There is this guy, Stanley Thornton Jr. that lives his life playacting as an adult baby. He also makes adult size baby furniture. Sometime in the past year he appeared on the National Geographic channel which displayed his fetish and that he is also a recepient of social security disability benefits. Coburn upon viewing Thornton’s appearance on the television show requested a review of Mr. Thornton’s eligibility to receive such benefits considering Thornton has the ability to drive himself, dress himself, design and built furniture, etc. Thornton in a subsequent interview threatened to kill himself if his SS benefits were terminated.
Well the SS administration completed their review and cleared Thornton of any fraud and his benefits will continue.
Now Thornton wants a public apology from Coburn. Should Coburn give it?
Doesn’t seem anything particularly harmful happened, other then Thornton had to sit through an extra review of his disability status. Its kinda silly for Senators to try and micromanage the SS disability system, but I don’t see any reason it should merit an apology.
I have to wonder if the Social Security administration took Thornton’s threat to kill himself seriously. If they did, and I can only believe that they did, then I fear for the future of the U.S.
Telling the SSA to re-examine this strikes me as an abuse that warrants some action. Informing the SSA of the situation in the manner any private citizen could and allowing then to decide whether it warrants another look is fine.
I’d be a tad miffed if my senator demanded the IRS audited me…
Using your status as a senator to pinpoint individuals you want investigated is extremely inappropriate. It is harrassment. Stanley Thornton should demand that Senator Coburn be investigated by every single government agency. Does he hire illegals? Has he been audited by the IRS? Is his car properly registered? If enough agencies look long enough they will probably find something.
I would like to know what disability Mr. Thorton has too, but it ain’t my business.
I tend to agree, but the article doesn’t make clear if the Senator pulled any strings to get the investigation going, nor does it tell us how Thornton found out Coburn requested the audit.
That’s why I think a Senator should do this anonymously. If the SSA knows it is a Senator providing information, the pressure to investigate trumps any idea of whether such an investigation would normally be warranted.
Having an elected government official ask for a review of how an agency handles its budget, even with respect to an individual, is a perfectly fine thing to do. Should congressmen be prevented from asking the Pentagon to audit its contracts with one particular weapons supplier? If a lobbyist claims that he got special consideration from some department or another, shouldn’t a congressman be free to ask whether that consideration was lawful?
If someone goes on TV to talk about the business they run, and they also mention they get disability benefits, I think it is a reasonable question to ask whether someone who is able to run a business is also truly disabled. It’s worth noting that the SSA Inspector General maintains a webpage encouraging the general public to report suspected waste, fraud, or abuse. There’s an 800 number and everything.
Now, if a congressman were to threaten an agency in an attempt to cut benefits to someone who is lawfully eligible for them, that’s a completely different matter. I can’t see any evidence of such a threat, though.
I am quite curious what the nature of the disability is, though. It is puzzling.
Sure. Everybody would threaten to kill themselves, bringing the hospitals and the country down.
I suspect you are overolading the importance of one stupid case.
Under this same principle, let’s have Obama request an IRS audit of all Tea Party leaders, since being anti-tax could easily inspire them to cheat on the taxes they feel are unjust. No possible objection from our conservative friends, right?
Coburn should stick to denying evolution and global warming.
There is a slight difference between questioning someone’s disability status based on their public appearances (and let’s not forget that it’s unclear as to whether Coburn even started the investigation) and targeting opposition leaders based on hostile assumptions.
That said, I have absolutely no problem with Coburn requesting an investigation in his capacity as a private citizen. I have a very big problem with him doing it as a sitting US Senator.
The article said he was in physical pain, so I don’t think its a mental health issue (which isn’t to say the guy doesn’t have mental health issues, the baby stuff is definitely skirting the edge of crazy.)
I missed that when I was reading the article. Thanks.
I don’t think it is the same. In one case, we have someone saying on TV that they build furniture and collect SSI benefits. In the other, we have people who are advocating for lower taxes. I don’t think stating one’s views on tax policy (unless it is perhaps something extreme, like in the case of people who say that there are secret exemptions in the IRS code that allow descendants of slaves to get huge benefits from the government) is a reasonable cause for suspicion of abuse. On the other hand, someone saying on TV that they work and collect disability benefits would seem to raise a reasonable question.
I’m not quite understanding this view. Do you think that members of Congress should not be able to question a government agency about whether a specific action by a specific private individual violated any law?