New Neurocognitive Listing

     From Social Security's new Listings of impairments for mental disorders effective January 17, 2017:

12.02 Neurocognitive disorders (see 12.00B1), satisfied by A and B, or A and C:

      A. Medical documentation of a significant cognitive decline from a prior level of functioning in one or more of the cognitive areas:

          1. Complex attention;

          2. Executive function

          3. Learning and memory;

          4. Language;

          5. Perceptual - motor; or

          6. Social cognition.

AND

     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F):

         1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1).

         2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2).

         3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3).

         4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4).

     C. Your mental disorder in this listing category is “serious and persistent;” that is, you have a medically documented history of the existence of the disorder over a period of at least 2 year s, and there is evidence of both:

         1. Medical treatment, mental health therapy, psychosocial support(s), or a highly structured setting(s) that is ongoing and that diminishes the symptoms and signs of your mental disorder (see 12.00G2b); and

       2. Marginal adjustment, that is, you have minimal capacity to adapt to changes in your environment or to demands that are not already part of your daily life (see 12.00G2c) .

How Do You Spell That?

     From Psychology Today:

Naming a baby is a big decision, one many parents agonize over. ...

In discussion groups online for expecting mothers, many say they want to choose a unique name because “different is good” or “I want him to stand out.” Others dismiss names that are “too popular” because “I don’t want them to be one of three kids with the same name in their class.” ...

In a 2010 paper, my co-authors and I found that the use of common names declined precipitously between the 1950s and 2007 in the Social Security Administration database of the name of every American with a Social Security number (which is nearly everyone). In the 1950s, 1 out of every 4 boys had one of the 10 most popular names. By 2007, only 10% did. Fitting in went from being desirable to being undesirable, and uniqueness went the opposite way. It was yet another sign of American culture becoming more individualistic – more focused on the self and less on social rules. ...

But then the Great Recession hit. People started talking about a “cultural reset,” and in fact charity donations and interest in social issues did go up, suggesting a rise in communalism. But signs of a sustained increase in individualism, such as a continuing rise in positive self-views, also appeared.

So what happened with names? In a paper published today, we found that the trend toward unique names continued during the recession, especially for boys. Unique names are more common now than they were 10 years ago. Thirty-four percent of boys received a name among the 50 most popular in 2004-06, compared to only 30% during the 2008-10 recession years and 28% in post-recession 2011-15. For girls, the decline was from 24% to 22% to 21%. ...

This research shows the hidden power of culture. Across the country over the last few decades, parents were collectively deciding not to choose common names for their children. How does something like that happen? It’s a mysterious process – somehow the value of uniqueness became more prominent. We know it happened, but exactly how and why is a bit of a mystery. For now, we can take comfort that our kids will be less likely to be confused with another who has the same name – but more likely to be asked the question “And how do you spell that?”

More Immigration Enforcement Problems

     Social Security is denying retirement benefits to a man who was born in Canada even though he served in the U.S. Army and his father is a U.S. citizen. The man worked in the U.S. for 48 years. 

     Sounds like where Ted Cruz may be in a few years -- although Cruz never served in the Army.

New Autism Listing

     From Social Security's new mental impairment Listings effective January 17, 2017:

12.10 Autism spectrum disorder (see 12.00B8), satisfied by A and B:

     A. Medical documentation of both of the following:

      1. Qualitative deficits in verbal communication, nonverbal communication, and social interaction; and

       2. Significantly restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities.

AND

     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F):

          1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1).

          2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2).

          3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3).

          4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4).

New Anxiety Listing

     From Social Security's new mental impairments Listings effective January 17, 2017.:

12.06 Anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders (see 12.00B5), satisfied by A and B, or A and C:

     A. Medical documentation of the requirements of paragraph 1, 2, or 3:

          1. Anxiety disorder, characterized by three or more of the following;

              a. Restlessness;

              b. Easily fatigued;

              c. Difficulty concentrating;

              d. Irritability;

              e. Muscle tension; or

              f. Sleep disturbance.

          2. Panic disorder or agoraphobia, characterized by one or both:

               a. Panic attacks followed by a persistent concern or worry about additional panic attacks or their consequences; or

               b. Disproportionate fear or anxiety about at least two different situations (for example, using public transportation, being in a crowd, being in a line, being outside of your home, being in open spaces).

