Graham: Social Security Trustees Overstate Economic Growth

The headline of Jed Graham's Investors Business Daily piece -- "Why The Social Security Trustees Can't Be Trusted" -- is over the top, but he hits at an interesting question: Do the Trustees' projections for Social Security's financing health rely on excessively optimistic assumptions regarding economic growth?

In the past they've been accused of being excessively pessimistic, a charge I defended them against at the time, but I believe there may be something to Graham's case -- and that has repercussions beyond merely how long we expect Social Security's trust fund to last. I'll be writing on that in the near future, but in the meantime check out Jed's piece and join the argument here.




Read more!

Washington Post: Reform Disability, Not Just Refinance It

The Washington Post's editorial board weighs in on Social Security Disability, arguing that -- in addition to merely keeping the program solvent -- policymakers also need to reform the program to make it work better:

"The problem is that SSDI is far from functioning optimally; while most of the program’s rising cost is, indeed, due to demographics, not all of it is. As recent research in labor economics has shown, some of the growth is due to post-1984 program rules that made it easier to claim disability on the basis of mental or musculoskeletal ailments. Perversely, SSDI provides employers no incentive to keep individuals at work, earning wages, while providing those who get benefits no incentive to return to the workforce. As economist David Autor of MIT has written, “the SSDI program spends too few societal resources helping individuals with disabilities to remain employed and too many resources supporting the long-term dependency of individuals who could be self-sufficient with . . . appropriate accommodation and support.”

Check out the whole piece here. Read more!

No Social Security COLA for 2016?

My former SSA collague Jason Ficthner of the Mercatus Center, writes for Marketwatch on the prospect that Social Security won't pay a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) in 2016. 

Lost in the news surrounding the release of the 2015 Social Security Trustees report is the likelihood that Social Security beneficiaries won't see a cost-of-living adjustment increase, or COLA, in 2016. According to the Trustees, Social Security beneficiaries can expect to receive a COLA increase of 0.0 percent. That's right ... a goose egg.

Why? Well, not much inflation. Check out Jason's piece for more details.

Side note: here's a New York Times piece on the COLA I wrote with Alicia Munnell back in 2010, when beneficiaries also faced the prospect of a zero COLA. Of all the  things I've written -- including some that in retrospect were incendiary and probably ill-considered -- none produced as strong and negative response as this piece. Some of the emails I received were scary. 




Read more!

New paper: “Social Security’s Financial Outlook: The 2015 Update in Perspective”

The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College has released a new Issue in Brief:

“Social Security’s Financial Outlook: The 2015 Update in Perspective”

by Alicia H. Munnell

The brief’s key findings are:

• The 2015 Trustees Report shows little change from last year:

• Social Security’s 75-year deficit declined modestly from 2.88 percent to 2.68 percent of payroll.

• The deficit as a percent of GDP remains at about 1 percent.

• Trust fund exhaustion moved back slightly from 2033 to 2034, after which payroll taxes still cover about three quarters of promised benefits.

• The shortfall is manageable, but action should be taken soon to restore confidence in the program and give people time to adjust to needed changes.

·   In addition, the disability insurance program needs immediate attention, as its trust fund is expected to be exhausted next year.

This brief is available here.  Read more!

Leading House Dem Proposes Bill to Merge Trust Funds

Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA) has introduced legislation that would merge the Social Security retirement and disability trust funds. The purpose of the merge is to reallocate revenues from the retirement to the disability plan, which would forestall the disability plan's insolvency, projected for late 2016. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has a nice blog post summarizing the issues surrounding a trust fund merger.

But I'll be more blunt: merging the trust funds is an effort to -- almost literally -- paper over the larger policy problems with the Disability Insurance program. Yes, DI is suffering financially due to population aging and the larger number of women who qualify for benefits.

But if these were the only factors, it's unlikely we'd have seen such a large shift in the causes of disability applications from things like circulatory disorders (think heart disease) to mental and musculoskeletal disorders. Congressional changes in eligibility rules in the 1980s made it easier to apply for benefits based on those latter types of ailments.

