
Social Security Has a 'Maddening' New AI Phone Bot. Here's How to Deal With It
Social Security's new phone bot can be frustrating to use. Here's how to navigate it.
Getty Images
The Social Security Administration's new AI-powered phone bot is coming, whether you're ready for it or not -- and apparently whether it's ready or not, too. Reports out in recent days indicate that the system has been struggling to handle seemingly simple tasks for people calling in with questions.
I've been covering Social Security for some time now, so I'm well aware of the challenges confronting the agency, including severe layoffs, and how those challenges affect the more than 70 million people currently receiving Social Security benefits. I've called the agency myself multiple times to see how it's responding, or failing to.
In the last few days, I've put the AI phone bot to the test, and far too often, it struggled with what seemed like straightforward questions and statements I made.
At issue right now is a new telecommunications system that's being rolled out across the country. It started with the agency's national phone number and is working its way out to the all field offices and card centers nationwide, and all their local phone numbers. Central to it is an automated system that incorporates unspecified AI "enhancements."
Whether those enhancements will make things better over the long haul remains to be seen. Below, I'll go over the details of what's happening, my experience contacting the SSA and provide a few tips to navigate the new phone bot if you have to call in.
For more, don't miss the four ways you could potentially lose your Social Security benefits.
Social Security's 'maddening' AI phone bot
Earlier this month, The Washington Post reported on issues plaguing the Social Security Administration, and tucked in the middle of the article were some troubling details about the phone system.
The article cited a frustrating experience for Jennifer Burdick, an attorney who represents people with or applying for Social Security Disability Insurance. Burdick noted, "many times when you say 'agent' it won't put you through to the hold line, it'll act like it didn't hear what you said."
One of the Post's reporters tried it out for herself, only to have a similarly frustrating and dizzying experience. She presented the bot with an issue that would more than likely need to be handled by an agent: not receiving a Social Security check in April.
The reporter explained the matter to the phone bot simply and succinctly, only to receive an automated reply with information about the 2025 COLA increase, Medicare Part B information, and other benefits available to recipients -- none of which were relevant or helpful. Only after eight attempts did the system respond correctly and begin transferring the call to a person.
MSNBC last week picked up the story and shared a video of the reporter's "maddening" experience. (While that video refers to the tech as a chatbot, it's really more of a classic phone bot, apparently with some AI elements but different from AI chatbots like ChatGPT and Gemini.)
Read More: Social Security Check Missing? Here's What to Do
I tried calling the SSA to test the AI bot's skills
Spurred by those accounts, I wanted to see for myself how the phone system was working. I called in not once, but 11 different times. Mostly my experience was much more positive, but when the phone bot went wrong, it went very wrong.
When I asked, "Why is my payment lower than I thought it would be for this month?" the bot completely missed my point. It replied with the maximum benefit amounts for 2025 and how payments differ by age. I tried to clarify: "I'm already receiving benefits, and only this check is lower than it typically is" -- to which it replied that the SSA checks its records between October and March to determine if an account needs an adjustment.
I repeated my initial question and received the strangest answer yet: "OK, direct deposit. If you're finished, feel free to hang up. Otherwise, how can I help you today?"
Yeah, that's pretty maddening.
Other times, it would take a long-winded route that did eventually lead me where I wanted to go. When I said, "I didn't receive my payment last month," the bot provided the full payment schedule for the month of May in detail but followed with, "To report a missing payment, just say 'agent,'" and when I did, it correctly sent me over to the next step.
My takeaway: Maybe AI is working somewhere behind the scenes, but you can't trust it to understand natural language -- the way people speak in normal conversation -- which is something that AI chatbots like Gemini Live are getting really good at, which I know from experience.
The trick, I discovered, was to forget about speaking to the phone bot conversationally. Instead, I hammered home on a single word: "agent." On five separate calls, when all I did was to say "agent" whenever prompted, I got past the phone bot and into the queue to wait for an actual human agent. (Given the long wait times typical of calling the SSA, I didn't stick around after that point.)
So yay! Success after all.
My tips for making the phone bot work for you
Here's what I'd suggest when trying to deal with Social Security's new phone system.
Prioritize getting to a person, not the problem
The Social Security phone bot clearly has some issues to work through. Phone systems like this are notoriously bad -- think of those times you've called customer service for, well, just about any big business -- so you shouldn't assume it's going to be as understanding as when you're speaking to a more sophisticated AI bot like Gemini Live.
When the bot asks you what you need help with, just continue to say you want to speak to an agent.
