(WSJ) Insolvency Looms as States Drain U.S. Disability Fund

The SSDI is set to soon become the first big federal benefit program to run out of cash””and one of the main reasons is U.S. states and territories have a large say in who qualifies for the federally funded program. Without changes, the Social Security retirement fund can survive intact through about 2040 and Medicare through 2029. The disability fund, however, will run dry in four to seven years without federal intervention, government auditors say.

In addition to the uneven selection process, SSDI has been pushed to the brink of insolvency by the sour economy. A huge wave of applicants joined the program over the past decade, boosting it from 6.6 million beneficiaries in 2000 to 10.2 million in 2010. New recipients have come from across the country, with an 85% increase in Texas over 10 years and a 69% increase in New Hampshire.

Over the years, Puerto Rico’s dependence on SSDI has grown particularly stark, exacerbated by the closure of factories and U.S. military installations, an exodus of skilled workers and a number of corruption scandals.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Economics, Politics, Economy, Politics in General, State Government, The Credit Freeze Crisis of Fall 2008/The Recession of 2007--, The U.S. Government

6 comments on “(WSJ) Insolvency Looms as States Drain U.S. Disability Fund

  1. Br. Michael says:

    It’s time to let Puerto Rico become a separate nation. As far as the military installation is concerned, they are the one who wanted that closed down.

  2. David Keller says:

    SSDI is a boondoggle. It is something that needs to be seriously looked at. Based on my anecdotal observations of 30 years of law practice my estimate of SSDI recipienets is 1/3 are total frauds, 1/3 could work in some capacity, at least at minimum wage, and 1/3 are actually disabled. The standards were somewhat tightened under Bush but have been rexaled under Obama–big surprise there.

  3. In Texas says:

    I took three years and a hearing before a judge to finally have my wife declared permanently disabled. My wife has MS, and she meets more than one of the requirments to be declared disabled. Her lawyer said that if you are under 55, not a drug addict, a quadraplegic, or weigh 400 lbs, one had to go through this process.

  4. lostdesert says:

    Ponzi scheme run by Saul Alinsky socialists determined to ruin the work ethic of the US. Obama health care declares 26 year olds under the care of their parents – at the height of their hard working ability – the state makes the CHILDREN again. Good bye to the things that made this nation great.

  5. Teatime2 says:

    #3 — Well, I have to respectfully disagree and I’m in Texas, too. I don’t meet any of your criteria (except for being under 55) and I was approved rather quickly. Of course, I was ill for many years, went back to school and changed professions, repeatedly modified my work, and, by the time I applied, had 14 diagnoses and no way of being able to continue working. I worked until I was in utterly horrible shape and had tried every available med./treatment.

    #4 — So you think that people like myself and In Texas’ wife should just starve or perhaps be put into homes run by charities because we’re too sick to work? SSD is a godsend to those of us who were once productive citizens but, through no fault of our own, can no longer work.

    I despise those who defraud the system. And I think that SSI, which hands out money to addicts and others who haven’t worked, needs to be dissolved or, at least, severely overhauled. But to dismiss SSD in the way you did is cruel. I’m not a “child” — I’m a woman who was stricken with serious illnesses in the prime of her life and who struggles with depression because I hate feeling dependent, weak, and useless.

  6. David Keller says:

    #3–You make my point. Quadriplegics are usually totally disbaled (though not always–Stephen Hawking comes to mind). But why should we foot the bill for drug addicts and 400 pounders? Of course, we shouldn’t.