It's also unlike we would have seen the shift in applicants toward less-educated, less-skilled workers had loosened eligibility rules, combined with stagnating wages for working-class individuals, made DI benefits more attractive.

But living on DI isn't an attractive life. You can survive, but only just. And you'll never get ahead, even modestly. It's not a life you'd wish for someone if there were any good alternatives. And there are. A substantial number of studies show that many DI beneficiaries have significant ability to work. If we reward work -- say, by making the EITC more generous -- and require that DI applicants first go through rehabilitation and re-employment training, we can shift the incentives toward staying in the workforce

But that's only going to happen if we decide to grapple seriously with disability reform. Rep. Becerra's bill to paper over the DI program's problems indicated that such an effort isn't likely. Read more!

New papers from the Social Science Research Network

"Evidence of Increasing Differential Mortality: A Comparison of the HRS and SIPP" 
Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Working Paper No. 2015-13

BARRY BOSWORTH, Brookings Institution - Economic Studies Program
Email: bbosworth@brookings.edu
KAN ZHANG, Brookings Institution
Email: KZhang@brookings.edu

This paper uses data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) and the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to explore the extent of a widening in life expectancies by socioeconomic status (SES) for older persons. We construct four alternative measures of SES, using educational attainment, average (career) earnings in the prime working ages of 41-50, wealth, and occupational classifications.

The paper finds that: There is strong statistical evidence in both the SIPP and HRS of a growing inequality of mortality risk by SES across birth cohorts from 1910 to 1961. Growing inequality in mortality risk is evident using all four indicators of SES, but it is strongest for the measures based on career earnings and educational attainment. The secular changes in differential mortality are very large, but their influence on the length of time for which people receive benefits has been dampened by legal restrictions on early retirement for low-SES individuals and by voluntary postponement of retirement at the top of the distribution. Self-reported health status is a highly significant predictor of mortality risk, but its inclusion in the statistical models has only a marginal effect on the evidence of differential mortality operating through the various SES indicators. The combination of survey measures of the various SES indicators and the administrative records covering earnings, death records, and OASDI benefits provides a particularly large and rich data set for the analysis of mortality experience and its implications for the distribution of benefits.

The policy implications of the findings are: Indexing the retirement age to increases in average life expectancy to stabilize OASDI finances may have substantial unintended distributional consequences, because most mortality gains have been concentrated among workers with relatively high SES.

"Facing a Biased Adviser While Choosing a Retirement Plan. The Impact of Financial Literacy and Fair Disclosure." 
Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2015 Forthcoming

EYAL CARMEL, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Email: carmeley@gmail.com
DANA CARMEL, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev - Department of Psychology
Email: bomzedana@gmail.com
DAVID LEISER, Dept. of Psychology - Ben Gurion University of the Negev
Email: dleiser@bgu.ac.il
AVIA SPIVAK, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev - Department of Economics
Email: avia@bgumail.bgu.ac.il

Buying a retirement saving plan in Israel involves meeting with an agent whose interests may differ from those of his or her customers. The aim of the present study was to explore the effect of the advice given by the agent, along with that of two further factors: a fair disclosure statement regarding ‎the agent’s ‎conflict of interest, and the customer's degree of financial literacy. Two experiments conducted among undergraduate students in Israel showed that customers ‎mostly ‎follow the agent's recommendation, even against their best ‎interest, and despite the presence of a fair disclosure statement. Only participants with high financial literacy, who received a disclosure statement, did examine the alternatives closely and rejected the advice when the recommendation was damaging. We also ruled out the existence of a negative psychological reactance response to a disclosure statement that would work to the detriment of financially literate participants.

