Social Security Administration, Haltzel said it is part of their effort to discredit the entire federal government. “There’s a narrative that they want to sell that government doesn’t work. Apparently, the best way to prove that narrative… is to make it so.”
She acknowledges that the administration also may be targeting SSA because of Musk’s apparent hostility to Social Security itself, which he recently called a “Ponzi scheme.” Musk told the media that there is $700 billion in waste, fraud and abuse in “entitlement programs,” and that he intends to slash spending by that same amount — even though his baseless claims about Social Security fraud have been thoroughly discredited.
Underfunded and understaffed, SSA already was struggling to provide adequate customer service to beneficiaries before Trump and Musk took over. DOGE’s raiding of agency resources will only worsen SSA’s ability to serve the public. “The reduction in customer service ironically reinforces the Musk/DOGE narrative of government dysfunction. It has the potential to become self-fulfilling prophecy,” says Haltzel.
While the media have quoted unnamed SSA staffers in reports about Musk/DOGE interference, no agency officials who were there at the beginning of the Trump administration have gone ‘on-the-record’ with their criticisms until today. Haltzel believes that by being outside the Agency now — and having freedom of speech — she has a special duty to ensure that she speaks on behalf of those still within SSA, for whom doing so would put their jobs at risk. Haltzel realizes that going public is a risk to herself and her family, though she notes that they have taken precautions against retribution by Trump and Musk’s supporters.
“I have taken the oath of office multiple times at multiple agencies. Just because I’m not a federal employee does not diminish the oath I took. It has no expiration date,” she says. “I believe you are either a person of integrity and speak up — or you are not. I will continue to be a person of integrity. I’m not going to change who I am.”
Former Official Reveals Recklessness of Musk’s Meddling in Social Security System
The Social Security Administration (SSA) is facing mounting scrutiny after a lawsuit was filed by labor unions seeking to block Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing Americans’ sensitive personal data. According to the Washington Post, the legal challenge includes testimony from Tiffany Flick, a former senior SSA official, who warned in court filings that DOGE’s interference poses a serious threat to the security of data belonging to millions of people. Flick, who resigned her post at SSA after three decades, cited these actions as part of broader concerns over mismanagement and policy risk brought on by interference in the agency by Trump, Musk, and DOGE.
“DOGE’s requests were unprecedented and reckless,” Flick stated in her affidavit. “They demanded immediate access to taxpayer data without completing standard security checks or following any established protocols. Ignoring these safeguards is more than just careless; it’s a direct threat to the privacy of millions of Americans.”
Tiffany Flick resigned her job as acting chief of staff at SSA at the same time as acting commissioner Michelle King quit in protest of DOGE’s requests for sensitive data. A former long-time SSA staffer who did not wish his name to be used in this article, says, “Flick’s principled approach, along with former acting commissioner Michelle King, shows courage and professionalism in the face of illegal and inappropriate access requests. She and Ms. King were quite brave and paid a heavy price to adhere to the rule of law.”
What Drove Her to Leave?
Flick’s resignation stemmed from repeated attempts by DOGE to gain unauthorized access to critical databases containing highly sensitive taxpayer information. These databases were safeguarded under strict protocols designed to ensure privacy and data security. When DOGE sought to bypass these safeguards, Flick and King pushed back, risking their careers for what they believed to be the right course of action.
The methods employed by DOGE were described by Flick as “unorthodox and alarming,” undermining established security procedures. The risks were too great for her to ignore, and rather than compromise the values she had built her career upon, Flick chose to step away. “It became clear that the safety and trust SSA relies on were deliberately being disregarded,” she noted in her affidavit.
An Agency Facing Growing Challenges
Since Flick’s departure, reports indicate that DOGE’s interference has only intensified. Acting Commissioner Leland Dudek has announced plans for radical downsizing (at an agency where staffing already is at a 50-year low), including firings, coerced early retirement, and the closure of field offices that service the public. Seniors’ advocates warn that these decisions could jeopardize the agency’s ability to serve its beneficiaries effectively, particularly those who rely on in-person assistance. Adding to these difficulties, many of Dudek’s decisions appear to be heavily influenced by DOGE. According to the Post, he admitted to advocacy groups that Musk and his team are “calling the shots” at SSA.
“This is about more than just internal disputes,” Flick declared in her affidavit. “It’s about whether the SSA can remain a trusted institution, or whether it becomes a tool for external agendas that put the public at risk.”
A Warning About the Risks
According to Maria Freese, senior Social Security expert at the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), the ongoing interference and mismanagement represent a profound threat.
