In 1981, shortly after Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States, his administration sent letters to 485,000 Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) recipients stating that, after review, they were considered not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. These reviews did not include physical exams, just reexaminations of the files of SSDI recipients and, in a minority of cases, an in-person interview.
Of those cut off, 66% had SSDI benefits restored after challenging the determination. Of those represented by attorneys, 86% had benefits restored. The overwhelming majority of those who lost benefits did not return to work. They became dependent on local government aid programs and family.
Acknowledging the error of his ways, in 1984, President Reagan signed the Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act which required the government to prove an individual’s condition had improved before benefits could be terminated.
Reagan’s campaign for president coined the term “welfare queens” to describe mothers with children receiving government support. This attitude regarding benefits reform carried over to the SSDI program, although in the end, the program remained intact and was even improved by Congress in response to the Reagan Administration’s meddling.
Now, four decades later, the Trump Administration is considering issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (required by law) to inform the public that it will revisit the SSDI program. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the goal is a 20% reduction in the number of recipients over ten years. The Urban Institute’s analysis of the proposal indicates that even a 10% cut would mean 750,000 people would be denied benefits during that period.
About 80% of SSDI recipients are over 50. Older workers are least likely to be employed after benefits denials. The Social Security Act requires the government to consider the applicant’s age and education as the Social Security Administration (SSA) determines eligibility. If an applicant cannot engage in substantial gainful activity, i.e., work, they’re deemed eligible. It is a subjective, case-by-case determination. The least educated are the most likely to be eligible as they are the hardest to reemploy after disability. The country will likely reexperience the Reagan era results if the Trump Administration follows through with the SSDI cuts, despite campaign promises not to cut Social Security.
Ironically, from a political point of view, SSDI cuts would hurt Appalachia and Southern states the most despite their support for the President in the 2024 elections. The states with the highest percentages of workers retiring on SSDI are Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Maine. Aging, blue-collar workers who become too disabled to stay on the job are the reason why. Office workers are far less likely to qualify for SSDI than physical laborers because many can continue to work after the onset of disability.
The Administration has already cut 7,000 jobs at Social Security resulting in fewer staff serving fewer applicants and beneficiaries. Backlog has increased. Applicant waiting periods for eligibility determinations average eight months. Also, the Administration has imposed new restrictions on how people with disabilities can communicate with SSA, requiring in-person visits and less telephone availability, due to customer service staffing cuts.
The cuts being considered are controversial and the Administration has postponed issuing the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking as it considers the impact of Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cuts on SSA. People with disabilities and their advocates should stay alert for proposed changes and encourage their members of Congress to oppose additional cuts, restrictions and slowdowns.
Opinions expressed are solely those of the writer(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Able News at The Viscardi Center and/or The Viscardi Center.