         3. Obsessive-compulsive disorder, characterized by one or both:

            a. Involuntary, time-consuming preoccupation with intrusive, unwanted thoughts; or

               b. Repetitive behaviors aimed at reducing anxiety.

AND

     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F):

          1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1

          2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2).

          3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3).

          4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4). OR

     C. Your mental disorder in this listing category is “serious and persistent;” that is, you have a medically documented history of the existence of the disorder over a period of at least 2 years, and there is evidence of both:

         1. Medical treatment, mental health therapy, psychosocial support(s), or a highly structured setting(s) that is ongoing and that diminishes the symptoms and signs of your mental disorder (see 12.00G2b); and

        2. Marginal adjustment, that is, you have minimal capacity to adapt to changes in your environment or to demands that are not already par t of your daily life (see 12.00G2c)

New PTSD Listing

     From Social Security's new mental impairment Listings effective January 17, 2017:

12.15 Trauma-and [so in the original] stressor-related  disorders (see 12.00B11), satisfied by A and B, or A and C:

     A. Medical documentation of all of the following:

          1. Exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury, or violence;

        2. Subsequent involuntary re-experiencing of the traumatic event (for example, intrusive memories, dreams, or flashbacks);

          3. Avoidance of external reminders of the event;

          4. Disturbance in mood and behavior; and

        5. Increases in arousal and reactivity (for example, exaggerated startle response, sleep disturbance).

AND

     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F):

          1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1).

          2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2).

          3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3).

          4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4).

OR

     C. Your mental disorder in this listing category is “serious and persistent;” that is, you have a medically documented history of the existence of the disorder over a period of at least 2 years, and there is evidence of both

     1. Medical treatment, mental health therapy, psychosocial support(s), or a highly structured setting(s) that is ongoing and that diminishes the symptoms and signs of your mental disorder (see 12.00G2b); and

    2. Marginal adjustment, that is, you have minimal capacity to adapt to changes in your environment or to demands that are not already part of your daily life (see 12.00G2c).

New Depression/Bipolar Listing

      From Social Security's new mental impairment Listings effective January 17, 2017:

12.04 Depressive, bipolar and related disorders (see 12.00B3), satisfied by A and B, or A and C: 

     A. Medical documentation of the requirements of paragraph 1 or 2: 

          1. Depressive disorder, characterized by five or more of the following: 

               a. Depressed mood; 

               b. Diminished interest in almost all activities; 

               c. Appetite disturbance with change in weight; 

               d. Sleep disturbance; 

               e. Observable psychomotor agitation or retardation; 

               f. Decreased energy 

               g. Feelings of guilt or worthlessness; 

               h. Difficulty concentrating or thinking; or 

               i. Thoughts of death or suicide. 

          2. Bipolar disorder, characterized by three or more of the following: 

               a. Pressured speech; 

               b. Flight of ideas; 

               c. Inflated self-esteem; 

               d. Decreased need for sleep; 

               e. Distractibility; 

           f. Involvement in activities that have a high probability of painful consequences that are not recognized;

or 
              g . Increase in goal-directed activity or psychomotor agitation 

AND

     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F): 

          1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1). 

          2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2). 

          3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3). 

          4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4). 
OR

     C. Your mental disorder in this listing category is “serious and persistent;” that is, you have a medically documented history of the existence of the disorder over a period of at least 2 years, and there is evidence of both: 

          1. Medical treatment, mental health therapy, psychosocial support(s), or a highly structured setting(s) that is ongoing and that diminishes the symptoms and signs of your mental disorder (see 12.00G2b); and 

          2. Marginal adjustment, that is, you have minimal capacity to adapt to changes in your environment or to demands that are not already part of your daily life (see 12.00G2c) .

New Eating Disorder Listing

     From Social Security's new mental impairment Listings:

12.13 Eating disorders (see 12.00B10), satisfied by A and B:

     A. Medical documentation of a persistent alteration in eating or eating-related behavior that results in a change in consumption or absorption of food and that significantly impairs physical or psychological health .

AND

     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F):

          1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1).

          2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2).

          3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3).

          4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4)

If You Just Can't Stomach Clinton Or Trump

     If you can't stomach either Clinton or Trump you might consider voting for the Libertarian Party candidate, Gary Johnson. However, before you do, you might take a look at some of his positions. For one, he's in favor of abolishing Social Security. Not modifying Social Security. Abolishing it.

