"RECONSIDERATION" RAVAGES DISABILITY CLAIMANTS

Prior to March 2020, 10 states allowed denied Social Security disability claims to go directly to an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for a hearing.  The other 40 states required a process called "Reconsideration" first, where the denied claim goes back to the same office that denied it for a second "review" or "reconsideration."  Starting October 1, 2019, Alabama became one of states that requires "Reconsideration" before an appeal to a judge.  By March 2020, all 50 states and Puerto Rico require the "Reconsideration process."

The US Government performed an audit of the "Reconsideration" process to see how it effects Social Security claimants.  Here is that audit:

In 2015, 616,917 claims were denied. at Reconsideration.  Of that number, 86,400 (14 percent) gave up and did not take any further action, receiving no benefit.  530,500 (86 percent) appealed and went to a hearing before a judge.  Of these 530,500 claimants who went to a judge 290,000 (55 percent) were awarded benefits.

Note that the government saved money on the 86,400 claimants who gave up after "Reconsideration" and filed no further appeal.

How much does "Reconsideration" delay getting benefits?  In 2018, it took 79 days longer for a claimant to receive an award (approval) in states that used "Reconsideration."  In total, it took an average of 924 days to get an award in states using "Reconsideration.

So, this process makes the claimant wait an additional 79 days.  "Reconsideration" issues the wrong decision 55 percent of the time.

Why has the government required all 50 states to use this process?

The audit answers the question:  It saves the government money.  It will save $3.9 billion over a 10-year period (2019 - 2028),

A majority of that savings will result from the 14 percent of claimants who drop out or die after being denied at "Reconsideration" and file no further appeal.  So, it's all about saving money.

Based on this audit, the government fully knows that "Reconsideration" takes longer and results in incorrect decisions 55 percent of the time; yet, it has actively required the 10 states that did not use the stinking process to adopt it.  It saves money.

If you or I had a business operation that we knew made serious mistakes 55 percent of the time, on operations essential to our mission, and added 79 days to getting our job done, what would we do?  We would either change quickly or go out of business.  However, Social Security saves billions of dollars by with their ineptitude, according to the government audit.

It's difficult not to believe that the Social Security Administration is saving $3.9 billion because they know 14 percent of individuals making claims against them will die or quit after they are denied at "Reconsideration," although there is a 55 percent chance they could get benefits if they stuck to it and went to a judge. 

It is difficult for me not to see "Reconsideration" as a delaying process that eliminates a large portion (14%) of the claimant pool before getting to the place where an award can be made.

Instead of requiring the 10 states that did not use "Reconsideration" to start using it, Social Security should have required the 40 states that did use it to stop.  Again, if I owned 50 businesses and 10 of them were 55 percent less efficient than the other 10, what would I do?  I would try to make the 40 conform to the 10, not the other way around.

  "Reconsideration" should be eliminated.

I practiced in Alabama for years when we did not have "Reconsideration."  I can tell you that in every way, it has resulted in nothing but an unnecessary burden on disabled claimants, who are already burdened enough.  They wait 79 days longer for a decision than they should, and in 55 cases out of 100, the decisions they finally get are incorrect--denying benefits when they should have paid them.