Fellow disability attorney and blogger Charles Hall recently posted about likely upcoming changes to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program administered by Social Security. I thought readers of our blog might also be interested, and have summarized his comments here. Because income and resource requirements have not been adjusted for inflation in decades, it is widely agreed that things have to change. Simplification of SSI seems likely. According to the recent article in the Social Security Bulletin, change in the in-kind support and maintenance rules may be what to expect. Thanks to Charles Hall for providing the following excerpt from the article:
... [S]implifying policy on food or shelter support to recipients from family and friends is especially compelling. Current policy on such in-kind support requires that recipients answer detailed questions about household composition, household expenses, and any contributions from the recipient and members of the household toward household expenses. This detailed household information is collected not only for initial applications, but also when there are changes in address, household composition, or household expenses. Moreover, although this information is collected for most recipients, much of it is unverifiable. ... [T]here is a consensus among policymakers and program administrators that current SSI policies on in-kind support and maintenance (ISM) are complex, intrusive, and sometimes inequitable. In addition, these policies create a disincentive for families and friends who might otherwise increase food or shelter support to recipients. Finally, year-after-year ISM is shown to be a major source of payment error ...
Over the years, policymakers have evaluated several alternatives to ISM ... Of these alternatives, benefit restructuring has emerged as an interesting option because it simply eliminates all ISM-related benefit reductions, assuring program simplification. The benefit restructuring options considered here incorporate a cost neutrality constraint; that is, the cost of increasing benefits to recipients with ISM is fully offset by other benefit reductions. ...
Under benefit restructuring, benefit reductions for ISM recipients would be eliminated and, to offset the program cost increases, a smaller benefit reduction would be implemented for the large number of adult recipients who live with other adults.
Over the years, policymakers have evaluated several alternatives to ISM ... Of these alternatives, benefit restructuring has emerged as an interesting option because it simply eliminates all ISM-related benefit reductions, assuring program simplification. The benefit restructuring options considered here incorporate a cost neutrality constraint; that is, the cost of increasing benefits to recipients with ISM is fully offset by other benefit reductions. ...
Under benefit restructuring, benefit reductions for ISM recipients would be eliminated and, to offset the program cost increases, a smaller benefit reduction would be implemented for the large number of adult recipients who live with other adults.
Hi,
This one is a great article.
Thanks for sharing sir.
Posted by: Toy stores | March 31, 2009 at 11:38 PM