New Schizophrenia Listing

     From the new mental impairment Listings:

12.03 Schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders (see 12.00B2), satisfied by A and B, or A and C: 
     A. Medical documentation of one or more of the following: 
          1. Delusions or hallucinations; 
          2. Disorganized thinking (speech); or 
          3. Grossly disorganized behavior or catatonia. 
     AND 
     B. Extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning (see 12.00F): 
         1. Understand, remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1). 
         2. Interact with others (see 12.00E2). 
         3. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3). 
         4. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4). OR 
     C. Your mental disorder in this listing category is “serious and persistent;” that is, you have a medically documented history of the existence of the disorder over a period of at least 2 years, and there is evidence of both: 
         1. Medical treatment, mental health therapy, psychosocial support(s), or a highly structured setting(s) that is ongoing and that diminishes the symptoms and signs of your mental disorder (see 12.00G2b); and 
        2. Marginal adjustment, that is, you have minimal capacity to adapt to changes in your environment or to demands that are not already part of your daily life (see 12.00G2c) .

New Mental Impairment Listings

     To my surprise, Social Security has published new mental impairment Listings as final rules. I wasn't expecting them until after the election because that's what they said they planned to do. These are not effective until January. I'll post excerpts from them as I have time.
     Here are the new intellectual disability Listings:

12.05 Intellectual disorder(see 12.00B4), satisfied by A or B:

A. Satisfied by 1, 2, and 3 (see 12.00H):

1. Significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning evident in your cognitive inability to function at a level required to participate in standardized testing of intellectual functioning; and

2. Significant deficits in adaptive functioning currently manifested by your dependence upon others for personal needs (for example, toileting, eating, dressing, or bathing); and

3. The evidence about your current intellectual and adaptive functioning and about the history of your disorder demonstrates or supports the conclusion that the disorder began prior to your attainment of age 22.

B. Satisfied by 1, 2, and 3 (see 12.00H):

1. Significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning evidenced by a or b:

a. A full scale (or comparable) IQ score of 70 or below on an individually administered standardized test of general intelligence;

or

b. A full scale (or comparable) IQ score of 71-75 accompanied by a verbal or performance IQ score (or comparable part score) of 70 or below on an individually administered standardized test of general intelligence; and

2. Significant deficits in adaptive functioning currently manifested by extreme limitation of one, or marked limitation of two, of the following areas of mental functioning:

a. Understand,remember, or apply information (see 12.00E1); or

b. Interact with others (see 12.00E2); or

c. Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace (see 12.00E3); or

d. Adapt or manage oneself (see 12.00E4); and

3. The evidence about your current intellectual and adaptive functioning and about the history of your disorder demonstrates or supports the conclusion that the disorder began prior to your attainment of age 22.

What's The Solution?

     From WATE:

A young disabled Knoxville woman has lost her Social Security disability and Medicare assistance. She has epilepsy and until a year ago, had uncontrollable seizures. ...

Over the last 15 months, Amy Schnelle’s mom says her daughter’s health improved dramatically with the help of anti-seizure medications. Now, however, Amy Schnelle’s Medicare is ending and she can’t afford to buy the pills. Everything changed when Social Security sent a letter in May of this year saying her $1,200 a month check would be ending. ...

The Schnelles say what Social Security didn’t take into account is once her disability was dropped, she no longer can get the medications needed to control her condition. ...

Final Rules On Exclusion Of Evidence

     The following new final rules will appear in the Federal Register tomorrow:

§ 404.1503b Evidence from excluded medical sources of evidence.

     (a) General. We will not consider evidence from the following medical sources excluded under section 223(d)(5)(C) (i) of the Social Security Act (Act), as amended, unless we find good cause under paragraph (b) of this section:

         (1) Any medical source that has been convicted of a felony under section 208 or under section 1632 of the Act;

         (2) Any medical source that has been excluded from participation in any Federal health care program under section 1128 of the Act; or

         (3) Any medical source that has received a final decision imposing a civil monetary penalty or assessment, or both, for submitting false evidence under section 1129 of the Act.