"Shifting the Place of Social Security: Welfare Reform and Social Rights Under the Coalition Government's Austerity Programme" 
Jed Meers, 'Shifting the Place of Social Security: Welfare Reform and Social Rights under the Coalition Government's Austerity Programme' (2015)

JED MEERS, University of York, York Law School, Students

Email: jed.meers@york.ac.uk

The overall focus of the changing nature of social rights protection under austerity needs to be linked, of course, with specific investigations of the administration of social welfare law and policy in the age of austerity. As part of this, a report has been complied analysing the UK Coalition Government’s welfare reform agenda by Jed Meers.

It seeks to outline and analyse the key reforms and legal challenges stemming from the Welfare Reform Act 2012, and identify key problems with the current legal tools available to challenge reforms and key themes arising in the case law

Read more!

Summary of 2015 Trustees Report from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

The CRFB has produced a detailed but still readable summary of the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report, which was released yesterday. The report projected a small improvement in the program's finances versus the 2014 Report, with the combined trust funds projected to last an additional year and the long-term actuarial deficit slightly reduced.

The the Trustees still project that Social Security isn't close to financially sustainable without reforms. In particular, the Disability Insurance trust fund is projected to run out next year.

Click here to read their whole report.

Read more!

Upcoming Event: "What’s the News in the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report?"

Understanding Today’s Social Security Trustees Report

Two new resources are available from the Academy to help journalists, Hill staff, researchers, policy analysts, advocates, and business leaders interpret findings in the new Social Security Trustees Report:

• Social Security Finances: Findings of the 2015 Trustees Report: A brief summarizing the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report, released today. 
   
• Tomorrow’s (7/23) event, What’s the News in the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report?, offers an in-depth discussion of the new projections with Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary of the Social Security Administration, and additional expert speakers.

Event Details:
What’s the News in the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report?
When:    July 23, 10:00 – 11:30 A.M.
Where:   Brookings Institution • Falk Auditorium
               1775 Massachusetts Ave. NW
               Washington, DC, 20036



On-site registration is available. Read more!

New issue brief: "Does the Social Security 'Statement Add Value?"

The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College has released a new Issue in Brief:

Does the Social Security “Statement” Add Value?

by Steven A. Sass

The brief’s key findings are:

• To help workers better plan for retirement, the Social Security Administration provides a Statement with personalized benefit estimates.
• Surveys have explored how workers view the Statement, and research studies have examined its effectiveness.
• The results indicate that workers generally consider the Statement a valuable resource, and it improves their benefit knowledge. 
• At the same time, studies have not found any effect on workers’ Social Security claiming behavior.

This brief is available here.  Read more!

Lunch event TODAY: Retirement & Savings Foundation with Howard Iams of SSA

LUNCH FORUM
Join us on Tuesday, July 21 at noon
with Howard Iams of the Social Security Administration discussing 

"Retirement Plan Coverage by Firm Size: An Update"

This paper was a co-authored by Howard Iams, Jules Lichtenstein, and Irena Dushi
 

Tuesday, July 21
Noon - 1:00 p.m.

RSVP

Location: 
Americans for Tax Reform
722 12th Street, NW
7th FLOOR
Washington, D.C. 20005

Lunch will be provided.
This is a widely attended event.

Irena Dushi is an economist with the Office of Policy Evaluation and Modeling, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics (ORES), Office of Retirement and Disability Policy (ORDP), Social Security Administration (SSA).

Jules Lichtenstein is a senior economist with the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy. Read more!

New papers from the National Bureau of Economic Research

Does Protecting Older Workers from Discrimination Make It Harder to Get Hired?  Evidence from Disability Discrimination Laws by David Neumark, Joanne Song, Patrick Button  -  #21379 (AG LS)

Abstract:

We explore the effects of disability discrimination laws on hiring of older workers.  A concern with anti-discrimination laws is that they may reduce hiring by raising the cost of terminations and - in the specific case of disability discrimination laws - raising the cost of employment because of the need to accommodate disabled workers. Moreover, disability discrimination laws can affect non-disabled older workers because they are fairly likely to develop work-related disabilities, yet are not protected by these laws.  Using state variation in disability discrimination protections, we find little or no evidence that stronger disability discrimination laws lower the hiring of non-disabled older workers.  We similarly find no evidence of adverse effects of disability discrimination laws on hiring of disabled older workers.