“What billionaire Elon Musk does not seem to understand is that accessing federal records is not a game. Security procedures are in place for a reason – the Social Security Administration collects Americans’ most personal and private information including Social Security numbers, banking information, work histories and in many cases, troves of personal medical records. The American people share this information with SSA because they have been assured that the government employees who have access to it have gone through rigorous screening to ensure they can be trusted.” – Maria Freese, NCPSSM senior legislative representative, 3/9/25
Musk claims all these employees have ‘security clearances,’ but Flick’s affidavit shines a bright light on the perfunctory process the DOGE staffers underwent before being cleared. “The process was clearly a ‘security clearance’ in name only – under intense pressure from Musk to approve his acolytes quickly – with little attention to whether they truly could be trusted to safely handle our personal information,” says Freese.
Freese emphasizes that any diminishment of the SSA’s ability to protect this information not only risks significant harm to individuals but also damages the trust that is fundamental to public support of Social Security. Compromising the system, she warns, is a direct threat to beneficiaries.
The Importance of Stability at SSA
Social Security serves as a vital safety net for retirees, disabled individuals, and families who rely on survivor benefits. Disruptions to this system could have devastating consequences for millions of Americans who depend on their earned benefits for financial Security. Former SSA Commissioner Martin O’Malley warned that Musk and DOGE’s meddling in SSA could damage the system and result in missed payments “within 30 to 90 days.”
Tiffany Flick’s decision to speak out serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of integrity and courage when public trust is at stake. “The SSA’s mission is not a commodity to be traded for political convenience,” Flick stated in her affidavit. “It’s a promise, one that must be defended for the sake of Americans today and for generations to come.”
LISTEN TO OUR PODCAST here.
JOIN THE NATIONAL COMMITTEE here.
Trump & Musk Tried to Make it Harder for Parents to Register Newborns for Social Security
It started as a baffling and alarming decision. The Social Security Administration (SSA), under the influence of President Trump’s campaign to gut the federal government and Elon Musk’s DOGE team, announced the termination of Maine’s Enumeration at Birth (EAB) program. For 35 years, the EAB program had allowed parents to register their newborns for Social Security numbers right at the hospital. But suddenly, without warning, SSA moved to rescind this critical service, which would have compelled parents to register their children for Social Security with an SSA representative after leaving the hospital, at a time when Trump and Musk are closing SSA field offices and radically reducing the agency’s workforce.
Tellingly, SSA offered no reason for the original policy change — or its reversal shortly after. – NCPSSM, 3/7/25
Thankfully, after blowback from media reports and pressure from the Maine Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the SSA reversed its decision and rescinded the new policy. This quick reversal is good for Maine families, but make no mistake, the attempt itself speaks volumes about the Trump administration’s apparent agenda to dismantle Social Security from within.
Max Richtman, President and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, captured the severity of the situation when he noted, “The attempt to end the EAB program in Maine was the latest effort by Trump, Musk, and DOGE to incapacitate the agency that administers Social Security benefits for 73 million Americans. Even though they’ve backtracked in Maine, this obviously is part of a policy aimed at undermining the program.”
The Broader Strategy to Chip Away at Social Security
While the decision to reinstate EAB in Maine is welcome news for now, other states—including Arizona, Maryland, Michigan, New Mexico, and Rhode Island— are listed on the DOGE website as having their EAB contracts terminated as part of Musk’s “cost cutting” efforts.
Trump and Musk’s intentions are becoming increasingly obvious. This is part of a systematic effort to make Social Security harder to access and, in the process, shrink the program as a whole. “By closing field offices, coercing experienced employees into early retirement, and cutting over 7,000 jobs, the administration is methodically stripping the SSA of its ability to serve Americans efficiently,” said Richtman.
“Trump clearly has his priorities backwards. First, he makes the absurd claim that 360 year-olds may be collecting benefits, then he tries to strip parents of the ability to easily register their children for Social Security.” – Max Richtman, NCPSSM President and CEO
Temporary Reprieve in Maine, but an Ongoing Threat
The reversal of the EAB policy in Maine shows what media exposure can accomplish. The fact remains that SSA thought it could quietly eliminate this program with little to no accountability.
Policies like this create barriers. Barriers discourage participation. Discouraged participation weakens the system. It’s a chain reaction designed to dismantle Social Security — not in one master stroke but piece by piece.
