From a press release:
Today, House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX) announced that the subcommittee will hold a hearing on the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) management of earnings reports from disability beneficiaries trying to go back to work. The SSA faces difficulties processing earnings reports and adjusting benefits in a timely fashion, in part due to the complexity of the work incentives in the Disability Insurance program. These difficulties can cause large overpayments for disability beneficiaries trying to return to work. The hearing will take place on Tuesday, June 16, at 2:00 PM in room B-318 of the Rayburn House Building.
Upon the announcement, Chairman Johnson said, “There are two problems for the American taxpayer when Social Security can’t manage earnings reports: First, dollars go out that shouldn’t; Second, individuals who want to work are discouraged from doing so. It’s time Congress takes a look at what drives overpayments. The American people want, need, and deserve nothing less.”If this Subcommittee wants to do something truly useful and bipartisan, it should simplify Social Security's work incentives. There has been one piece of legislation after another over decades based upon the fantasy that just one more incentive will cause Social Security disability recipients to go back to work in droves. It hasn't happened. It's not going to happen. It's just too hard to get on Social Security disability benefits. Realistically, few recipients have the capacity to return to regular employment. The work incentives have been added onto so many times that they're a confusing mess which is almost impossible to administer. Simplify. Simplify. Simplify. Don't do it in the belief that simplification will return more people to work. Simplify so that the system of work incentives can be effectively administered.
6 comments:
Charles, you should know better. Any claimant who is found capable of performing some range of unskilled sedentary work or light work full-time, but who has to be paid because their age GRIDS them out is an individual who is capable of returning to work. There are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of individuals granted disability under these circumstances every year.
However, I do agree that the work incentives could be clearer and simplified.
Johnson must be suffering from dementia. To wit, he says, "It's time Congress takes a look at what drives overpayments." Yo Sam, you've known about this for years.
Let's figure this out, since the American people deserve to know. Sam, you should investigate who those dastardly villains were who underfunded SSA for years, so that they lost about 10,000 employees during times in which Congress was warned that the Agency work load was increasing. Who were they, who made it impossible for the underfunded and undermanned agency to timely keep up with that workload of earnings reports, CDRs and other paperwork? Expose them so we Americans know who to blame come election time!
Anyone that works over the limit after the TWP, barring pre Cessation averaging, subsidy, UWA, or IRWE, and does not notify SSA they are working, can expect an o/p. Unfortunately SSA goes off of IRS reports and those are delivered to SSA midway through the following year. Unfortunately that is just the reality of the situation. No reason to sensationalize it into something more.
I seriously doubt there are hundreds of thousands of light and sedentary unskilled disabled individuals who could sustain work above SGA every year, much tens of thousands. Would love to see those statistics because no study I’ve seen has even hinted at that.
The amount of money Johnson is spending on this shell game is disgusting and part of his smear tactics to underfund the disability program. Johnson has proposed and passed no legislation to address the projected financial shortfall, much less materially help the disabled. Instead he and his cronies periodically bloviate as they will today, citing patently false fraud rhetoric and insincere concern for the disabled.
Work Incentives might, might succeed if beneficiaries and recipients are allowed trial work period with seamless reinstatement of all benefits should their return to work attempts fail. Medicare should remain in place until financial independence is obtained. If work attempts are successful, access to continued Medicare or with commiserate health insurance should be in place. That’s my simple proposal.
But with the strict criteria for disability even that proposal is unlikely to succeed. The first question I get when the majority of my claimants are allowed is can I ever go back to work. I explain trial work period and the theoretical scheme of expedited reinstatement (I no longer bother mention Ticket to work since most SSA Field offices don't understand or have the personnel to oversee it). After that no one in their right mind would risk the scenario of losing the benefits they just spent 6 months to years obtaining. Because in reality they are disabled and cannot sustain gainful employment. If Johnson et al had any sincere intentions he would first work to fully fund the disability program and let someone else with the lights on research “work incentives.”
Amen, 9:07. Whenever former clients who've been on disability begin to recover, since they no longer have the physical or mental stressors that may have helped create impairments, I warn them of the perils of attempting to work again. This is not only because of the arcane rules.
I would like to hear the perspective of ALJs who may read this. I've had too many clients who did return to work successfully and then suffered relapses of their severe conditions within a year or two. I would think that their attempt to work then would give them greater credibility in a subsequent disability hearing, not less. However, the majority of ALJs in these cases appear to have the attitude, "Well, you've been working for awhile, now you're just malingering" and deny the new claim, despite clear-cut medical evidence of a relapse. It's happened so often that, in good conscience, I cannot recommend that a beneficiary attempt to work up to SGA level and imperil their future benefit--unless they are absolutely confident that they will never again have to seek benefits.
Post a Comment