. . . but I will. From just over a year ago.
A year ago, just short of 9 million individuals were receiving Social Security disability compensation. Five months ago, that number was up to around 11 million.
The number just keeps on climbing. At the end of August, per the Social Security Administration the number of individuals receiving Social Security disability payments was just over 14 million.
The program also appears rife with fraud. It looks like about half of all newly approved claims actually are bogus under Federal law – just like a year ago. (Federal law regarding Social Security Disability compensation requires that the individual be unable to perform work of any type to be eligible for payment.) It appears the same could easily be true of about half of all such Social Security disability claims, period.
It’s now costing Uncle Sam more to pay Social Security Disability benefits than it does to run the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, and the Labor Department – combined. The annual outlay for Social Security Disability payments is now approximately $135 billion.
Apparently CBS has now finally figured out the above. So it’s not just the conservative part of the blogosphere that’s noticing the issue any more.
Yes, some people are so physically or mentally “messed up” that they legitimately rate Social Security disability payments. But IMO, a huge fraction of the recipients appear to be using the program as nothing more than an undeserved, alternate form of permanent unemployment compensation. Further, in many cases it seems they’re being aided and abetted in what appears to be blatant fraud by compliant Social Security officials – and by lawyers who in some cases end up getting paid literally millions by the Social Security Administration.
The Social Security Disability “Insurance” Fund is in absolutely horrible financial shape. As you might expect, it’s in far worse shape than the rest of Social Security.
For the Social Security disability program, the proverbial “well” runs dry in 3 years, give or take; some sources estimate the fund will be exhausted in as little as 18 months. So I’m guessing we can look forward to another push to raise Social Security taxes yet again some time in the next 3 years.
NHSparky: dunno. I folded my copy in half and used it as a placemat to keep the floor clean when giving the cats a snack. I didn’t catch the date. (smile)
Alberich: I’ll defer to your knowledge of SSDI regs based on your prior employment. However, assuming what you say is accurate, those regs appear to disregard the plain language of Federal law.
Here’s the continuation of 42 USC § 423(d). The “paragraph (1)(A) referenced is the one I quoted in comment 12 above:
“(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(A)—
(A) An individual shall be determined to be under a disability only if his physical or mental impairment or impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy, regardless of whether such work exists in the immediate area in which he lives, or whether a specific job vacancy exists for him, or whether he would be hired if he applied for work. For purposes of the preceding sentence (with respect to any individual), “work which exists in the national economy” means work which exists in significant numbers either in the region where such individual lives or in several regions of the country.
(B) In determining whether an individual’s physical or mental impairment or impairments are of a sufficient medical severity that such impairment or impairments could be the basis of eligibility under this section, the Commissioner of Social Security shall consider the combined effect of all of the individual’s impairments without regard to whether any such impairment, if considered separately, would be of such severity. If the Commissioner of Social Security does find a medically severe combination of impairments, the combined impact of the impairments shall be considered throughout the disability determination process.
(C) An individual shall not be considered to be disabled for purposes of this subchapter if alcoholism or drug addiction would (but for this subparagraph) be a contributing factor material to the Commissioner’s determination that the individual is disabled. ”
What this plainly says is if the guy/gal is physically and mentally able to work as a receptionist, a cashier, in a fast-food restaurant, as a WalMart greeter, as a telemarketer, a janitor, or whatever – they do not qualify for SSDI. All that matters is that the individual be physically and mentally qualified to do some kind of useful work available at a job that exists in “several regions of the country”.
WalMart exists in “several regions of the country”. Ditto janitorial jobs, receptionists, telemarketers, etc . . . . People have to relocate due to changes in the local employment situation all the time. Lack of local employment is not a reason to ignore Federal law regarding SSDI – which IMO is precisely what the Social Security regs you discussed above are doing.
What we have here IMO is a bureaucratic rule that essentially rewrites Federal law – and in the process, invalidates it. Rather than interpreting the law, that regulation seems to completely ignore the clearly-stated intent of the governing Federal law. In fact, such regs would seem to flatly contradict the plain language of Federal law.