Changes Scheduled in Social Security Disability Benefits
WASHINGTON, Sept. 28- Sweeping changes could be in the pipeline for disabled persons seeking Social Security benefits under legislation aimed at improving the process for determining who qualifies for aid.
“I did not assume the position of commissioner of Social Security to manage the status quo,” Jo Anne Barnhart, who brought the proposed changes to the Hill, told the House ways and means committee on Monday.
Developing the proposal has been a meticulous two-year process. Barnhart has attended more than 123 meetings, many with disability advocates and other interested groups. She also consulted legal and medical professionals and Social Security agency employees. A Web site, with a comment section available until Oct. 25, was set up to allow public participation in the process. So far, more than 800 individuals have chimed in with their two cents.
Representative Nancy Johnson (R-CT), who sits on the ways and means committee, believes “there should be fair, accurate and timely disability determinations,” said Brian Schubert, her spokesman. “She is pleased the commissioner has made this issue a priority.”
The most significant changes under consideration seek to streamline the determination process. Barnhart said the new process would be more transparent and holds officials to a higher standard of accountability. Gaps in the system that allow for overpayment and fraud should tighten, she said. Among the recommendations:
Establish a quick disability determination process for the obviously disabled, with claims going directly to special units at the state level.
Create federal expert units to provide specialized medical and vocational advice to improve determinations.
Establish federal reviewing officials to review State agency determinations at the request of claimants.
• Require administrative law judges to provide a written rationale for their decisions; Barnhart said claimants currently receive an up-or-down “boilerplate” determination.
• Move the Social Security Administration from paper to an electronic file system to improve accuracy and efficiency in the determination process as well as improve distribution of benefits-especially in widespread crisis situations, according to Barnhart.
But some critics worry that streamlining would remove important safeguards for claimants. “We strongly support changes to the process so long as they do not affect the fairness of the procedures used to determine a claimant’s entitlement to benefits,”Thomas Sutton, president of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, told the committee.
Some changes are positive, Sutton said, but others may “elevate speed of adjudication above accuracy of decision-making.”
Changes to time limits were another point of contention. For example, the new program would require a claimant to submit evidence at least 20 days before a hearing. Evidence submitted after this deadline would be included at the discretion of an administrative law judge.
“Closing the record before the hearing is inconsistent with the Social Security Act,” Sutton argued. The law affords claimants the right to a decision based on evidence presented at the hearing, he said. Under current regulations, claimants may submit new evidence at the hearing.
If the proposed rules changes are adopted, one of the 10 Social Security Administration regions would be chosen as a pilot site. Reforms would then be phased in by region, Barnhart said. This would allow the administration to easily monitor progress and make changes, she said. But that means benefits would probably not reach all regions for several years. Barnhart said that next April would be a feasible starting date.
