Unpacking the SSI/SSDI Hearing for Caseworkers
One of the most frustrating parts of casework is seeing the same cases come up over and over again. But the recent House Ways and Means Committee Subcommittee on Social Security hearing focused on some of the most sticky, intractable problems of the SSI and SSDI programs. Today, we’ll recap that hearing, and flag some ways that caseworkers can contribute to similar hearings in your issue areas in the future.
Takeaways from the hearing
On November 2, 2023, the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security held a hearing examining the extensive backlogs in processing Social Security disability claims. The focus of the hearing was the extreme backlog in SSI and SSDI programs: currently, over 1 million Americans are waiting for initial decisions, and decisions take an average of 220 days for an initial decision, compared to the Social Security Administration's (SSA) goal of 60 days.
There was bipartisan consensus among Members that the disability claims process is severely broken and in need of significant improvements.
Multiple Members powerfully articulated the impact of these delays using statements or stories from their constituents who had experienced severe delays and/or inaccurate decisions in the SSI or SSDI process. For example, Chair Ferguson [R, GA] opened the hearing with a statement from a constituent whose condition (on the Compassionate Allowance list) had been denied, leaving her waiting fifteen months for back pay. Chair Ferguson noted that he wished that district staff could join the hearing to share stories of cases that caseworkers see every day.
Witnesses included staff from SSA, DDS services, disability rights organizations, and former SSA leadership. Their testimony touched on several main points:
Linda K. Davis (SSA Acting Assistant Deputy Commissioner)
Disability backlogs are mostly due to reduced staffing, difficulty hiring qualified examiners, and less access to medical evidence.
SSA has a plan to address backlogs through processing capacity, recruitment/retention, business process improvements, and upgraded IT systems.
Progress is being made but returning to pre-pandemic timeframes will take years and sustained resources.
Jacqueline Russell (National Council of Disability Determination Directors)
Disability examiners are adaptive and innovative but need consistent hiring authority to replace losses, as well as overtime access.
Better communications options like texting could improve interactions with claimants.
Allowing trained examiners decisional authority for certain cases could also increase efficiency.
With support from Congress, solutions can be realized to challenges like consistent hiring and improved communications that meet claimants' needs.
David Camp (National Organization of Social Security Claimants' Representatives)
Disability claims have declined significantly over the past decade, so the backlog is not just a budget issue.
Steps like eliminating reconsideration, allowing electronic filing, and letting representatives access more case data online could improve efficiency.
SSA should also stop relying on antiquated job data and classifications.
Jennifer Berdick (Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities)
Eliminating reconsideration would immediately help reduce backlogs.
Improved rules to ensure treating doctor evidence is prioritized would also streamline accurate decisions.
Mark Warshawsky (American Enterprise Institute)
Deterioration in service and morale at SSA is sudden and severe, and not solely budget related.
The complex, outdated disability determination rules need to be simplified, modernized and automated. A proposed regulation to achieve this was developed at SSA but remains unpublished.
Updating data systems and vocational criteria would significantly improve accuracy and speed for claimants.
