Disability Information & Resources

Help, Guidance, News & Tips on Social Security Disability Issues

Social Security Articles

Michigan Social Security Disability Backlog

Jun 7

Posted by Hal LaPray in Social Security Articles

When it comes to processing times of backlogged claims for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits, Michigan ranks one of the worst. Currently there are over 40,000 backlogged cases waiting to be processed and several thousands more awaiting appeals. Wait times of a year – or more – are not uncommon in Michigan.

Kelly Young was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at 34 and applied for SSDI benefits after being forced to quit her job in early 2009. Her claim was processed quickly, according to the Social Security Administration (SSA) norm – within just three months. Her initial claim was denied and Young had to employ an attorney to represent her in her appeal. Young and her husband had just depleted their savings account when she was finally approved for benefits just over a year from filing her initial claim.

Larry Cronin’s daughter Lindsay was born with a mental disability. When Lindsay turned eighteen, Larry applied for SSDI benefits on  her behalf so that his daughter would have some means to support herself once her parents were no longer able to. Lindsay’s claim was not only denied, but the SSA found that Lindsay wasn’t disabled at all and that there were still jobs she was able to perform so as to support herself by earning an income. It took three years and one appeal to finally get Lindsay approved for the SSDI benefits that she was entitled to.

The SSA acknowledges that the backlog of cases in Michigan is a serious problem, especially for applicants who have no other source of income or any life savings from which to sustain themselves in the interim. Michigan is taking some reactive steps to battle the backlog. So far, the state has opened additional hearing offices in Livonia and Mt. Pleasant and offering Michigan applicants the option of having their claims and appeals heard by administrative law judges in other state via video conferencing. In addition to these steps, Michigan is also considering reinstating a former policy that directed denied applicants right into the appeals process. Some SSDI attorneys and state representatives are opposing this suggestion , saying throwing so many in to the appeals process automatically may actually add to the backlog rather than allieivate it. No final decision has been made so far.

1 Comment

Proposed Law to Ensure Social Security Benefits for Same-Sex Couples

Apr 15

Posted by Hal LaPray in Disability News, Retirement, Social Security Articles, Survivors Benefits

Linda Sanchez (D-California) announced this week that she plans to introduce a bill that would ensure equality for same sex couples under Social Security’s benefit programs.  Rep. Judy Chu (D-California) offered to co-author the bill.

Linda Sanchez (D-California), plans to co-sponsor legislation that would help ensure equality in Social Security benefits for same-sex couples.

Linda Sanchez (D-California), plans to co-sponsor legislation that would help ensure equality in Social Security benefits for same-sex couples.

Sanchez made her announcement to a crowd of 700 supporters who had gathered at Hollywood’s Gay and Lesbian Center to kick off a grass-roots movement demanding equal rights for same-sex couples by the Social Security Administration (SSA). The rally, known as “Rock for Equality”, was organized by the center – in conjunction with the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the AIDS Community Action Foundation.

"Right now, same-sex marriage couples pay equally into a system that they don't receive equal benefits from in return"

Sanchez is a member of the House Subcommittee on Social Security and believes that same-sex couples are being unjustly and routinely denied Social Security benefits that are given freely to their heterosexual counterparts. Her bill would demand that the SSA recognize same-sex partnerships as they apply to the disbursement of survival benefits that heterosexual couples now receive. As it stands, gay and lesbian couples are not eligible for Social Security’s four main spousal benefits. These include retirement benefits, dependent disability benefits, survivor’s benefits and death benefits.

Research by UCLA’s Williams Institute suggests that there are currently one million same-sex couples in the United States. With the number of gay and lesbian taxpayers paying into the system, but not being eligible for benefits, the research estimates that over the course of the past decade, the gay and lesbian community lost $2 billion in benefits they should have qualified for by paying into a system that doesn’t recognize them. This equates to roughly $5,700 per survivor, per year.

“I don’t think it’s right that Americans should be treated differently by the country they love because of who they love,” Sanchez said. “Right now, same-sex marriage couples pay equally into a system that they don’t receive equal benefits from in return. Shame on this country for allowing that to happen.”