http://papers.nber.org/papers/W21379?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw

Supplemental Plan Offerings and Retirement Saving Choices: An Analysis of North Carolina School Districts by Robert L. Clark, Emma Hanson, Melinda Sandler Morrill, Aditi Pathak  -  #21382 (AG)

Abstract:

Unlike private sector employers, public school districts generally offer more than one type of supplemental retirement savings plan and allow multiple vendors to offer products.  Using individual-level payroll data from over half of the public school districts in North Carolina coupled with data from an employer survey, this study examines the impact of inter-district differences in supplemental plan administration on participation in these savings vehicles.  We find wide variation in total participation rates and in 403(b) plan participation rates in particular, even among this population of public-sector workers with the same defined benefit pension plan, health plan, and retiree health coverage.  Individual and district characteristics explain some, but not all, of the variation observed.

http://papers.nber.org/papers/W21382?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw

Lessons for Public Pensions from Utah's Move to Pension Choice by Robert L. Clark, Emma Hanson, Olivia S. Mitchell  -  #21385 (AG LS PE)

Abstract:

We explore what happened when the state of Utah moved away from its traditional defined benefit pension.  In its place, it offered new hires a choice between a conventional defined contribution plan and a hybrid plan option, where the latter has both a guaranteed benefit component and a defined contribution plan where employees bear investment risk.  We show that around 60 percent of new hires failed to make any active choice and, as a result, were automatically defaulted into the hybrid plan.  Slightly more than half of those who made an active choice elected the hybrid plan.  Post-reform,employees who failed to actively elect a primary retirement plan were also far less likely to enroll in a supplemental retirement account, compared to new hires who actively selected a plan.  We also find that employees hired following the reform were more likely to leave public employment, resulting in higher separation rates.  This could reflect a reduction in the desirability of public employment under the new pension design and an improving economic climate in the

state. Our results imply that public pension reformers must consider employee responses in addition to potential cost savings, when developing and enacting major pension plan changes.

http://papers.nber.org/papers/W21385?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw

Read more!

Should we eliminate Social Security's delayed retirement credits?

Individuals who delay retirement receive a higher Social Security benefit. Since Social Security benefits are paid for life, this means that a person who delays retirement is "purchasing" a large annuity from the government. This means the government takes on greater mortality risk. Does this make sense?

Writing in The Hill, Brenton Smith argues no:

When DRC was created in 1972, the annuity market may have forced the government to assume a monopoly role. The past is the past. Today, the government’s role is completely unnecessary. There is a robust annuity market today that could support retirees with an expanded range of choices.
The problem for Americans with this rule is risk. Annuities in the private sector are priced daily – every day.  The government does not re-price the annuity daily, weekly, monthly, or even yearly.  The last time that the government changed the pricing for the annuities issued by Social Security was in 1983.  Pricing is a tri-decennial event.

Click here to read the whole article. Read more!

New papers from the Social Science Research Network

"Do Retired Americans Annuitize Too Little? Trends in the Share of Annuitized Income" 

BARRY BOSWORTH, Brookings Institution - Economic Studies Program
Email: bbosworth@brookings.edu
GARY BURTLESS, Brookings Institution, Boston College - Retirement Research Center
Email: GBURTLESS@BROOK.EDU
MATTAN ALALOUF, Independent
Email: malalouf@brookings.edu

This paper examines the importance of annuity-like income as a share of total money income received by aged families. The analysis considers the aged (62) population as a whole as well as different parts of the aged families’ income distribution during the period from the early 1980s through 2009. We use survey data from 1983 through 2009 from the March Current Population Survey (March CPS) and the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). The total income amounts reported in the files are compared with data in the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA). We calculate the family income consisting of annuitized income flows (primarily Social Security and pensions) and measure it as a share of families’ total money income. We also expand the definition of both annuitized and non-annuitized income to include income flows not captured in the surveys, namely, health insurance subsidies and the housing services received by homeowners. Finally, we consider the potential impact on aged families if they were to convert their wealth into private annuities.

