Today's debate: Social Security

Getting approval grows harder Big jump in disability rolls shows need for changes ‘ A vital lifeline for citizens’

Certain things can cause someone to become disabled — a chronic illness, for example, or an accident. One thing that should not cause people to be categorized as disabled is a recession.

But that appears to be happening with Social Security Disability Insurance, the 1950s- era expansion of the program best known for paying retirement benefits. In 2007, 8.9 million people were on disability. Now that number is 10.7 million, a 20% jump in just five years.

While non- economic factors account for part of the increase — including a previous backlog of applicants and an aging population — the linkage between the rising disability rolls

is impossible

8.9

9.3 and the Great Recession to ignore.

So, too, is the boom in law firms specializing in getting people disability benefits. The system is so inefficient that applicants commonly have to wait two years for a decision, prompting them to hire lawyers. Those lawyers typically are paid a percentage of the backpay successful applicants get to cover the time between their claim and the decision. This gives the lawyers a potent incentive to drag the process out, to the detriment of everyone but themselves.

Social Security disability was meant to help those desperately in need, and presumably swiftly. It was never meant to be a continuation of unemployment benefits.

So what to do? One approach might be to tighten the rules for qualifying. The current definition of disability appears to be fairly tough: Applicants must show that their condition renders

’ 07

’ 08

’ 09

Social Security Disability Insurance remains a vital lifeline for citizens who once held full- time jobs but have become too ill or injured to work. It is a time- honored expression of our nation’s commitment to help care for those who must stop working due to illness or injury. While any large government program will have problems — and Social Security is no exception — we should work on fixing the problems and not join the current rush to condemn an entire system because of rare instances of abuse or mounting political pressures to cut federal spending.

As an attorney who has spent more than 34 years helping thousands of Social Security applicants, let me be clear that getting disability approval is harder than ever. Undocumented pain, alcoholism and drug abuse have been disqualified. Mental retardation and HIV standards are tougher. Diabetes and obesity are no longer distinct disabilities. Illegal immigrants are now disqualified. Applicants must now present objective medical evidence of disability. This is no rubberstamp process.

Moreover, it

is a misrepresentation to claim them unable to work, makes them unable to adjust to other work, and is expected to last at least a year or be terminal.

But the data suggest that this definition has considerable wiggle room. A White House study found a progression of people who had lost jobs, received unemployment benefits for as long as they could, and then qualified for disability.

Another approach would be to reshape the application review process. The current system delegates the initial screening to state agencies, with an appeal process handled by administrative law judges.

The appeals phase appears to be particularly problematic. In recent years, judges have been overturning the initial rejection at rates of about 60%. Their decisions vary wildly from region to region and judge to judge. A few judges approve virtually all the cases they hear — making them equivalent of “easy A” professors.

Beyond these get- tough approaches, some outside experts favor financial incentives for companies to retain minimally disabled people on their payrolls. Another reasonable idea is to create a category of disability that must be renewed after a few years to cover people with conditions that might improve.

Whatever the plan, something must be done about swelling disability rolls. The trend is unsustainable. The disability fund, which is financed by a 0.9% tax on employees and employers, has been running an annual deficit since 2005 and is set to exhaust its reserves by 2018.

A recovering economy would help ease the crunch. So would reforms that make the system less of a burden on taxpayers, and make the process swifter and fairer for the people who truly deserve to receive benefits. That would be a win for everyone.

9.7

10.2 10.71

’ 10

’ 11 that there is a surge in unemployed applicants looking to get on the public dole. Applications have increased due to social, medical and economic mega- trends ( such as more insured women and aged workers).

Yes, today’s Social Security Disability Insurance system is huge, complex, costly and certainly imperfect. But it deserves to be improved, not scorned. Claimants’ representatives play an important role by discouraging frivolous applications and assisting those who can prove disability navigate a daunting and often confusing bureaucracy.

The road to restoring Social Security to full health is not to conduct a witch hunt for the rare but inevitable undeserving claimants or deficient judges, but through sensible measures such as giving more help to people with disabilities who want to work, giving employers incentives to hire them, and upgrading the gathering and delivery of medical treatment and information.

Tough times can bring out the best in people. Let’s not let our frustration over a lousy economy cause us to turn on those who are most in need. Let’s improve a system that reflects the true spirit of American compassion.

Charles Martin, a Decatur, Ga.- based attorney, is president of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants' Representatives.