Although Sanchez’s proposed bill has a long way to go before becoming law, there is already a great amount of political support being shown in favor of the bill. California Senator Barbara Boxer attended the rally as well. Last month, the city of Los Angeles announced that it supports Social Security benefits for same-sex couples. Event organizers say that President Obama has voiced his opposition to Social Security discrimination for same-sex couples also. Representative Sanchez plans to seek more co-sponsors of the bill and will attempt to hold a hearing in the Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee, once the bill has been formally introduced.

1 Comment

SSI Recipients in Tennessee Losing Heath Care Benefits

Apr 13

Posted by Hal LaPray in Disability News, Personal Stories - Social Security Disability, Social Security Articles, Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Tennessee SSI Recipiects May Lose Health Care Coverage

Tennessee SSI Recipiects May Lose Health Care Coverage

Since January of 2009, Tennessee has withdrawn coverage for 100,000 residents who were insured through TennCare, Tennessee’s version of the Medicaid program. These cuts come on the heels of a resolution to a decade’s long court battle involving recipients of Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

TennCare’s eligibility guidelines have always stated that anyone who ever qualified for SSI would also qualify for medical coverage under their program. Due to rising costs and the state’s unstable financial situation, Tennessee wanted this provision overturned to withdraw health coverage from those who no longer qualified for SSI. In 1987, a class-action lawsuit involving SSI recipients was brought against the state. The lawsuit resulted in an injunction barring Tennessee from denying coverage under TennCare to all SSI recipients, both past and present.

"Here I am three-quarters of the way through getting well after two types of cancer and needing surgery and colon tests and CAT scans to see if the lymphoma's come back and here they cut me off. There's nothing I can do until I turn 65 now, except wait and hope I don't get sicker." - Thomas Moore, 64, Woodbury, Tennessee

The state argues that all SSI recipients should qualify for TennCare on their own, taking their current income and assets into consideration. This is the same process that applicants who have never received SSI have to go through to determine their eligibility. State officials say that assuring that everyone follows the same set of rules not only benefits those seeking assistance, but also reduces wasteful spending of state resources by ceasing to pay out benefits to people who clearly are not entitled to them.

TennCare’s spokesperson Kelly Gunderson maintains that SSI recipients are not being unfairly targeted. Gunderson said TennCare is only re-evaluating their eligibility based on income, which is the same process every other TennCare recipient must go through. If their household incomes qualify them for health coverage, they will receive it. However, Social Security is the very income that has put some TennCare recipients over the qualifying threshold in some cases.  Further, the vast majority of those losing TennCare benefits under the new ruling were receiving treatments for live-threatening conditions and are now being forced to discontinue those treatments due to lack of health coverage.

Jessica Pipkin is a Tennessee resident who lost the use of her limb in an accident five years ago. She requires 24 hour nursing care in her home, which was covered under TennCare until the recent ruling went into effect. Her husband makes $19,000 a year at his job. Her disability benefits are $14,400 per year. This combined income puts them well over the threshold to qualify for TennCare coverage, even though Pipkin’s care costs $37 per hour.

Thomas Moore, a 64 year old Tennessee resident and cancer survivor also had his health coverage dropped under the new ruling. In 2008, Moore began receiving SSI benefits because of a hip fracture, but was required by the state to move to the Social Security program when he reached the age of 62. The change in programs put his income at too high a level to qualify for TennCare coverage, which he subsequently lost. Moore was still undergoing follow up treatments for his cancer and had a hip surgery scheduled at the time he lost coverage.

3 Comments

Politicians Consider Capping Social Security Benefits

Apr 7

Posted by Hal LaPray in Disability News, Social Security Articles

In the wake of the massive increases to the national deficit brought on by changes made by the Obama Administration, many voters and politicians are wondering where the money to balance the scales between red and black is going to come from. This leaves some politicians eying the already troubled Social Security trust fund as the possible answer to this country’s deficit woes.

Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and various other social health programs combine to make up 40 percent of the federal budget. Under the current law, the budgets for these programs will increase. This means that the national deficit will also increase in the coming years. Politicians say there are two very hard choices they must make in order to get a handle on the ever-expanding deficit. Those choices are raising taxes on the rich and/or middle class or cutting the federally funded health care programs so that they cannot be expanded.