This strategy isn’t just cruel; it’s deliberate. Richtman summed it up perfectly:
“Why on earth would the administration want to make it harder for parents to register their children for Social Security unless the aim was to shrink the size of the program?” – Max Richtman, 3/7/25
A Bigger Pattern of Sabotage
At the heart of this issue lies a deeper truth. Trump and Musk have long criticized Social Security. Musk recently called it a “Ponzi Scheme,” and Trump dismissed it as a “scam.” Their solution? Slash one of the government’s most effective and efficient programs, which currently has an overhead of less than 1%. By targeting EAB programs, shuttering field offices, and radically reducing staff, they’re advancing this goal. It isn’t just bad policy. It’s a blatant betrayal of Trump’s promise “not to touch” Social Security.
Millionaires Are Done Paying Into Social Security for 2025
Millionaires stop paying into Social Security for the year this week — and billionaires already stopped contributing wages to the program in January. The rest of us continue paying into the system for the entire year. Is it fair that Elon Musk, Rupert Murdoch, Charles Koch, and Tim Cook of Apple don’t have to contribute to Social Security for the rest of the year while most Americans do? We don’t think so. Our Social Security expert, Maria Freese, explains why we need to scrap — or adjust — the payroll wage cap.
Q: For those who don’t know, what is the Social Security “payroll wage cap?”
FREESE: Most people have no idea that there’s a limit on how much of your wages are subject to Social Security payroll taxes because they don’t make enough money to ever reach the cap. This year the cap is $176,100. Once you reach that amount in wages, you stop paying into Social Security for the rest of the year.
Q: So the slogan is: “Scrap the Cap” and we support adjusting the payroll wage cap. Why? Why do we support that?
FREESE: High-income earners pay a significantly smaller percentage of their wages into Social Security than the rest of us. That’s not only patently unfair; it deprives Social Security of much-needed revenue, and we believe that the best way to infuse new revenue into Social Security is to ask the wealthiest among us to pay their fair share.
Q: In years past, 90% of wages in this country fell below the cap, so that income was captured. Today, only about 83% of those earnings are subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That’s because of widening wealth inequality, correct?
FREESE: While middle-income workers’ wages have been stagnating for the last couple of decades, the earnings of the highest paid workers in the country have continued to grow disproportionately. This imbalance means that more and more of the income earned by the wealthy is exempt from paying into Social Security, while workers who are already suffering because their wages haven’t kept up with the cost of living over the past decades they continue contributing on every dollar they earn.
Q: Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative John Larson have offered legislation that would adjust the payroll wage cap, which would go a long way toward keeping the Social Security trust fund solvent beyond its projected depletion date in 2035. Tell us more about how these bills would do that.
FREESE: Both bills ask the wealthiest among us to pay their fair share. They just start at different thresholds. The bill by Senator Sanders reinstates Social Security payroll taxes for wages over $250,000 a year. The bill by Congressman Larson, on the other hand, begins the Social Security payroll taxes again for those earning over $400,000 a year. They did that intentionally, so that it would line up with President Biden’s commitment not to raise taxes on anyone earning under $400,000.
In addition to raising the wage cap, they also both impose a tax on investment income for the wealthiest, who, more and more, are living on the income produced by stocks and bonds rather than wages.
Q: In return for the wealthy contributing more, which they would under this legislation, they would get a higher benefit? Is that right?
FREESE: We believe they should, and in Congressman Larson’s bill, they do. Social security is an earned benefit. The taxes we contribute have a direct relationship to the amount of benefits we earn. For those who earn the least over their lifetimes, Social Security provides a higher proportionate benefit either in retirement or in case of disability — as a percentage of what they earned while they were working.
Q: To be clear, Congressman Larson’s bill does not raise payroll taxes for anyone earning less than $400,000 per year?
FREESE: That’s exactly right. And in fact, as I mentioned earlier, the bill by Congressman Larson does exactly that. It does not affect taxes paid by anyone earning under $400,000 a year. And that was done intentionally to align with former President Biden’s commitment not to raise taxes for anyone earning under that amount.
Q: If the Republicans oppose bringing in new revenue to Social Security by having the wealthy contribute a little more, what do the Republicans propose instead?
FREESE: That’s actually a very good question. Republicans have generally been unwilling to put any of their proposals on paper for obvious reasons. But they have floated proposals to raise the retirement age (a huge benefit cut), adopt a more miserly COLA formula, and even means-test benefits, which could seriously hurt middle class beneficiaries. Meanwhile, Donald Trump and Elon Musk appear to be hunting for revenue from the Social Security program by radically reducing Social Security Administration staff and claiming that there is “massive fraud” in the program. This is what we call “cutting benefits by cutting the SSA.”
Q: A recent survey that we did of our members and supporters indicates 96% support for raising the payroll wage cap. So I ask you again, if this is so popular, why hasn’t it been done?