The paper finds that:

-- Despite the shift from defined benefit (DB) to defined contribution (DC) retirement plans, there is little evidence that the annuity-like income share of total income has fallen for aged families – and, in particular, for low-income aged families – over the past three decades.

-- This basic result remains unchanged when we consider more comprehensive income definitions and when we focus on aged families with retired heads of family.

-- Nonetheless, many middle- and high-income aged families would experience a sizeable increase in monthly income if they annuitized their wealth.

The policy implications of the findings are:

-- Concerns that reduced rates of annuitization will lead retirees to spend down their assets at a too-rapid rate seem overblown or at least premature; there is little evidence that the share of income derived from annuity-like income sources has declined.

-- Contrary to a widespread fear, the shift from DB to DC workplace pensions has not reduced the share of retirement income that consists of relatively secure, annuity-like income flows that will last as long as aged breadwinners and their spouses survive.

"Sources of Increasing Differential Mortality Among the Aged by Socioeconomic Status" 

BARRY BOSWORTH, Brookings Institution - Economic Studies Program
Email: bbosworth@brookings.edu
GARY BURTLESS, Brookings Institution, Boston College - Retirement Research Center
Email: GBURTLESS@BROOK.EDU
KAN ZHANG, Brookings Institution
Email: KZhang@brookings.edu

This paper uses data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to explore the extent and causes of widening differences in life expectancy by socioeconomic status (SES) for older persons. We construct alternative measures of SES using educational attainment and average (career) earnings in the prime working ages of 41-50. We also use information on causes of death, health status and various behavioral indicators (smoking, drinking, and obesity) that are believed to be predictors of premature death in an effort to explain the causes of the growing disparities in life expectancy between people of high and low SES.

The paper finds that:

-- There is strong statistical evidence in the HRS of a growing inequality of mortality risk by SES among more recent birth cohorts compared with cohorts born before 1930.

-- Both educational attainment and career earnings as constructed from Social Security records are equally useful indicators of SES, although the distinction in mortality risk by education is greatest for those with and without a college degree.

-- There has been a significant decline in the risk of dying from cancer or heart conditions for older Americans in the top half of the income distribution, but we find no such reduction of mortality risk in the bottom half of the distribution.

-- The inclusion of the behavioral variables and health status result in substantial improvement in the predictions of mortality, but they do not identify the sources of the increase in differential mortality.

The policy implications of the findings are:

-- Indexing the retirement age to increases in average life expectancy to stabilize OASDI finances may have unintended distributional consequences, because most mortality gains have been concentrated among workers in the top half of the earnings distribution.

-- The fact that we cannot identify the sources of the increase in differential mortality contributes to uncertainty about the distributional effects of increases in the retirement age in future years.

"Optimal Equity Glidepaths in Retirement" 

CHRISTOPHER J. ROOK, Stevens Institute of Technology
Email: rookchrj@gmail.com

Dynamic retirement glidepaths evolve over time based on some measure such as the retiree’s funded status or current market valuations. Conversely, static glidepaths are fixed at a starting point and selected under the assumption that they will not change. In practice, new static glidepaths may be derived periodically making them more flexible. The optimal static retirement glidepath would be the one that performs better than all others with respect to some metric. When systematic withdrawals are made from a retirement portfolio, glidepaths are often assessed via the probability of ruin (or success). Our goal here is to derive the optimal static glidepath with respect to this metric. It is a result new to the literature and the shape will be of special interest to retirees, financial advisors, retirement researchers, and target-date fund providers.

