Sources familiar with the investigation said the case was referred to federal prosecutors, who have declined to pursue charges. However, sources said, Social Security officials are considering efforts to recover the money through administrative procedures. One described the case as "highly political."
The precise scope of the probe could not be ascertained because state and federal officials would not reveal the information, citing federal secrecy statutes and patient-confidentiality laws.
Brewer and her office have declined to discuss the matter in detail. Brewer said in a written statement to The Arizona Republic, after more than a month of interview requests, that she knows no specifics of the inquiry and never spoke to investigators.
Her spokesman, Matt Benson, wrote in an e-mail late Wednesday that the target of the inquiry has not been clear. "All that has been evident is that the records of the governor's son Ron were of interest," he said.
Brewer's statement said she believed the investigation was a politically motivated attack on her family. She said she believes it began with an anonymous complaint to Social Security before last year's election.
"To our family's knowledge, my son has never received any Social Security benefits to which he was not entitled, and all the benefits he has received have been spent entirely for his care and well being," the statement said.
The Republic has determined:
• The case involves an examination of Social Security benefits paid on behalf of Brewer's oldest son, Ronald. He first received benefits as a minor after his father's death and continued to receive them as an adult because of a disability from mental illness.
• In 1989, Ronald was charged with sexual assault and kidnapping. The next year, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity and sent to the Arizona State Hospital. A court commissioner ordered Jan Brewer, as Ronald's "representative payee," to direct her son's monthly Social Security benefits toward the cost of his hospitalization. The Arizona Department of Health Services, which runs the hospital, declined to release records to The Republic regarding such payments, saying the records either were protected by privacy laws or did not exist.
• Court records said Ronald was receiving Social Security benefits when he was sent to the hospital in 1990. Federal law was changed in 1995, barring Social Security benefits to anyone institutionalized after being found not guilty by reason of insanity.
• Each year, Jan Brewer, as "representative payee," would have been asked by the Social Security Administration to sign a form regarding her son's status. That form requires the representative payee to confirm if there is any change in the living arrangements of the beneficiary. The signature line for that reporting form states: "A person who conceals or fails to tell SSA about events asked about on this form with the intent to fraudulently receive benefits may be fined, imprisoned, or both." Ronald did have a status change in 2002. Court records show he was conditionally released in May 2002 and returned to the hospital by September 2002. He currently is confined to the hospital.
• The basis of the investigation was whether Ronald improperly received benefits at any time; the amount of money in question is about $75,000. Brewer said her son is no longer receiving benefits.
The governor declined repeated requests for interviews or records regarding the investigation. Last Friday, the newspaper submitted written questions to the governor's chief of staff and Brewer's private attorney. Those questions were answered in part this week by a four-page statement from Brewer.
Much of that statement focused on her family's efforts to manage the affairs of her son, whose institutionalization has required them to be involved in his financial affairs.
"Federal laws have changed many times through the course of his life," Brewer said. "His benefits have changed through the years depending on his status. Our family, like many others, has repeatedly had to deal with a bureaucratic maze to fully understand and comply with the requirements of the Social Security system."
Benson's statement Wednesday said the governor had regularly communicated with the Social Security Administration and filled out paperwork about her son over the years. Given that, he said, "it is baffling that any sort of formal inquiry or investigation would be necessary if the SSA had a question regarding Ron's status, whereabouts or entitlement to benefits."
The Republic has confirmed from multiple sources that the Social Security Administration's Office of Inspector General initially launched an investigation involving Brewer in a case tied to Ronald's benefits.
The case was presented in fall 2010 to the U.S. Department of Justice, sources said, which sent it to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Nevada to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest with the U.S. Attorney's Office in Arizona. That office is involved in the Department of Justice's lawsuit against Arizona and Brewer in her capacity as governor over the state's immigration law, Senate Bill 1070.
A spokesman for the SSA said more than 1,200 Social Security cases were accepted for federal prosecution during the past fiscal year. A larger number of cases were declined because they were minor offenses, there was no loss to the government or there were "problematic" issues with evidence or procedure, the spokesman said.