FREESE: Republicans don’t support and have not supported in the past any proposals to raise taxes on their wealthy contributors or on corporations. So you can’t get any Republican support. You couldn’t get a bill through the current GOP-controlled House or Senate, let alone signed by President Trump.
Q: We have been beating this drum for many years now about adjusting the payroll wage cap. What do you think the likelihood is of this happening anytime soon?
FREESE: It’s really hard to get members of Congress to agree on anything unless they’re faced with a deadline or a crisis. And even then, it’s not easy to find consensus these days. Social Security doesn’t face that deadline until the trust funds become insolvent, which currently, as you mentioned, is projected to happen in the mid 2030s. It would be better for everyone if they were able to do it sooner rather than later, but Congress just doesn’t tend to work that way.
What the Heck is Going on at the Social Security Administration?
\
In the short period of time that Trump, Elon Musk and DOGE have had their hooks in the Social Security Administration, there have been alarming changes at the agency. The most obvious – and most egregious – is Musk and DOGE’s access to the sensitive personal data of some 70 million Social Security beneficiaries, creating the potential for enormous abuse. This was the first line of attack in Musk’s bogus campaign to expose fraud at an agency where improper payments are less than 1% of total benefits paid. (See his widely discredited claim that ‘150 year-olds are receiving benefits’ and other nonsense.)
Today, the American Prospect reported that Social Security’s acting commissioner asked that managers present him with a plan to cut the agency’s staff by 50%. The Prospect characterized this as “a mass firing that could affect tens of thousands of employees across the country.” This comes at a point when staffing at SSA is already at a 50-year low, with 10,000 Baby Boomers reaching retirement age every day.
“The idea of cutting the staff by 50% is outrageous and irresponsible — and would devastate customer service to the 70 million Americans on Social Security. There is no reason for slashing SSA’s workforce by half, other than the ideological crusade of Elon Musk, DOGE, and their sympathizers in SSA leadership to hollow out the agency that administers our most popular social insurance program and privatize as much of the federal government as they possibly can.” – National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, 2/26/25
Other troubling developments this week include the closure of SSA divisions (or offices) that Trump and Musk likely oppose on ideological grounds. This week SSA announced the closures of the Office of Civil Rights and the Office of Transformation. Former Commissioner Martin O’Malley created the Office of Transformation to spearhead the improvement of customer service at the understaffed, underfunded agency. By closing that office, Trump and Musk are signaling that improving service to beneficiaries no longer is a priority.
The closure of the Office Civil Rights and Equal Opportunity no doubt is part of the Trump administration’s crusade to eliminate protections for groups that have traditionally faced discrimination.
According to a former SSA employee who wishes to remain anonymous, the Office of Civil Rights “spent most of their time processing sexual harassment complaints, race and sex discrimination complaints, and advising on administrative issues, such as reasonable accommodation (RA) requests from staff with physical disabilities.”
SSA disingenuously claims that this office was ‘redundant’ and is shifting responsibilities to different departments. This move seems more symbolic than pragmatic — and is consistent with the mean-spirted MAGA campaign against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). “So much for the land of equality,” said one of our grassroots volunteers in Florida.
“This is an ideological campaign, not a good faith effort to improve government. What Musk & DOGE are trying to do is discredit our most popular social insurance program that has been doing its job quite well for almost 90 years. Perhaps they hope not only to question the value of Social Security, but lay the groundwork to cut benefits going forward. – NCPSSM President and CEO Max Richtman, 2/26/25
It’s noteworthy that these changes are all being made before a confirmed Social Security commissioner takes over. President Trump nominated financial services executive Frank Bisignano, but he has yet to be confirmed or sworn in. In the meantime, Leland Dudek, a GS-15 employee not in the ranks of upper management, was elevated to acting commissioner after the previous person in that post resigned in protest. Dudek, who is considered sympathetic to Musk and DOGE’s crusade, is the one who reportedly is considering firing 50% of the agency’s staff, and who presided over this week’s other alarming changes.
Social Security’s controversial new acting commissioner, Leland Dudek
On Monday, the union representing most SSA employees (AFSCME), filed suit in federal court “to stop DOGE’s unlawful seizure of people’s personal, sensitive data from the Social Security Administration.” The only apparent public resistance to the Musk/DOGE takeover of Social Security has come from unions, advocacy groups, and Democrats in Congress; but congressional Republicans and the President himself seem fine with the unelected billionaire Musk and his minions taking a wrecking ball to the Social Security Administration — one of the most efficient agencies in the federal government.