     (b) Good cause. We may find good cause to consider evidence from a n excluded medical source of evidence under section 223(d)(5)(C) (i) of the Act, as amended, if:

          (1) The evidence from the medical source consists of evidence of treatment that occurred before the date the source was convicted of a felony under section 208 or under section 1632 of the Act;

          (2) The evidence from the medical source consists of evidence of treatment that occurred during a period in which the source was not excluded from participation in any Federal health care program under section 1128 of the Act;

         (3) The evidence from the medical source consists of evidence of treatment that occurred before the date the source received a final decision imposing a civil monetary penalty or assessment, or both, for submitting false evidence under section 1129 of the Act;

         (4) The sole basis for the medical source’s exclusion under section 223(d)(5)(C) (i) of the Act, as amended, is that the source cannot participate in any Federal health care program under section 1128 of the Act, but the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Hum an Services granted a waiver of the section 1128 exclusion; or

          (5) The evidence is a laboratory finding about a physical impairment and there is no indication that the finding is unreliable.

Social Security Remains Third Rail Of U.S. Politics

     From Public Policy Polling:

A new Public Policy Polling survey covering 5 key Senate battlegrounds finds that voters are strongly opposed to a number of changes that Republicans might pursue to Social Security if they get total control of the government after this fall. 69% of voters say they’re concerned about the changes Republicans might make to Social Security, and by a 33 point margin they say they’re less likely to vote GOP this fall if they’re informed about what changes Republican control could bring to the program. In this closely contested election Democrats should be talking more about Social Security, which could be a winning issue for them in these pivotal states.

Key findings of the survey which included voters in Florida, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin include:

• Only 20% of voters would support privatizing Social Security by investing benefits in the stock market, to 68% who are opposed to that. There’s bipartisan agreement with Democrats (13/83), independents (24/64), and Republicans (27/53) all strongly opposed to privatization. By a 48 point margin voters say they’d be less likely to vote for a candidate who supported that - 63% would be less likely to, compared to only 15% who would be more likely to.
• Only 5% of voters support making any cuts to Social Security benefits, to 88% who are opposed to them. You’d be hard pressed to find any issue that Americans are in such strong agreement about. There’s more than 80% opposition from independents (5/91), Democrats (6/90), and Republicans (4/84) alike. 80% of voters say they’d be less likely to support someone who would cut Social Security benefits, to only 5% who’d be more likely to vote for someone wanting to do that.
• Only 28% of voters support raising the retirement age, to 62% who are opposed to doing that. Once again there’s bipartisan opposition with Democrats (18/74), Republicans (34/54), and independents (40/47) all firmly opposed to raising the retirement age. By a 44 point spread voters are less likely to support a candidate who would raise it - 58% say they’d be less inclined to vote for someone who wanted to do that, to only 14% who would be more likely to vote for them. 
• Only 14% of voters support changing the formula that increases benefits for inflation, to 62% who would oppose doing that. Democrats (11/69), independents (14/69), and Republicans (19/52) all stand together in opposing such changes.
• When informed about the possibility that Republicans might pursue some of these policy changes if they end up with control of the White House, Senate, and House after the election 53% of voters say that makes them less likely to vote for the GOP in November, to only 20% who say it makes them more likely to support the party’s candidates. Particularly notable is that among pivotal independent voters, 50% say possible Republican changes to Social Security would make them less likely to vote for the party to just 22% who would be more likely to do so.

Rep Payee Fraud In Michigan

     From The Herald-Palladium of St. Joseph, MI:

A Benton Harbor woman who stole Social Security benefits meant for disabled people was sentenced Monday to 2-5 years in prison.

Jill Mae Williams was also ordered by Berrien County Trial Court Judge Arthur Cotter to pay $260,089 in restitution to the Social Security Administration and $25,185 to the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services.  ...

According to [prosecutor Jane] Wainwright, Williams had arranged for herself to become the “payee” for Social Security benefits for 10 vulnerable adults in Benton Harbor and was taking much of the money for her own use. ...

The people she was charged with stealing from were disabled and/or could not read and write. ...