Keep words to a minimum
I think the success I had with the phone system could have been because I kept my responses to "agent" every time I was prompted to speak. Overexplaining to an ill-equipped AI bot likely won't yield the results you want.
Don't call using speakerphone
If the phone system already performs poorly, don't make it worse by introducing extra noise that can further degrade the experience, like when you call on speaker phone. Stick to using headphones that have good call quality or just have the phone to your ear and speak directly into the microphone when making your requests.
Your mileage still may vary
Even these tips may not prevent a poor call system from interpreting your request correctly. If it begins to send you in circles, hang up and call back to see if that can get you where you need to go faster.
A spokesperson for the SSA told the Washington Post that the phone bot feature is constantly improving and several factors can affect the quality of the call, including background noise, call connection and speech clarity. None of these things seemed to be an issue on the Washington Post reporter's phone call. But my experience wasn't as awful as that, so maybe the system is getting better, at least a little.
For more, don't miss what the experts are predicting for the 2026 COLA increase.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Louisiana likely to make it harder to sue nursing homes over wrongful deaths
Louisiana legislators have sent legislation to shield nursing homes from lawsuit damages to Gov. Jeff Landry's desk. (Getty Images) Louisiana lawmakers gave final approval to legislation Tuesday to limit the amount of money nursing home residents and their families receive from lawsuits over injuries, neglect and wrongful deaths. Senate Bill 134 has been one of the most controversial bills of the legislative session. Advocacy organizations for seniors and people who are disabled made it a top priority to defeat the bill, saying it would protect nursing homes owners who keep their residents in dangerous situations. 'We are supposed to protect the elderly – not somebody who is trying to make more money off the elderly,' said Rep. Mandie Landry, D-New Orleans, who opposed the bill. Supporters insisted the proposal was not just about nursing homes and would protect a variety of medical facilities from frivolous lawsuits. But Louisiana's powerful nursing home owners were the primary backers of the bill and made it the focus of their legislative agenda this year. 'We're going to have those health care facilities turning in their keys because they can't do business in this state anymore' if these lawsuits continue, Wes Hataway, policy director for the Louisiana Nursing Home Association, said at a legislative hearing last month. There are more than 60 lawsuits pending against nursing homes across the state that could be limited by the legislation. They are being brought by residents and families, often alleging a loved one developed bedsores or injuries from repeated falls while living at a facility. The lawsuits allege the nursing homes and their management companies don't hire enough staff to watch the residents adequately, instead prioritizing lower costs and maximum profits. The bill would limit the damages that can be recovered from such a lawsuit. It would bring many of the lawsuits nursing homes currently face under the state Medical Malpractice Act, which caps awards at $500,000. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Recently, lawsuits against Chateau St. James Rehab and Retirement in Lutcher and Heritage Manor West in Shreveport over infected bedsores that contributed to residents' deaths had produced awards worth millions of dollars, far more than the legislation would allow. Nursing home owners are among the state's biggest political donors and one of the most influential industries at the Louisiana Capitol, focusing many of their contributions on state lawmakers and governors. A handful of legislators also have direct ties to the nursing home industry. Senate President Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, and Sen. Bob Hensgens, R-Abbeville, are part of the 10-person ownership group of Acadia St. Landry Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Church Point. Their nursing home currently faces a wrongful death lawsuit. The nursing home industry pushed for this bill particularly hard, employing extra lobbyists and recruiting other influential groups such the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry and the Louisiana Hospital Association to support the proposal. The legislation passed easily, with a 58-37 vote in the House Tuesday and a 26-11 vote in the Senate last month. Gov. Jeff Landry could still attempt to block the legislation from passing into a law with a veto however. Legislators opposed to the bill attempted to water down the legislation by adding an amendment that would block a nursing home from being put under the $500,000 medical malpractice cap if it was poorly rated by the federal government. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The U.S. Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services give nursing homes ratings of one to five stars based on factors such as facility inspections and staffing. The proposed amendment would have permitted lawsuits carrying greater risk to be brought against those nursing homes receiving one- or two-star ratings. 