"Does Social Security Continue to Favor Couples?" 
Center for Retirement Research Working Paper No. 2015-11

NADIA S. KARAMCHEVA, Urban Institute, Boston College - Center for Retirement Research
Email: karamcheva@gmail.com
APRIL YANYUAN WU, Boston College - Center for Retirement Research
Email: wuuv@bc.edu
ALICIA H. MUNNELL, Boston College - Carroll School of Management
Email: crr4381@bc.edu

While dramatic increases in women’s labor supply and earnings have led to a substantial decline in the fraction of women eligible for spouse benefits at retirement, most wives still receive a survivor benefit, as wives still typically have lower earnings than their husbands and live longer. Using the MINT microsimulation model and the HRS data linked with Social Security administrative earnings records, this paper examines the extent to which Social Security continues to favor couples and will do so in the future.

The paper found that: While the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance program still distributes lifetime income from singles to couples, the transfers appear to be shrinking over time. Nevertheless, couples are still projected to have a higher benefit/tax ratio, a lower median net tax rate, and a greater likelihood of receiving positive net transfers from the system compared to those who are never married or divorced. The increased labor force participation and earnings of women have contributed significantly to the decline in redistribution from men to women, and from singles to couples, while the effect of declining marriage rates has only a modest effect.

The policy implications of the findings are: Family benefit provisions within the Social Security program can have a significant impact on various measures of redistribution. Policymakers may find the results of this paper helpful in evaluating any reform proposals that would change these provisions.

"Slowed or Sidelined? The Effect of 'Normal' Cognitive Decline on Job Performance Among the Elderly" 
Center for Retirement Research at Boston College Working Paper No. 2015-12

ANEK BELBASE, Center for Retirement Research at Boston College
Email: anbelbas@gmail.com
MASHFIQUR KHAN, Boston College - Center for Retirement Research
Email: khanmf@bc.edu
ALICIA H. MUNNELL, Boston College - Carroll School of Management
Email: crr4381@bc.edu
ANTHONY WEBB, Boston College - Center for Retirement Research
Email: webbaa@bc.edu

This paper examines the relationship between age-related cognitive decline and three potential workplace outcomes: 1) coping with increased job difficulty; 2) shifting to a less cognitively demanding job; and 3) retiring early. It uses data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the O*NET database. Critical components of the analysis are the metric used to measure cognitive decline, inclusion of cognitive reserve as an independent variable, and the use of overlapping 10-year observation windows. A key limitation is that the study cannot conclusively discern a causal relationship between cognitive decline and workforce exit.

The paper found that: About 10 percent of workers between the ages of 55 and 69 experienced steep cognitive decline over a 10-year period. Workers experiencing steep cognitive decline were more likely to “downshift” to a less demanding job or retire than workers experiencing no cognitive decline. Workers experiencing steep cognitive decline retired significantly earlier than planned, compared to workers who experienced no change in cognitive ability. Workers without cognitive reserves were more likely to exit the workforce and retire earlier than planned, compared to workers with cognitive reserves.

The policy implications of the findings are: Cognitive decline might prevent a significant minority of older individuals from working to their planned retirement ages, and thus should be considered when assessing reforms that incent delayed retirement. Policies that support “downshifting” to a cognitively less demanding job might help workers at risk of steep cognitive decline to remain in the labor force. Further research is needed to identify whether workers in specific occupations are more susceptible to age-related decline than others, and whether anything can be done to moderate the effect of age-related decline in work ability.

"Pension Scheme Redesign and Wealth Redistribution Between the Members and Sponsor: The USS Rule Change in October 2011" 

EMMANOUIL PLATANAKIS, University of Reading - ICMA Centre
Email: e.platanakis@icmacentre.ac.uk
CHARLES SUTCLIFFE, University of Reading - ICMA Centre
Email: C.M.S.Sutcliffe@rdg.ac.uk

