Patent Applied For

     From United States Patent Application 20150242818:

A computerized system and method for determining eligibility for social security disability insurance benefits (SSDI) through a computer network. The network provides access to State databases containing information relating to persons receiving treatment for developmental disabilities and/or mental illness from a State licensed care facility and Federal Social Security records containing information relating to person's status of SSDI benefits and parental/marital information relating to person's eligibility of SSDI benefits. The system and method is programmed to automatically determine who is potentially eligible for SSDI benefits and determine those who are eligible for SSDI benefits based on the information identified within the State and Federal databases. Moreover, the computerized system and method may also automatically identify lump sum payments paid out on behalf of at least one person who is/are receiving treatment for disabilities and/or mental illness from a State licensed care facility.

Social Security Disability Insurance at Age 60: Does It Still Reflect Congress' Original Intent?

     Paul O'Leary, Elisa Walker, and Emily Roessel of Social Security's Office of Retirement and Disability Policy have written an article titled Social Security Disability Insurance at Age 60: Does It Still Reflect Congress' Original Intent? I won't hold you in suspense. Their answer is "Yes." 

     Having looked at the legislative history of Disability Insurance Benefits, I'd have to say that it's impossible to answer the question. The program now is dramatically different than when it started but those differences have to do with amendments to the Social Security Act rather than anything to do with its administration. Sixty years ago there weren't even any cash benefits, for goodness sake! Of course, it's changed.

Friday News Dump

     Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued a progress report on Social Security's national computer center. This is a very expensive project to replace Social Security's current data processing center. There has been a controversy over whether it's really needed.

     OIG has labeled the report as "Limited Distribution" and has issued only a very brief summary to the public. They're keeping most of it secret. The report, such as it is, has been released on the Friday before Labor Day. Why?
     Let me just mention that a Republican was Commissioner of Social Security when the national computer center was being planned and when construction started. Republicans on Capitol Hill were the biggest proponents of a national computer center. I don't think Social Security's Inspector General, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, has ever raised any question about the wisdom of creating a national computer center even though OIG has done many studies of the national computer center over the years. I don't think this is a partisan problem but if it is, it's a problem primarily created by Republicans.

Work Incentives Don't Matter Much

    The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) has issued a report on benefit offset proposals for Social Security's disability programs. To vastly oversimplify, claimants can now work for a year and earn as much as they can before their cash benefits are completely cut off. This is often referred to as a cliff. The idea would be to replace this cliff with a ramp. Benefits would be gradually reduced by earnings from employment instead of being suddenly cut off altogether. There are several proposals for how this ramp would work. CBPP's report shows that any benefit offset program would be problematic. CBPP is skeptical of any benefit offset proposal. 

     I think the current system is so ridiculously complicated that a change to a benefit offset system would be a good idea. There would certainly be problems with a benefit offset system but those problems are far less than the problems we have now. I don't think that CBPP comprehends just how difficult it is to administer the current system. I suppose those practical problems don't matter to you if you're sitting in a think tank in D.C. and never have to deal with implementing the preposterous mess we have now.

     The far more important point in the CBPP report is that anyone who thinks that tinkering with work incentives is going to save money doesn't understand the problem. It doesn't matter what work incentives are implemented, very few Social Security disability recipients will return to work.
     The belief that tinkering with work incentives could save a lot of money arises out of persistent confusion about who is drawing Social Security disability benefits. Here are the misconceptions:

• Many people visualize Social Security disability recipients as having health problems that will get better over time when, in fact, very few do get better. The vast majority get worse as time goes along. You have to have been or be predicted to be disabled for at least a year to get on benefits. If you've got something wrong with you that's going to disabled you that long, it's almost certain to disable you for the rest of your life.
• Many people think it's not too hard to get on Social Security disability benefits so many who get on benefits could work if they really wanted to. They just need appropriate incentives. Actually, it's incredibly difficult to get on Social Security disability benefits. Few people who get on benefits have any realistic hope of returning to regular, sustained employment.

    None of us want to think we'll become disabled. We're too strong, too hard-working for that to happen to us. That happens to other people. You know, those lazy people who don't want to work. You know who they are. We're not like them. No, if we get sick, we'll get better and we'll be back at work. It would take something catastrophic to disable us. If that happened, we're certainly not have any problems with Social Security and no one would think we'd ever be able to go back to work.  I get a lot of clients who used to think like this. In fact, they still think like this despite their problems getting on Social Security disability benefits. They think that their problems with Social Security are just some weird fluke. But, of course, disability won't happen to us. No, that happens to other people. You know who they are.

NCSSMA Newsletter

     The National Council of Social Security Management Associations (NCSSMA), an organization of Social Security management personnel has issued its September 2015 newsletter. The newsletter lists NCSSMA's legislative proposals:

1. Eliminate SSI Dedicated Accounts
2. Eliminate the SSI Holding Out Provisions among Couple 
3. Streamline Worker’s Compensation Offset

     No, I don't know how they want to streamline the workers compensation offset.

Reality Check

"The Ticking Time Bomb" Of Social Security Disability

     Harold Pollack has a lengthy article in The Atlantic on what he refers to as "the ticking time bomb" of Social Security disability. It's a more sophisticated article than most. However, Pollack clearly spent a lot of time listening to right wing advocates who are on the payrolls of insurance companies. I don't understand why anyone would think that forcing individuals or their employers to purchase private disability insurance would be a plausible solution for anything. Honestly, I can't understand why the insurance companies think it makes business sense to invest even small amounts of money on a proposition whose adoption is so wildly improbable.

     Anyway, here are two interesting graphs from the article.

The Mess Left Behind By Eric Conn

One minor point: The reason that attorneys cannot get fees for representing claimants at these upcoming hearings isn't that Conn already got the maximum fee. The problem is that these claimants are still receiving benefits. No back benefits accrue from which an attorney can obtain a fee.