Here's the fiscal year 2018 "waterfall chart" showing the outcomes of Social Security disability claims:
 |
| Click on image to view full size |
Note all the Administrative Law Judge dismissals. I expect most of this is related to how difficult it is to win. Attorneys who represent Social Security disability claimants don't take the case of everyone who seeks their help. We only work with those we deem to have a reasonable chance. If you're a claimant and you call several attorneys seeking representation and they all turn you away, what are you going to do? Probably you won't show up for your hearing and your case will get dismissed. Attorneys are, to some extent, gatekeepers. It's a role I'm uncomfortable with but there's no other way to make a living representing Social Security disability claimants in such a harsh environment.
9 comments:
Jobless claims lowest since 1969, just saying that might have something to do with some of those dismissals.
@11:06
The history of the hearing level dismissal rate is as follows:
2018: 21%
2017: 21%
2016: 20%
2015: 18%
2014: 18%
2012: 16%
2009: 15%
I couldn't find 2013. In any event, the lowering of jobless claims could be relevant, but frankly, even if you believe the economy has drastically improved in the last 2 years, it resulted in a 1% increase in dismissals.
As to why 21% of cases are being dismissed, I'm not sure I blame it on economic improvement, difficulty in winning, or some other factor. A 1% change doesn't say much to me. But I also doubt it is due to difficulty winning, as the expansion of healthcare has pretty directly resulted in better developed records, as claimants can actually get treatment. Weird to not see much change over the past few years in regard to dismissals.
I wonder what impact the threat of referral to OIG has had on representatives no longer withdrawing once a hearing has been scheduled in a case that appears unwinnable and, instead, now discussing withdrawal of the claim with the client. I have done that on a couple of occasions now.
@12:05
Another interesting hypothesis: With more available healthcare for the poor in some states, at least some who would have become disabled actually got better and no longer need to pursue disability claims (perhaps enough to account for some of the small change). It would be interesting to do a side by side comparison of states without Medicaid expansion or other treatment options for the poor, to those with Medicaid expansion on some of these points.
I mention this because I have had clients who received good and timely healthcare improve and then drop their disability claims on returning to work. I've also had some with conditions which would not have been permanent if treated timely, who became permanently disabled due to lack of such treatment. I suspect that good healthcare access for the poor is probably more effective at lowering the disability rolls than every other SSA work incentive combined.
@4:11
12:05 here,
Good point! Certainly expanded treatment could contribute to the slight increase in dismissals, and measuring medicaid expansion states versus non-expansion states could be pretty insightful. I agree timely treatment is probably more effective at lowering the disability rolls that SSA's work incentives.
4:11 Interesting arguments. I am obviously for Medicaid expansion because of the benefit to the people who are now able to receive medical care. However, from a purely microeconomic standpoint, I always wondered if it was good or bad for my SSD practice to have the Medicaid expansion in my state. Good: finally have medical records to submit for indigent clients to give a better chance of winning the case. Bad: prospective clients receive medical treatment, get health under control and don't need to file for disability in the first place. This would ultimately less overall disability clients. Good for society, however.
"Another interesting hypothesis: With more available healthcare for the poor in some states, at least some who would have become disabled actually got better and no longer need to pursue disability claims (perhaps enough to account for some of the small change)."
I wholeheartedly believe this to be true.
I've seen a RECENT increase in requested withdrawn claims from people finding work but this is very recent.
There are just a lot of people who move around a lot or lack a permanent address or reliable contact to receive their mail and communicate hearing dates to them.
One of the few things in the Social Security program that Republican law makers are willing to shovel money towards is work incentive programs. However, one of the best ways to keep the most people with low incomes and resources off disability benefits is to keep them healthy by ensuring that decent healthcare is available to them. Ironically, the same Republicans who favor work incentive programs vehemently oppose that.
Post a Comment