The redesign of defined benefit pension schemes usually results in a substantial redistribution of wealth between age cohorts of members, pensioners, and the sponsor. This is the first study to quantify the redistributive effects of a rule change by a real world scheme (the Universities Superannuation Scheme, USS) where the sponsor underwrites the pension promise. In October 2011 USS closed its final salary scheme to new members, opened a career average revalued earnings (CARE) section, and moved to ‘cap and share’ contribution rates. We find that the pre-October 2011 scheme was not viable in the long run, while the post-October 2011 scheme is probably viable in the long run, but faces medium term problems. In October 2011 future members of USS lost 65% of their pension wealth (or roughly £100,000 per head), equivalent to a reduction of roughly 11% in their total compensation, while those aged over 57 years lost almost nothing. The riskiness of the pension wealth of future members increased by a third, while the riskiness of the present value of the sponsor’s future contributions reduced by 10%. Finally, the sponsor’s wealth increased by about £32.5 billion, equivalent to a reduction of 26% in their pension costs. 

Read more!

Upcoming Event: McCrery-Pomeroy SSDI Solutions Conference

McCrery-Pomeroy SSDI Solutions Conference

Tuesday, August 4, 2015
8:45 am – 5:00 pm

Breakfast will be served at 8:00 am
Post-conference reception from 5:00 pm- 6:30 pm

District Architecture Center
421 7th St NW, Washington, DC 20004

Next year the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) trust fund will deplete its reserves, prompting a discussion in Washington about how to improve the program. The McCrery-Pomeroy SSDI Solutions Initiative seeks to provide policymakers with a menu of innovative ideas to improve the SSDI program and other services for people with disabilities.

The SSDI Solutions Conference will feature presentations of numerous policy proposals selected by the McCrery-Pomeroy SSDI Solutions Initiative and will bring together experts, advocates, policymakers and interested stakeholders for an engaged dialogue about how SSDI and other programs can better serve those with disabilities, taxpayers and society as a whole.

Please RSVP here

District Architecture Center
421 7th Street NW
Washington, DC 20004

Tuesday, August 4 2015

DRAFT Agenda – Please check back for additional speakers and other information

8:00 am - 8:45 am

Continental Breakfast and Registration

8:45 am - 9:15 am

Welcome and Opening Remarks

9:15 am - 10:30 am

Panel One: Structural Reforms

Discussant: Art Spencer, Former Associate Commissioner for Disability Programs, Social Security Administration

Papers discussed:
Christian, Hildred, Krent, and Mazerski – Transitional benefits for a small subset of SSDI beneficiaries with disabilities likely to experience medical improvement
Fichtner and Seligman – A system for partial disability benefits
Aaron, Aghabi, Butz, and Jacobson – Exploring alternative definitions of disability

10:30 am - 12:00 pm

Panel Two: Early Intervention and Work Support

Discussant: Lisa Ekman, Ekman Advocates for Progress, LLC

Papers discussed:
Ben-Shalom, Mann, and Stapleton – Integrated employment support and eligibility determination system
Burton, Christian, and Wickizer – Expanding community-focused work and health services
Kerksick, Riemer, and Williams – Using transitional jobs and tax incentives to encourage employment

12:00 pm - 1:20 pm

Lunch

1:30 pm - 2:45 pm

Panel Three: Determination and Adjudication Reform

Discussant: Margaret Malone, Former Staff Director, Social Security Advisory Board
Papers discussed:
Che, Collins, Constantin, Porcino, and Zhou – Reducing CDR backlogs
Dubin – Streamlining the determination process
Engel, Glendening, and Wolfe – Exploring changes to the SSDI adjudication process

3:00 pm - 4:15 pm

Panel Four: Interaction with other programs

Discussant: David Wittenburg, Associate Director of Health Research, Mathematica Policy Research

Papers discussed:
Babbel and Meyer – Encouraging enrollment in private disability insurance
Burton and Guo – Improving the interaction between SSDI and Workers’ Compensation programs
Perriello – Improving health coverage for workers with disabilities

4:15 pm - 5:00 pm

Closing Panel Discussion

Participants:
Jim McCrery
Earl Pomeroy
Mark Washawsky, Visiting Scholar, Mercatus Center of George Mason University
Alan Cohen, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress

5:00 pm - 6:30 pm

Closing reception

Read more!