Jun 1, 2023

Debt Limit Bill Passes House Of Representatives

     The bill to increase the debt limit passed the House of Representatives yesterday. It would force a slight decrease in "non-defense discretionary" spending. That's only a relatively small portion of federal spending but it includes Social Security's administrative budget. If you consider inflation, which may be around 5% now, agencies affected can expect a significant decrease in operating funds. Exactly how much each agency in the "non-defense discretionary" category receives will be determined in the appropriations process that lies ahead. While we can hope that the Social Security Administration fares better than other agencies, the reality is that it has been disfavored in recent years, receiving less than most other agencies in the "non-defense discretionary" category.

     The projected cut in operating funds for Social Security probably won't be across the board. I am attaching a page from the debt limit bill. My guess is that the language about continuing disability reviews is intended to make sure that the Social Security Administration has more and more to spend on CDRs even though its appropriation otherwise will go down. Does anyone know whether there's more going on?

Click on image to view full size


May 31, 2023

Debt Limit Extension Bill Would Apply Food Stamps Work Requirements To Those Applying For Social Security Disability Benefits

    From Pamela Herd writing on Substack:

...  SNAP [commonly known as Food Stamps] is a critical safety valve for people trying to access Social Security Disability programs — for which delays in benefit receipt can extend into years. The expansion in work requirements for this age group [as part of the debt limit extension bill just agreed to by the President and the Speaker of the House] seems innocuous, but they are highly consequential. Even those who dislike work requirements don’t fully understand the ramifications. ...

But wait!  Aren’t disabled people excluded from the work requirements?

Yes, but this is where administrative burdens matter. In order to prove you are disabled, you must become eligible for Social Security Disability, either Social Security Disability Insurance or Supplemental Security Income. But this process takes significant amounts of effort and time. ...

The net result is that it can take years to prove disability in order to access either SSDI or SSI, as well as now prove that you can’t meet the work requirements for SNAP. 

And the wait times have been steadily increasing. Between 2014 and 2022, average wait times rose from 106 days to 183 days. The average beneficiary now waits six months to access their benefit, and *prove* their disability.  ...


May 30, 2023

Hearing On Identity Fraud

     Last Wednesday the House Social Security Subcommittee held a hearing on the Social Security Administration's role in preventing identity fraud. Below in the witness lineup:

Mr. Sean Brune
Deputy Commissioner for Systems and Chief Information Officer, Social Security Administration
Witness Statement

Ms. Katie Wechsler
Co-Executive Director, Consumer First Coalition
Witness Statement

Ms. Margaret Hayward
Private citizen and mother of three
Witness Statement

Mr. Robert Roach
President, Alliance for Retired Americans
Witness Statement

Mr. Jeffrey Brown
Deputy Assistant Inspector General, Office of Audits, Office of the Inspector General, Social Security Administration
Witness Statement

May 29, 2023

May 28, 2023

NADE Newsletter

      The National Association of Disability Examiners (NADE), an organization of the personnel who make initial and reconsideration determinations on Social Security disability claims, has issued its Spring 2023 newsletter. There’s information about a couple of meetings they’ve had with agency officials.

May 26, 2023

Unhappy ALJs

      Some of Social Security’s Administrative Law Judges really don’t like that Washington Post piece on all the federal court remands of their decisions. Take a look at what they have to say.

May 25, 2023

Social Security Faring Poorly In Federal Court

     Lisa Rein at the Washington Post has written an article on how frequently Social Security loses when denied disability claimants appeal their cases to federal court. Here are a few snippets:

  • In the last two fiscal years, federal judges considering appeals for denied benefits found fault with almost 6 in every 10 cases and sent them back to administrative law judges at Social Security for new hearings — the highest rate of rejections in years, agency statistics show. ... The scathing opinions have come from district and appellate court judges across the political spectrum, from conservatives appointed by President Ronald Reagan to liberal appointees of President Barack Obama.
  • The high rate of rejections for cases handled by administrative law judges and the attorneys who write their decisions is driven by stringent monthly quotas set by Social Security officials and growing pressure to deny more cases, according to current and former officials, audits and attorneys who represent the disabled. The agency’s policies have been reshaped to give less deference to the expertise of doctors who, in some cases, have treated claimants for years, and its policies routinely depart from federal appellate court rulings. ... Social Security has stacked the cards against the approximately 2 million people each year who apply for help when they can no longer work.
  • Social Security has also tilted the scales in recent years away from key medical evidence, critics say, in another sign of the shift toward granting fewer claims. While administrative law judges once based much of their decision on evidence from primary care doctors or psychiatrists who best understood their patients’ medical issues, that policy changed in 2017. Now judges are free to disregard the opinions of these treating physicians and rely heavily instead on contracted doctors who examine claimants for as little as 15 minute.
  • Less weight is given to certain musculoskeletal conditions, for example. IQ tests that show mental impairments do not automatically grant benefits.