Skip to main content

Government Wants to Keep Your Disability Dollars

It seems everyone is loading up to take aim at the integrity of the Social Security disability program.  Senate investigations into Social Security are nothing new but usually they are held by the Senate Finance Committee.  NOSSCR's Social Security Forum reports in their September 2012 edition that on September 13 2012, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs held a 3 hour hearing on the quality of favorable disability decisions handed down by Administrative Law Judges. 

Here is what disturbs me about this "investigation":
  • The Senate subcommittee "investigated" only favorable decisions.  This reinforces the idea that Social Security's main focus is not making sure that everyone who deserves Social Security disability gets it; the main focus is making sure that nobody gets Social Security disability that isn't supposed to.
  • Rarely, if ever, does a government committee or subcommittee investigate unfavorable decisions--not even judges who deny 90 percent or more of all claims are investigated.
  • The minority report recommended that the government (Social Security) be represented during disability hearings.  Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) stated his support for a government representative (an attorney) at hearings.
If Social Security adopts the idea of placing a government attorney in Social Security disability hearings, it will not only drive up the cost of Social Security, it will fundamentally change the hearing process.  At present the hearings are non-adversarial.  You don't have two opposing attorneys with one arguing that the claimant should get Social Security disability while the other one argues that he should not.  If that changes then the entire procedure will become more complex, more difficult, more costly and more time consuming. 

Social Security disability award rates have already fallen dramatically over the past 12 months.  Apparently, the government has decided that they have not fallen enough.  Judges are being "retrained," pressured, prodded and now "investigated" for giving too many favorable awards to disabled claimants--for whom SSA disability is the only financial lifeline they have left.

If government lawyers are indeed placed in Social Security hearings, you can expect a much more active role of the federal district courts, which have jurisdiction at the next level of appeal after a hearing by an Administrative Law Judge.  If government attorneys direct more unfavorable hearing decisions, attorneys for the claimants will no doubt file more federal court challenges because that is their only recourse.  This will add up to 3 years of additional waiting for the claimant, in addition to the 18 months he/she has already waited just to get a hearing.

 Apparently, there are those in government who believe that administrative law judges with bleeding hearts are giving away Social Security awards wholesale.  They may be, but I'd like to meet one of them.  I haven't seen one yet!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

COMPLETING THE FUNCTION REPORT FOR SOCIAL SECURITY

Social Security analyzes a new claimant's ability to perform certain activities.  This helps them to decide whether the claimant is disabled according to their rules.  They use a form called "Function Report - Form SSA-3373-BK" or one very much like it.  Be careful how you answer the questions on this form.  Strive to be accurate but also descriptive.  Try to give a real picture of how your pain or other symptoms limit your daily activities--such as shopping, driving, doing housework, socializing, etc. Here are just a few of the questions on the Function Report, as samples of the type of information being collected from each applicant who files a new claim for benefits: Do you take care of anyone else such as a wife/husband, children, parents, friend, other?  ( If you do, and do not show that you have significant problems in doing so, Social Security may judge that you are quite able to perform other activity, like working). How often do you prepare f...
5 comments
Read more

JUDGE JUDY TIRADES ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY

Judge Judy Sheindlin has added her two cents worth to the controversy about Social Security.  Judge Judy appeared on a Fox News program hosted by Megan Kelly and said she was tired of people getting Social Security disability because they were "alcoholics and drug addicts," adding to the popular myth that SSDI is "going broke" because of dead beat drug users who refuse to work.  Fox News did nothing to set the record straight. The truth is that by law individuals cannot qualify for SSI or SSDI benefits based on either alcohol or drug addiction/abuse. In 1996, Congress passed Public Law ( P.L. ) 104-121—which terminated benefits for Supplemental Security Income ( SSI ) and Disability Insurance ( DI ) beneficiaries whose primary impairment was drug addiction, alcoholism, or both. As a result of the 1996 legislation, those individuals became ineligible for benefits, effective January 1, 1997. Social Security will currently not award benefits to persons becau...
Post a Comment
Read more

TAKE A HARD LOOK AT SOCIAL SECURITY BEFORE YOU FILE!

Considering a Social Security disability claim?  Take a hard look at it before deciding. If you have a choice, you probably don't need to apply. Some things to consider: 1.  It will probably not be an easy or short process.  It will take about 4 months to get your initial decision and 70% of those are denials.  If you must appeal, expect a wait time of an additional 18 months after you file the appeal.  So, you may be looking at 2 years or more in many cases. 2.  You will need good medical evidence.  If you have little or no evidence from a doctor, it isn't likely you will ever be approved. 3.  You cannot apply for SSDI while you are working and earning at least $1,170 a month.  This work will disqualify you.  Many people don't realize they will have to stop working to apply for SSDI.  That's why we say, "If you have a choice, you probably don't need to apply."  If working is an option, it's the best option. 4.  Th...
4 comments
Read more