Questions from the Members
Rep. Ferguson [R, GA]
Asked Ms. Russell how consistent hiring authority helps with retention (59:45)
Asked Mr. Camp about spending resources to bring in more claims when struggling with current claims (1:01:07)
Asked Ms. Davis why updating job classification data is taking so long (1:03:01)
Asked Ms. Russell and Mr. Camp about the discrepancy in approval rates between initial review and judges (1:07:24)
Rep. Pascrell [D, NJ]
Asked Ms. Davis what a 30% budget cut would do to customer service and backlogs (1:15:36)
Rep. Carey [R, OH]
Asked Dr. Warshawsky about reducing the look back period from 15 years to 5 years (1:20:43)
Rep. Sanchez [D, CA]
Asked Ms. Berdick how cuts to SSA's customer service budget would impact access to benefits (1:24:24)
Rep. Estes [R, KS]
Asked Ms. Russell how using outdated job classifications impacts processing times (1:31:02)
Asked Mr. Camp how outdated job classifications affect applicants (1:32:17)
Rep. Higgins [D, NY]
Asked Ms. Davis how much SSA requested in budget versus the President's request (1:38:46)
Rep. Kildee [D, MI]
Asked Ms. Berdick about the importance of the personal needs allowance for beneficiaries (1:56:37)
Rep. Evans [D, PA]
Asked Ms. Berdick about barriers faced by disability applicants (2:08:11)
Rep. Moore [R, UT]
Asked Ms. Davis about no longer allowing faxed applications (2:12:46)
Asked Mr. Camp and Mr. Warshawsky for ways SSA could improve the process with existing resources (2:14:36)
Rep. Byer [D, VA]
Asked Ms. Davis why SSA has not eliminated reconsideration (2:18:13)
Asked Ms. Berdick about eliminating the treating physician rule (2:19:12)
Asked Mr. Camp about attorneys' incentives related to claim timelines (2:20:28)
Asked Dr. Warshawsky who is responsible for updating disability determination rules (2:21:36)
Rep. Mast [R, FL]
Asked Ms. Davis to explain the hiring and retention challenges similar to private sector employers (2:06:32)
How to find relevant hearings
Confession time: we used Claude.AI to do most of the heavy lifting in the section above for us (NB: we used Claude instead of ChatGPT because for now, Claude has a larger token window to handle large amounts of text—like transcripts from a two hour hearing). For caseworkers who need to understand what is happening in these hearings but may not be able to devote the several hours to watch all the way through, these tools are great ways to easily pull a transcript, create summaries, and answer questions. The prompts we used to create the section above were loosely based on this guide from POPVOX Foundation Executive Director Marci Harris; some additional helpful prompts included requesting a list of Member questions with timestamps to organize the hearing into helpful chapters.
To stay up to date on hearings involving casework topics, you can review upcoming schedules for the House and Senate on House.gov and Senate.gov. We may be biased, but we think you should also consider subscribing to the First Branch Forecast, a weekly newsletter focused on the inner workings of Congress from our new team members at POPVOX Foundation (formerly based at Demand Progress).
Bringing casework expertise to oversight
Once you’ve identified an upcoming hearing in your issue area where your Member is on the right committee, how can you contribute from your subject matter expertise? The SSI/SSDI hearing points to a few options:
Be ready to flag relevant constituent stories
As Chair Ferguson demonstrated, having a story from a real person experiencing hardship is one of the most effective ways to identify problems and also make clear the stakes of a particular agency’s function. Casework is a great way to identify those stories. We have a short guide to sharing constituent stories while respecting constituent privacy here.
Consider drafting potential questions
If your Member is on the Committee, one of the primary duties of the legislative staffer in the committee’s portfolio will be to prepare questions for the Member to ask in a hearing. These questions can be asked live, or can be submitted in writing as a Question For the Record (QFR). QFRs are a great opportunity for the Member to go on record raising a systemic issue and to ask the agency to respond in writing. QFRs can typically be submitted within a prescribed window of time after the hearing. The casework team can suggest questions to their legislative counterparts, draft approval memos for the Member, and make a note to check back with the LA to see when the Member receives a response. QFRs can be a high-impact way for a Member to flag a casework concern, and the casework team can use its detailed knowledge of federal programs to develop questions that force agencies to look at their operations. The responses can then feed back into any future oversight or legislative activity.
For more, be sure to check out our guide to Legislation and Oversight for Caseworkers.
If your Member is not on the Committee, your options may be more limited. But don’t give up! You can still…
Help out your LA on this portfolio by sharing any notes you make for yourself on a relevant hearing.
Talk with your legislative team about submitting additional questions from the hearing directly to the witnesses—while it’s not common, these may be submitted as part of the official record by a sitting member of the Committee later.
Use the opportunity of the hearing to work with your comms team to issue any relevant PSAs about agency policy, or flag your boss’s sign-on to relevant legislation.
Make friends with offices whose Members are on the Committee to discuss collaborating on oversight or legislation—this is good practice under any circumstances!