'Don't we want our seniors, our family members, our grandparents …to be in a safe space?' asked Rep. Stephanie Hilferty, R-New Orleans, who sponsored the amendment on the House side. Backed by AARP and other advocates for seniors, similar amendments failed in both chambers, with the Senate voting one down 20-16 and the House voting one down 57-39. Louisiana has some of the worst-rated nursing homes in the country, with approximately two-thirds of the facilities receiving one- and two-star ratings, according to Hilferty. She said those poorly-rated nursing homes make up 50% of such facilities in Metairie, which she represents in part, and more than 70% of nursing homes in Baton Rouge. Rep. Michael Melerine, R-Shreveport, defended the nursing home industry on the House floor, saying the facilities might face challenges with keeping residents healthy because of Louisiana's high rates of obesity and diabetes. He also said the state's general shortage of nurses contributes to low staffing at the facilities. 'You cannot address this without addressing the shortage of registered nurses,' he said. Melerine's law partner, Sen. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport, is one of the sponsors of the legislation. Seabaugh is an attorney representing a nursing home facing a lawsuit over neglect in Bossier Parish.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Kate Spade was ‘trying to work things out' with husband Andy before suicide, best friend reveals
Kate Spade's best friend has opened up about the beloved fashion designer seven years after her shocking suicide. In her upcoming memoir, 'We Might Just Make It After All: My Best Friendship With Kate Spade,' Elyce Arons claims that Kate and her husband, Andy Spade, were 'trying to work things out' when she took her own life in her Manhattan apartment in 2018. 'They were trying to work things out – and they were always in each other's lives every day,' Arons, 62, wrote in a preview of the new book obtained by People on Tuesday. 'They loved each other.' Advertisement 7 Kate Spade's best friend, Elyce Arons, has claimed that the fashion designer and her husband, Andy Spade, were 'trying to work things out' when she tragically took her own life seven years ago. Monica Schipper 7 Spade took her own life on June 5, 2018, at the age of 55. Getty Images Kate and Andy married in 1994. They welcomed their daughter, Frances Beatrix Spade, now 20, in 2005. Advertisement However, in a statement released shortly after his wife's death on June 5, 2018, at the age of 55, Andy revealed that he and Kate had been living apart for 10 months before her tragic suicide. 'We were not legally separated, and never even discussed divorce,' he shared at the time. 'We were best friends trying to work through our problems in the best way we knew how.' 7 Andy Spade revealed that he and Kate were separated for 10 months before her shocking suicide. James Messerschmidt 'We were together for 35 years,' Andy, 63, added. 'We loved each other very much and simply needed a break.' Advertisement He also revealed that the late fashion designer 'suffered from depression and anxiety for many years' before her passing and was 'actively seeking help' at the time of her death. 'She was actively seeking help and working closely with doctors to treat her disease, one that takes far too many lives,' he continued seven years ago. 'We were in touch with her the night before and she sounded happy.' 7 'They loved each other,' Elyce Arons writes in her new memoir regarding Kate and Andy Spade. 'There was no indication and no warning that she would do this,' Andy added. 'It was a complete shock and it clearly wasn't her. There were personal demons she was battling.' Advertisement Elsewhere in her new memoir, Arons wrote that Kate was 'such a private person' and 'people didn't really know her' despite the successful Kate Spade New York handbag line she created in the 1990s. 'So many people remember Katy for how she left us, and not about her life,' Arons penned. 'She was such a private person in so many ways – that people didn't really know her.' 7 Kate and Andy Spade welcomed their daughter, Frances Beatrix Spade, now 20, in 2005. rachelbrosnahan/Instagram 'She never shared with me that she was diagnosed with anything. I think it's stigma-related,' Arons continued. 'And because she was private, she probably felt that even more so. She would just use the word sad.' Arons, who co-founded the popular accessories and clothing line Frances Valentine alongside Kate in 2016, has also announced a new special edition tote bag to support the Hope for Depression Research Foundation. 'I love the organization because they are working on research and getting a diagnosis,' she said. 'I think bringing it to light is helpful instead of hiding it.' 7 Kate Spade took her own life by hanging on June 5, 2018, at her 850 Park Avenue apartment in Manhattan. As for how Arons feels seven years after her best friend's passing, she admits that she has 'made peace' with Kate's 'incomprehensible choice.' Advertisement 'All of us who loved her have had to find a way to make peace with her incomprehensible choice,' she wrote toward the end of the book. 'It's not been easy.' 'I've learned to never take the people whom I care about for granted,' she continued. 'As I tell my closest friends: go to your sister or your best girlfriends who's just like a sister to you. Go to her today and hug her so hard that it's like you won't ever let her go.' 7 'So many people remember Katy for how she left us, and not about her life,' Arons writes in her upcoming memoir. AP Advertisement 'We Might Just Make It After All: My Best Friendship With Kate Spade' hits bookshelves on June 17. If you are struggling with suicidal thoughts or are experiencing a mental health crisis and live in New York City, you can call 1-888-NYC-WELL for free and confidential crisis counseling. If you live outside the five boroughs, you can dial the 24/7 National Suicide Prevention hotline at 988 or go to


San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump formally asks Congress to claw back approved spending targeted by DOGE
WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House on Tuesday officially asked Congress to claw back $9.4 billion in already approved spending, taking funding away from programs targeted by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. It's a process known as 'rescission,' which requires President Donald Trump to get approval from Congress to return money that had previously been appropriated. Trump's aides say the funding cuts target programs that promote liberal ideologies. The request, if it passes the House and Senate, would formally enshrine many of the spending cuts and freezes sought by DOGE. It comes at a time when Musk is extremely unhappy with the tax cut and spending plan making its way through Congress, calling it on Tuesday a 'disgusting abomination' for increasing the federal deficit. White House budget director Russ Vought said more rescission packages and other efforts to cut spending could follow if the current effort succeeds. 'We are certainly willing and able to send up additional packages if the congressional will is there,' Vought told reporters. Here's what to know about the rescissions request: Will the rescissions make a dent in the national debt? The request to Congress is unlikely to meaningfully change the troublesome increase in the U.S. national debt. Tax revenues have been insufficient to cover the growing costs of Social Security, Medicare and other programs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the government is on track to spend roughly $7 trillion this year, with the rescission request equaling just 0.1% of that total. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at Tuesday's briefing that Vought — a 'well-respected fiscal hawk,' she called him — would continue to cut spending, hinting that there could be additional efforts to return funds. 'He has tools at his disposal to produce even more savings,' Leavitt said. Vought said he can send up additional rescissions at the end of the fiscal year in September 'and if Congress does not act on it, that funding expires.' 'It's one of the reasons why we are not putting all of our expectations in a typical rescissions process,' he added. What programs are targeted by the rescissions? A spokesperson for the White House Office of Management and Budget, speaking on condition of anonymity to preview some of the items that would lose funding, said that $8.3 billion was being cut from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development. NPR and PBS would also lose federal funding, as would the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, also known as PEPFAR. The spokesperson listed specific programs that the Trump administration considered wasteful, including $750,000 to reduce xenophobia in Venezuela, $67,000 for feeding insect powder to children in Madagascar and $3 million for circumcision, vasectomies and condoms in Zambia. Is the rescissions package likely to get passed? House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., complimented the planned cuts and pledged to pass them. 'This rescissions package reflects many of DOGE's findings and is one of the many legislative tools Republicans are using to restore fiscal sanity,' Johnson said. 'Congress will continue working closely with the White House to codify these recommendations, and the House will bring the package to the floor as quickly as possible.' Members of the House Freedom Caucus, among the chamber's most conservative lawmakers, said they would like to see additional rescission packages from the administration. 'We will support as many more rescissions packages the White House can send us in the coming weeks and months,' the group said in a press release. 'Passing this rescissions package will be an important demonstration of Congress's willingness to deliver on DOGE and the Trump agenda.' Sen. Susan Collins, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, gave the package a less optimistic greeting. 'Despite this fast track, the Senate Appropriations Committee will carefully review the rescissions package and examine the potential consequences of these rescissions on global health, national security, emergency communications in rural communities, and public radio and television stations,' the Maine lawmaker said in a statement. Why does the administration need Congress' approval? The White House's request to return appropriated funds is meant to comply with the 1974 Impoundment Control Act. That law created the process by which the president can formally disclose to Congress the appropriated money it intends to not spend. Congress generally has 45 days to review and approve the request, but Vought is arguing that the end of the fiscal year would enable the administration to bypass a vote. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a fiscal watchdog group, said in a 2018 backgrounder that the Senate can pass rescission packages with a simple majority, instead of the 60 votes needed to overcome a possible filibuster. Between 1974 and 2000, presidents requested $76 billion worth of rescissions and Congress approved $25 billion. Bobby Kogan, senior director of federal budget policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, said in an emailed statement that the Trump administration was already 'illegally impounding additional funds,' as withholding money has 'always been illegal without explicit Congressional approval.' On CNN on Sunday, Vought insisted that the Trump administration was complying with the law, but it simply had a different view of the law relative to some Democrats. 'We're not breaking the law,' Vought said. 'Every part of the federal government, each branch, has to look at the Constitution themselves and uphold it, and there's tension between the branches.'