Library Collections: Document: Full Text

Because, by definition the claimants for SSI are in immediate need, it was felt that some kind of help should be available without the long wait that could accompany a decision, or the 5-month waiting period required for title II benefits. An emergency advance of $100 against future benefits may be made for a claimant who is presumptively eligible. Presumptive determinations of eligibility for 3 months may be made; after that time -- a final determination must be made. By regulation, a district Social Security Office may make a presumption of disability only if the claimant meets certain strict criteria of a medical nature. The State offices have more latitude in such decisions.

The Secretary of HEW is to provide for referral of disabled or blind SSI recip-ients to State rehabilitation agencies at least quarterly for reevaluation of disability and vocational rehabilitation services, except in such cases that he determines such action would be nonproductive. The recipient must accept such services if he is to remain eligible for payments. The Federal Government is to pay the State agency for such services received by the title XVI recipient.

Public Law 93-66 (july 1973)

This law changed a number of provisions of the title XVI, supplemental security income for the aged, blind, and disabled including raising the payment level from $130 to $140 for an individual and from $195 to $2 10 for a couple, effective July 1974; and requiring that the supplementation of Federal pay-ments by the States be made mandatory for recipients transferred from Federal-State programs. The States, in order to receive medicaid (title XIX) funds, must supplement, the Federal recipients' benefits to bring them up to the recipi-ents' December 1973 payment level. The Congress did not feel that a recipient should be penalized because the APTD program was federalized. Therefore, it enacted this provision to assure that no State APTD recipient would receive less than his State APTD payment under the Federal plan.

Social Security Amendments of 1973 (Public Law 93-233) (December 1973)

In 1973 the Congress became concerned over what it felt was an effort, at least in some States, to reduce their AFDC (aid to families with dependent' children) cost at the expense of the Federal Government by moving AFDC mothers to APTD so they would be grandfathered in under SSI. The Senate Finance Commit tee report on legislation, aimed at curtailing this practice, stated :

New York City is apparently hastily examining all AFDC care-taker relatives for disability in order to place the maximum number on aid to the disabled. An article appearing in the New York Times of September 24, 1973, indicated that 65 percent of the first 10,000 welfare mothers screened were found to have severe disabilities. New York City plans of test 250,000 welfare mothers in a ten-week period. This transfer of AFDC mothers to APTD would shift the cost from the Federal-State AFDC program to the Federal SSI program, with higher Federal and lower State costs.-39-

-39- S. Rept. No. 529, 93d Cong., p. 25.

In order to prevent this transfer, Congress enacted a provision which would allow State APTD recipients to be grandfathered into SSI only if they were on the State rolls at least one month prior to July 1973 and were still on the rolls as of December 1973.

Because of the rise in the cost of living, it was decided to make the increases in SSI monthly payments of $140 for an individual and $210 for a couple, pro-vided by Public Law 93-66 effective January 1974. In addition, SSI benefits would be increased to $146 for an individual and $219 for a couple, effective July 1, 1974.

Public Law 93-256 (March 1974)

This law extends from March to December 1974 or until a redetermination of disability is made, whichever occurs first, the authority of the Social Security Administration to pay benefits to these former APTD recipients whose eligibility for SSI benefits could not be determined within the prescribed time limits, under the provision authorizing payments for presumptive disability for 3 months. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare estimated that by the end of March there would still be about 150,000 to 200,000 people whose eligibility would not yet have been decided. As the Committee on Ways and Means report states:

Your committee has been advised by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare that it is very likely that a substantial majority of the people subject to suspension of payments will ulti-mately be found to be eligible. . .Your committee is naturally concerned about the harsh and unjust effect of such a suspension? -40-

-40- H. Rept. 871, 93d Cong., p. 2.

In addition, the Senate Finance Committee report stated that:

While the Committee agrees that due care must be exercised so as to reach correct determinations it expects that those determinations will be made as promptly as possible, consistent with that objective and that the Social Security Administration will assure that the disa-bility determination units do not give these cases lowest priority simply because payments can be made on the basis of presumptive disability through December 1974. The committee emphasizes the importance of establishing stable precedents for disability determina-tion which will have important consequences for the nature of the administration of the social security and SSI programs in future years. -41-