Senate Finance Leaders Demand Clarity from SSA on Data Practices

Jan 28, 2026, 2:53 AM
Image for article Senate Finance Leaders Demand Clarity from SSA on Data Practices

Hover over text to view sources

The leaders of the Senate Finance Committee are seeking urgent clarification from the Social Security Administration (SSA) regarding its data handling practices. This request follows troubling revelations about the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its management of personally identifiable information (PII) during the Trump administration.
In a letter dated Tuesday, Senate Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., expressed their concerns to SSA Commissioner Frank Bisignano. The letter highlights findings from a recent Department of Justice (DOJ) court filing that revealed potentially noncompliant actions by DOGE in its handling of sensitive data.
According to the DOJ's January 16 filing, an internal review of the SSA's former DOGE team indicated that "communications, use of data and other actions" might have violated SSA policy and a prior court order that limited DOGE's access to sensitive information. This court order was initially issued in March 2025 as part of a lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO and other labor organizations concerned about DOGE's data access.
The revelations included allegations that DOGE members improperly shared data through an unapproved third-party Cloudflare server, raising significant privacy concerns. The SSA had reportedly been unaware of this data-sharing practice until the DOJ's review.
In their letter, Crapo and Wyden requested a briefing from the SSA on how this noncompliance was discovered, as well as the steps the agency intends to take to ensure future adherence to data protection policies. They emphasized the necessity for the SSA to improve its ability to identify all relevant information concerning DOGE's data usage, particularly as Congress continues to scrutinize the group’s activities.
The DOJ filing has drawn significant scrutiny, particularly regarding communications between DOGE members and a political advocacy group that requested analysis of state voter rolls to support claims of voter fraud. This relationship has raised concerns about the potential misuse of SSA data for political purposes, further complicating the agency's already controversial standing.
In response to inquiries about the situation, an SSA spokesperson reaffirmed the agency's commitment to safeguarding the personal data of Americans. They stated that the agency's systems are continuously monitored by professionals adhering to federal and industry security standards. Furthermore, the spokesperson indicated that the SSA is committed to engaging with Congress regarding its data protection measures going forward.
This issue comes in the wake of broader criticisms of the SSA under the leadership of acting commissioner Lee Dudek, who has faced backlash for comments suggesting that the court's restrictions on DOGE could disrupt agency operations. The court clarified that the temporary restraining order only applies to specific DOGE-affiliated employees, which Dudek initially misinterpreted, claiming it could affect all SSA operations.
Advocacy groups have expressed alarm over Dudek's management, claiming that the agency has jeopardized Americans' security and threatened the timely delivery of Social Security benefits. Dudek has since apologized for his earlier statements and committed to following the court's directives, while also calling for clarification on the order.
The ongoing scrutiny of the SSA and its practices highlights the increasing tension between federal agencies and legislative oversight, particularly concerning the protection of sensitive data in the digital age. As Congress continues to investigate these issues, the implications for data privacy and governmental transparency remain at the forefront of public discourse.
Lawmakers are determined to ensure strict compliance with privacy regulations to protect the personal information of millions of Americans, emphasizing the need for transparency and accountability within the SSA. The outcome of these inquiries could set significant precedents for federal data handling practices and policies in the future.
As the situation develops, stakeholders will be watching closely to see how the SSA responds to these demands for clarity and what measures will be implemented to prevent future violations of privacy standards.

Related articles

California Crypto Startup BitGo Relocates to South Dakota Amid Wealth Tax Debate

BitGo, a California-based cryptocurrency startup, has moved its headquarters to South Dakota as concerns over a proposed wealth tax in California escalate. The Billionaire Tax Act aims to impose a 5% tax on residents worth over $1 billion, prompting backlash from business leaders and influencing relocations within the tech sector.

Senate Committee Delays Crypto Bill After Coinbase CEO's Opposition

The US Senate Banking Committee has postponed a discussion on a cryptocurrency regulatory framework following objections from Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong. Armstrong criticized the bill for its potential negative impacts on the crypto industry, leading to uncertainty about its future.

Americans Cautious with AI in Finance, Open to Political Influence

A recent analysis reveals a stark contrast in American attitudes towards AI in finance and politics. While most Americans are hesitant to allow AI to manage their financial assets, they are more accepting of AI's role in shaping political opinions, even when faced with misinformation.

Elon Musk Sues Apple, OpenAI Over Antitrust Allegations

Elon Musk's lawsuit accuses Apple and OpenAI of anticompetitive practices by integrating ChatGPT into iOS. The case claims the partnership stifles innovation in AI chatbots and smartphone markets, with both companies denying the allegations.

Musk Seeks Zuckerberg’s Help for OpenAI Takeover Bid, Court Files Reveal

Elon Musk allegedly approached Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to help finance a $97.4 billion bid to acquire OpenAI, according to court filings. The lawsuit highlights tensions over OpenAI’s for-profit restructuring and Musk’s legal claims of breach of contract.