Employment and Disability

In Reply: The preference of many people with severe mental illnesses for part-time employment and simultaneous collection of some disability payments presents yet another policy dilemma facing the U.S. Congress in reforming disability policies. Yes, for many years blind persons have enjoyed the advantage of a higher level of earnings from substantial gainful activity (SGA), more than twice the level permitted for other causes of disability. Applying the same standard would correct an obvious inequity and would help many people pursue meaningful part-time work as a legitimate vocational objective.

But why has Congress resisted such an obvious fix for so many years? Many federal legislators know that there is nothing sui generis about "disability." They fear that many more people would seek and become eligible for disability payments as a more secure alternative source of income when periodic worsening of economic conditions curtails employment opportunities for everybody. They also recognize that the change would represent a back-door approach to creating a permanent partial disability program in the United States—a policy that it has repeatedly rejected in the past on the basis of cost considerations and experience with the intractable issues of administration in state workers' compensation programs (1).

Concerns about the possible negative consequences are reinforced by evidence from countries with a permanent partial disability policy and other, more generous provisions than exist in the U.S. (2). Thus Ms. Arnold's belief that passage of H.R. 464 and S.B. 1054 would somehow bypass the need for a major revision of the Social Security disability system is mistaken. Debate over the administrative feasibility and cost implications of the proposed increase in the SGA eligibility threshold for disability payments will, I fear, uncover the complexities involved and once more underscore the need for more basic reforms.

Regardless of the benefits that would accrue for some individuals, the likelihood that the present Congress will create, either up-front or by the back door, a new permanent partial disability program is remote. After all, this is the Congress that has tightened the definition of disability under the Supplemental Security Income program and forced off the rolls many people who were formerly covered.