GAO Report On Household With More Than One SSI Recipient

     From a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO):

In May 2013, an estimated 15 percent of the 7.2 million households with blind, aged, and disabled individuals receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) cash benefits included more than one SSI recipient, according to GAO’s data analysis. Of the estimated 1.1 million households with multiple SSI recipients, most included two recipients (953, 000) and at least one adult recipient between ages 18 and 64 (695,000). Most households with multiple recipients did not have any child recipients, though an estimated 190,000 had one child recipient, 111,000 had two, and 3 0,000 had three or more. Few households reported having married couple recipients (an estimated 90,000). Most multiple recipient households reported that members of one family — those related by birth, marriage, or adoption —lived in the household (an estimated 941,000). GAO was unable to determine the specific relationships of recipients in these households.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) provided households with multiple SSI recipients almost 30 percent, or an estimated $1.2 billion , of the total $4.3 billion paid in SSI benefits in May 2013, according to GAO’s data analysis. In that month, multiple recipient households received an estimated average of $1,131 in SSI benefits, compared to $507 for single recipient households. Further, consistent with federal law that applies a lower maximum benefit rate to married couple recipients, GAO’s analysis found that households with nonmarried multiple recipients received a higher estimated average monthly benefit payment than married recipient households. ...

[A]ccording to SSA staff, SSA’s claims management system lacks the ability to automatically connect and adjust claim records of those living in households with other SSI recipients, as it is structured around providing benefits to individuals. For example, if a mother lives with two of her children who are both SSI recipients, and the mother reports changes to her income, SSA’s system does not automatically adjust both children’s benefit amounts to account for this change in income. In addition, the system is unable to automatically process claims when two SSI recipients marry or separate, so staff must manually complete forms and calculate benefits outside the claims management system, which is time consuming and error prone, according to staff GAO spoke with in three of five selected field offices . SSA officials said the agency has not assessed the risks associated with the system’s limited ability to automatically process claims for multiple recipient households, and has no plans to improve the claims management system to address related issues. ...

     To be sure, there are some issues with households with multiple SSI recipients but the Republican interest in the subject seems to harken back to Ronald Reagan's fables (and they were fables with little basis is fact) about "welfare queens." Households with more than one SSI recipient are hardly living large on $1,131 per month. There's almost never a sinister explanation for why there is more than one SSI recipient in a household. Usually, it has to do with factors such as people who are mentally ill associating with each other (because that's who will associate with them) and families with more than one child suffering from the same congenital abnormality.

Boring OIG Report On DCPS

     From a recent report by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG):

In a February 13, 2015 letter to the Inspector General, Sam Johnson, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Social Security, House Committee on Ways and Means, expressed his continued concerns regarding the development of DCPS [Disabilty Case Processing System]. Specifically, Chairman Johnson requested that we provide regular reports to keep the Subcommittee informed of SSA’s DCPS-related efforts. This report is one in a series of reports that examines SSA’s progress in developing and implementing DCPS. ...

We concluded that SSA’s reported costs of $356 million for the DCPS project for the 8-year period ended September 30, 2015 were reasonably accurate. However, we noted issues with SSA’s processes for capturing and reporting contractor and labor costs. While we did not consider these issues to be sufficiently significant to materially affect the overall DCPS cost figure, we believe they warrant SSA’s attention....

0.3% COLA Coming?

     A reporter figures that Social Security's Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA) for this year will be 0.3%. I'd say that the margin of error on this prediction is no more than a tenth of one percent.

Spraying For Bed Bugs Leads To Problems In Cleveland Field Office

     From the Cleveland Plain Dealer:

U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown has asked the General Services Administration to investigate an incident in which some Social Security Administration employees who work in downtown Cleveland said they became ill after their office was sprayed for a bed bug infestation. 

Furniture from that office later was donated to Catholic Charities. ...

The spraying took place in February at the Social Security Administration office on the seventh floor of the Celebrezze building. After the spraying, workers complained of a chemical smell when they returned to their office. 

A worker told Fox8 that she suffered from vomiting, dizziness and tremors in her arms and legs. 

Brown's letter cites a recently released investigation by the Ohio Department to Agriculture that suggests pesticides intended for outdoor use only were used in the office.

Congressional Hearing Scheduled To Allow Republicans To Claim Social Security Is Bankrupt

     From a press release:

House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX) announced today that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing on “Understanding Social Security’s Solvency Challenge.” The hearing will focus on the difference between the Social Security solvency projections of the Congressional Budget Office and the Social Security Board of Trustees, the causes of the difference, and what this means for Social Security’s long-term solvency. The hearing will take place on Wednesday, September 21, 2016 in B-318 Rayburn House Office Building, beginning at 10:00 AM.