Erskine Bowles heads President Obama's Debt Reduction Commission

Erskine Bowles heads President Obama's Debt Reduction Commission

Erskine B. Bowles, the co-chair of President Obama’s Debt Reduction Commission, said: “As Senator Simpson and I have said all along, everything is on the table. No one has mentioned to me taking anything off the table.”  The Senator Simpson referred to is a former Republican senator from Wyoming, who along with Bowles, co-chairs the commission.

"As Senator Simpson and I have said all along, everything is on the table. No one has mentioned to me taking anything off the table."

Voters expressed their opposition to both in a recent poll conducted by Quinnipiac University. A panel of nearly two thousand registered voters was polled on their feelings for the proposed choices that politicians were prepared to make. Of those participating in the poll, more than seventy five percent opposed both options. Sixty percent say that the government should make increasing taxes on households making more than $250,000 a major component in reducing the deficit while seventy two percent stated that taxes should be raised on households making more than one million should be a major component in reducing the deficit.

Seventy six percent of poll participants agreed that cuts to Social Security and Medicare spending should not be the only way the government works to decrease the deficit. Forty two percent were in favor of a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes. However, fifty two percent of those stated that there should be more spending cuts than tax hikes in the combination-based solution to reducing the national deficit.

Whatever the final solution to the problem is, eighty four percent of those polled agreed that the middle class will have to make financial sacrifices in order to reduce the deficit. Four out of five participants are in favor of raising the taxes on the wealthiest in order to generate revenue. However, there are not enough households that fall into this tax bracket to have any real effect on reducing the deficit.

It will be interesting to watch how this unfolds in the coming years and to see which tax bracket was faced with the most tax hikes and financial sacrifices for the sake of reducing the national deficit.

No Comments

Laws Make Understanding Social Security Qualifying Process Difficult.

Apr 7

Posted by Hal LaPray in Social Security Articles, Social Security Disability, Social Security Disability Denials, Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Social Security laws are written in such a way that it is often confusing for disabled applicants to know whether they will qualify for benefits.

Social Security laws are written in such a way that it is often confusing for disabled applicants to know whether they will qualify for benefits.

The rules involving Social Security benefits are confusing at best. The Social Security Administration (SSA) denies sixty five percent of claims the first time they are filed. With so many different criteria to meet, regulations to follow and red tape to get tangled up in, it’s no surprise that most applicants resort to hiring an attorney to manage their application for them.

There are two types of benefits which a disabled person may apply for. One is for people who are recently disabled with a solid work history. The other is for people who do not have a recent work history or may not have accumulated enough qualifying “quarters”.

The first type of benefits are called Title II benefits (SSDI). These benefits are for people who have a recent work history and that have worked at least five of the past ten years. Each year is divided into four quarters so this means that in order to qualify for Title II benefits, a person must have worked for twenty of those forty quarters.

Disabled applicants who fall into this category are eligible to receive benefits for five years. During that time, their children are eligible to receive benefits on their behalf as well. The benefits for minor children will be one half of those awarded to the disabled parent. This amount increases to two thirds of the disabled parent’s benefits if the disabled parent dies while receiving benefits. Workers who qualify for benefits under the Title II guidelines will become eligible for Medicare two years from the onset of Social Security benefits.

The other kind of Social Security benefits is called Social Security Supplemental Income (SSI). In order to qualify for benefits under the SSI guidelines, the applicant must have very a limited income and very limited financial resources at their disposal. For a married couple, the value of their assets cannot exceed $3,000 – excluding necessities such as the home itself and vehicle. As of 2010, the maximum benefit amount for a person qualifying for SSI could receive is $674 per month. Under the umbrella of SSI benefits, there are no benefits granted to dependents or minor children.

If your original claim to the SSA for benefits has been denied, you are given sixty days in which to file for what is known as a “reconsideration”. This means you ask the SSA to reconsider your application for benefits, based on current information and any other new and supporting information you can provide. If turned down a second time, the SSA allows another sixty days for the filing of a second appeal.

No Comments