From Joe Klein writing in his
blog at Time:
Back during the presidential campaign, Mitt Romney tried to make the
argument that President Obam was soft on welfare reform. He missed the
target. Welfare abuse has shifted to Social Security Disability. ...
Now, to be sure, there are workers who fit the program’s inevitable
intent: older workers who suffer serious injuries and need support until
they reach the age of eligibility for social security. There are others
whose medical or mental disabilities make them clearly unable to work.
But the government has gotten sloppy about admissions. ...
The 55-year-old construction who hurt his back has my sympathy—I’d be
in favor of lowering the eligibility age for both Medicare and Social
Security a few years in such cases. But there are plenty of
non-back-breaking jobs that construction worker can hold in the interim.
Indeed, in all but the most severe cases, there are public service
jobs that can be done as a way of paying back—and a way of culling the
scam artists. All too often, the scammers find support on the left from
people who believe that free enterprise is inherently unfair and the
“victims,” even the unworthy poor, deserve any help they can get. That
sort of thinking is insidious and morally deficient.
10 comments:
Joe Klein is a joke when he is taking his usual left-wing stance. He is even dumber when he tries to take a right-wing stance, and to what purpose I can't imagine. What in the world is he trying to say?
In a competitive work environment, anyone with a significant impairment is going to be at a great disadvantage in the private job market even if they can work with a reasonable accommodation. Private employers have lots of non-impaired job applicants from which to choose.
Why not give all these folks, who can allegedly work, despite their impairments, first shot at government jobs starting with the Social Security Administration. Since this type of affirmative action program would not be based on race, it would not be subjected to constitutional questions. If someone is found to have a severe impairment and cannot return to past work, but does not meet the other requirements for disability, issue both an unfavorable decision and a federal government job application. This week's claimant could be next week's hearing assistant.
I don't see too many obviously impaired individuals at ODARS and SSA offices. Shouldn't Social Security be taking the lead in hiring those who are disabled, at least under the ADA definition?
This would also eliminate all of the alleged disability "fakers" because they won't want to work even if offered a good federal government job. In short, this is a win-win proposal.
Anonymous said "I don't see too many obviously impaired individuals at ODARS and SSA offices."
...and so therefore they must NOT exist. If their "impairment" is not "obvious" to you, the federal government is not hiring disabled workers.
In my observation, the vast majority of disability recipients do not have a college degree. They therefore are not qualified to be hired by SSA, and probably not by a lot of government agencies. This speculation about "public service jobs" is just a load.
RE: Anonymous at 10:58 PM's idea...
I'm not for or against it although I don't think it could ever happen. Can you imagine the poor supervisor who'd have to manage these folks, though? I'm not talking about the truly impaired who would probably give it all they got--I'm talking about the scammers who'd come to work and fake various maladies day in and day out to try and prove they can't work. As a manager of people myself, I imagine that would be one of the most challenging positions to be in.
This isn't a new idea. Back in the 90's after welfare to work was passed, many of the AFDC moms in my state were put to work at DDS. It was an unmitigated disaster.
Two facts that some seem unable to grasp:
People are determined to be disabled because they are unable to work, and
there are people who do not want to work.
The corollary to the second one is that yes, there are people who would rather receive welfare. This includes parents living off their kids' SSI.
SSA has a stated/published goal of making sure that at least 15% of the people they hire each year are disabled and at least 2% of the people they hire each year have "targeted" disabilities.
It's part of their annual performance plan and one of the metrics that is reported to the President.
That explains Central Office--everyone they hire there is mentally challenged, allowing them to meet the agency quotas.
I work in ODAR and there are two people with obvious physical disabilities (even handicapped parking placards) and another friend who is a disabled vet (fed gov't is hiring TONS of vets, especially disabled ones) in my office. We appear to hire a significant number of people with disabilities.
Shoot, you must be out to lunch if you don't see that the little external hiring ODAR is doing these days is almost exclusively vets (and disabled vets).
Post a Comment