The agency said other cases are prosecuted at the local level. When prosecution is declined, the Social Security Administration has the right in cases of overpayment of benefits to try to recover the money through civil lawsuits or administrative means.
A Department of Justice spokeswoman on Wednesday said she could not confirm or deny the existence of an investigation.
Request for records
During the course of The Republic's investigation, the newspaper obtained billing records of a Phoenix law firm retained to represent the Arizona Department of Health Services.
In late September 2010, the state hired Gallagher & Kennedy "in responding to a subpoena," according to a letter that shows the hiring of the firm. So far, the state has paid the firm more than $50,000 "in order to fully respond to the subpoena and multiple subsequent records requests by The Arizona Republic," the governor's statement said.
Typically, the state attorney general would be the statutory legal representative on such matters for ADHS and other state agencies. But when the subpoena arrived last year, then-Attorney General Terry Goddard was running against Brewer in the November 2010 gubernatorial election. Gallagher & Kennedy was hired to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.
The Republic also requested copies of any subpoenas, records of any payments to the hospital on Ronald Brewer's behalf, officials' calendars, and communications related to Ronald Brewer, the governor or the investigation. Various state agencies denied the requests on legal grounds or said they were unable to locate such records. In her statement, Brewer said: "I and my staff have adhered with all federal and state laws as they pertain to public records."
The Brewer family hired an attorney in the office of a law firm that has offices in Nevada and Phoenix to represent her family. The attorney, Greg Brower of the law firm Snell & Wilmer, is the former U.S. attorney for Nevada and has expertise in defending against investigations by the Office of Inspector General. Brower did not respond to written questions about the case. The governor's statement said her family is paying for the private legal counsel.
Questions over benefits
Over the course of its attempts to understand the nature of the federal investigation, The Republic learned that Ronald Brewer would have become eligible for his Social Security benefits via his birth father, Ronald Richard Warren, whom Brewer, then Drinkwine, married in 1963.
The couple divorced in 1967, and Ronald Warren died in Southern California in August 1969, entitling his son to survivor Social Security benefits. After the future governor remarried in 1970, Ronald Jr. took the last name of her new husband, John Brewer.
Ronald Brewer was 25 and living on his own in an apartment on July 29, 1989, when a woman knocked on his door, mistakenly thinking it was the apartment of a friend. According to a Phoenix police report, Ronald pulled her into the apartment, closed the door and forced her to perform oral sex.
He was arrested, charged, found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed to the Arizona State Hospital in Phoenix.
The court order following his commitment required Jan Brewer to use her son's Social Security benefits — his only income at the time — to pay the Arizona State Hospital for "the cost of said patient's examination, treatment and maintenance pursuant to court-ordered treatment." At the time of his 1990 commitment, Ronald Brewer's monthly Social Security check was $445. A year later, the court reiterated the order, and his monthly benefit had grown to $469.
Those Social Security benefits are the only benefits involving the Brewers of which the newspaper is aware. Ordinarily, survivor benefits expire at age 18 or 19. But if a surviving child is found to be disabled before age 22, the benefits could convert to disability benefits and be extended indefinitely. Ronald Brewer would have met the Social Security requirements for disability at a younger age based on what court records say was an early diagnosis of mental illness.
It is unclear when federal officials first questioned whether benefits were still being paid for Ronald Brewer even though he may not have been eligible because of his institutionalization in the Arizona State Hospital's forensic ward, where the average daily rate for care is $613.
The governor said her son "currently does not receive Social Security benefits," and she noted that she has "never been served with a subpoena, interviewed or deposed in the matter."
Published Social Security policies state that payee representatives are required to fill out forms annually indicating whether there has been any change in the beneficiary's living arrangements and how the benefits were spent. An accompanying instruction sheet says Social Security benefits must be used for the "care and well-being of the beneficiary."
In her statement, Brewer said she believes her "family will prevail with any additional or future inquiries in any fashion about his benefits."
No comments:
Post a Comment