SSI Child Benefits Result In Better Long Term Outcomes For Disabled Children

     The abstract of a research study by Norma Coe and Matthew Rutledge (emphasis added):

In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Sullivan v. Zebley case fundamentally changed, albeit temporarily, the criteria under which children qualified for the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program based on disability.  Instead of a system based on medical criteria alone, 1996 enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) tied children’s eligibility for SSI, in part, to the effects of their medically determinable impairments on their ability to function day-to-day in age-appropriate activities at home, at school, and in their communities.  This paper examines what happened to the Zebley cohort after the age of 18 relative to cohorts who received SSI payments under stricter criteria.  This paper evaluates the long-term impact on educational attainment, earnings, SSI and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) participation, and other markers of adult development for the Zebley cohort.  We find that, overall, SSI receipt in childhood is associated more [with] positive outcomes than negative ones.  The Zebley cohort has a longer attachment to the labor force and a lower likelihood of welfare receipt in adulthood, but also a higher likelihood of lacking health insurance coverage.  In addition, those with health conditions most likely to be affected by the new evaluation criteria appear to substitute welfare benefits for disability benefits  These results are consistent with the hypothesis that SSI receipt at the margin improves adult outcomes.

Sales Tax And Social Security Representation

     There is a serious threat that the N.C. General Assembly will extend the state's sales tax to services, including legal services, which would include the representation of Social Security claimants. My recollection was that this issue has come up in a few other states and that Social Security's position has been that it's up to the attorney to collect the sales tax as a cost, in the same way that the costs of obtaining medical records are collected. However, I don't see where this has been done in any state other than South Dakota. Has it been done in other states? How has it worked out where it has been done?

Social Security To Be Involved In Reducing Gun Violence

     I had posted yesterday that it seemed to me that Social Security has records in database form that could be used to identify individuals suffering from severe mental illness who should not be allowed to possess firearms. Apparently, the same idea had already occurred to people within government. The President sent out a memorandum to the heads of departments and agencies ordering them to advise the Department of Justice within 60 days of any records they may have that would be relevant to the Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and to submit an implementation plan on how those records could be shared. In and of itself, that doesn't tell us that Social Security would be involved. However, the President also set up a working group on improving the NICS which includes the Social Security Administration. I think that tells us that Social Security will be involved in a significant way.

Getting More Brazen All The Time

     Seemingly unconcerned about appearances, the Business Roundtable, an organization of CEOs, some of the wealthiest Americans, are lobbying for an increase in Social Security's Full Retirement Age (FRA) to 70 because this is "what's best for the country."  They also want to reduce Social Security's Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA). Of course, they oppose extending the F.I.C.A. tax to all salaries. Currently, F.I.C.A. is limited to the first $113,700 of salaries. Any salary beyond that -- and almost all of the salaries of these CEOs -- is not subjected to the F.I.C.A. tax.

It's Back

     Early in Michael Astrue's term as Commissioner, Social Security proposed a number of changes to its rules concerning the Appeals Council. The most controversial of these was a proposal to limit appeals to closed periods only, that is, if a claimant received a remand after making an appeal, the remand would only concern benefits up to the point of the original decision. A favorable decision on remand would only give the claimant a lump sum of benefits up to the date of the original denial. The proposal would also have limited the ability of claimants to submit additional medical evidence after the date of a hearing to five days but would have given claimants 75 days notice of hearings. Astrue backed off the more controversial portions of the proposal but never withdrew the whole thing. It hung fire. It's back now. As Astrue is leaving office, he's sending that proposal over to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), presumably with some amendments. With OMB's approval, the rule can be published in the Federal Register as a final rule. There's no way to know what ended up in the final rule.

     OMB is not going to act on this until after Astrue has left office. The new Commissioner, whoever he or she may be, will have a chance to withdraw this proposal for further study or to kill it.

Former SSA Employee Sentenced For Defrauding Agency

     From KMOV.com:

A former attorney for the Social Security Administration is now in deep trouble for defrauding the agency out of benefits.

37-year-old Robert Brauker’s punishment was handed down on Tuesday. Brauker was sentenced five years probation, lost his law license in Missouri, and he must pay back the government $9,244.

Brauker worked for Social Security at the North St Louis office on Goodfellow for about a year until March 2011. During that time, he was collecting disability benefits from Social Security.

Disability Recipients Concealing Self-Employment Income

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

Our objective was to identify individuals receiving Disability Insurance (DI) benefits who participated in self-employment activities and concealed the income by reporting it under another person’s Social Security number (SSN). ...

We reviewed a sample of 50 beneficiaries who reported SEI [Self Employment Income] before they were approved for DI benefits and had a spouse or child who reported SEI after the beneficiary was approved. Our review did not find any instances where beneficiaries concealed SEI by reporting it under a child’s SSN. However, our review found that 5 (10 percent) of the 50 beneficiaries were engaged in self-employment activities and concealed their income by reporting it under their spouse’s SSN. Of these five, we determined that three beneficiaries received improper payments of $348,000, and their auxiliaries received an additional $77,000. ...

The analysis we undertook for a sample of beneficiaries was labor-intensive and yielded a small number of beneficiaries who were actually concealing SEI. Therefore, we cannot recommend that the Agency integrate such a process into its procedures. However, we would be willing to work with SSA to develop a more sophisticated method for profiling cases where individuals are concealing SEI while receiving DI benefits.

Should Social Security Have A Role In Preventing Gun Violence?

     There seems to be widespread agreement that it would be best to keep guns out of the hands of those who are severely mentally ill. The problem is identifying those who are severely mentally ill. If only there were some government agency that had a database of people suffering from severe mental illness. I think I know of such a government agency. Social Security has a database of those who are drawing disability benefits and they are further identified in that database by primary diagnosis. I don't think that current Social Security policies allow data sharing for the purposes of keeping firearms out of the hands of those who are severely mentally ill but the Privacy Act has an exception that allows release of information for "law enforcement" purposes. Could that be interpreted to include gun background checks? I have heard nothing to suggest that the White House is considering the idea of using Social Security records to identify individuals who should not be allowed to buy guns. The idea may never be considered. It probably has drawbacks but I really don't like the idea of guns in the hands of schizophrenics.