New York Social Security Disability Lawyer Blog

After weeks of fumbling moves and back tracking, it appears that AARP was against Social Security benefits cuts before it was for them. Or something like that. What's clear is that the non-profit interest group serving more than 40 million persons age 50 and over has drawn the ire of many of its constituents by indicating that it would not oppose future cuts to Social Security in the face of the program's dwindling reserves.

In mid-June, The Wall Street Journal's Laura Meckler reported that "[AARP] is dropping its longstanding opposition to cutting Social Security benefits, a move that could rock Washington's debate over how to revamp the nation's entitlement programs," and a decision made "after a wrenching debate inside the organization."

The resulting blowback came fast and furiously as scores of members, including The Newark Star-Ledger's Fran Wood took to public forums to denounce the decision and proclaim that they were canceling their AARP memberships. In an open letter titled "Dear AARP: You're wrong. We're done," Wood writes

Enclosed please find my AARP membership card. I see no advantage in belonging to an organization that apparently has decided the full preservation of Social Security -- the single most important economic lifeline for most seniors and retirees -- is negotiable...Bargain rates on insurance, hotels and restaurants are all very nice. A glossy magazine with medical news, recipes, a crossword puzzle and articles on motorcycle-riding seniors is also nice. But AARP's focus has always been -- and always should be -- its advocacy for the two programs that spell the difference between solvency and poverty for most retired Americans: Social Security and Medicare.

AARP has spent the weeks following the Wall Street Journal story attempting to clarify, restate and/or retract its position on Social Security. According to The Huffington Post's Arthur Delaney, "[w]hile AARP says it is adamantly opposed to having Social Security in the debt ceiling discussion, the group is open to separate negotiations on changes in things like the retirement age or the formula for calculating benefits to maintain the long-term solvency of the Social Security trust fund. Such changes are tantamount to benefit cuts if they reduce the total amount retirees receive."

Continue reading "AARP Angers Members with Social Security Stance" »

Unless Congress acts before August 2, the United States government will be unable to pay its bills. This, for all intents and purposes, is the "debt ceiling" issue that has been splashed across newspapers and debated on cable TV programs in recent weeks: the feds are dangerously close to reaching the amount of debt that Uncle Sam is legally permitted to take on and, if the limit is not raised, the U.S. may default on interest due on some Treasury bonds.

In hammering out a deal to raise the ceiling, many in Washington and beyond are calling for sweeping changes to Social Security as we know it. As experienced Social Security disability lawyers, we are concerned about how any proposed changes to the system will play out.

In addition to providing retirement benefits the Social Security Administration (SSA) also assists people who are unable to work due to physical or mental impairment. These programs are funded by government trust funds and as a result are not part of the federal deficit that is on the verge of reaching its statutory limit. Still, the trust funds are expected to run out by 2036, and many lawmakers are calling on Social Security reform as part of any debt ceiling raise deal.

"We still have all these proposed caps and triggers out there, which probably won't include Social Security because they usually understand that Social Security is a separate program, separately financed," AARP legislative policy director David Certner told The Huffington Post. "But not all of the proposals out there do exclude Social Security, for instance the CAP Act."

The CAP Act is legislation proposed by Senators Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) that would both institute a limit on all federal spending and "eliminate the deceptive 'off-budget' distinction for Social Security," according to the law's sponsors. Meanwhile Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) recently proposed measures under which the Social Security retirement age would gradually rise, finally reaching 69 in 2027, and the yearly cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) would be shaved by 1 percent. This, of course, means that Americans who have paid taxes into the program will work longer and receive less in benefits upon retirement.

However, it does appear that changes must be made to insure the continuing viability of all aspects of the Social Security program; regardless of whether they are done in connection with the debt-ceiling agreement.

Continue reading "The Debt Ceiling and Social Security Reform" »

One of the hardest things for anyone to do is to really see things from someone else's perspective. As a lawyer I can tell you that sometimes things seem so obvious to us that we can't imagine why our client or potential client, or even our adversary, doesn't see it or didn't do it.

In preparing to meet with a financial planner recently my wife and I had to complete a worksheet so that he could understand our issues and concerns. One of the things it asked for was to list our Long Term Disability policies. Although I have been practicing disability law for over 30 years and can't imagine how many times I've told people (not clients---by then it's too late) to get disability insurance and to make sure they increase it as their salary increases, when I got to that part of the form I must admit I was at a loss.

I thought I had a Long Term Disability policy for myself for one amount and two for my wife. Coincidentally, I had just received a solicitation from the insurance company asking me to increase the coverage and it stated I had a far different amount of coverage in force than I thought. I sheepishly told the planner that even though this is my field, I really was unclear about my own coverage.

It turns out when I went through the policies a few days later that in fact I had two policies, and they actually totaled more than I thought! As for my wife, her two policies were there, but I really couldn't tell the amount of coverage without making some additional phone calls.

So the moral of this story is that once again, like the "caregiver" entry from last year and maybe one or two others I've posted here, I once again have a better insight when I meet with people who don't know if they have insurance, or what the coverage amounts are.

And for all of you, go check now. And make sure your coverage has kept up with your salary!

Lewis B. Insler, Esq.

Good news for the disabled in 23 states and the District of Columbia, including residents of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

On May 31, 2011 the US Department of Health and Human Services announced new steps to make it easier for Americans to enroll in state Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plans ("PCIP").

As I have mentioned in previous posts, one of the benefits of the Obama Health Plan is the availability of health plans for people who have been uninsured (or uninsurable) for longer than 6 months and have a preexisting condition.

Under the new rules, premiums will drop up to 40% to bring the PCIP premiums in line with state premiums. In states such as New York, New Jersey and Connecticut where premiums were already well aligned with the state premiums, there will be no changes.

Eligibility standards for coverage will be eased in 23 states and DC. Starting on July 1, 2011, it will no longer be necessary for people to show a denial of coverage from an insurance company due to a pre-existing condition. Instead, all that will be necessary is a letter from a doctor, physician's assistant or nurse practitioner dated within the past 12 months stating that the application has, or at any time in the past, had a medical condition, disability or illness.

Gabriel J. Hermann, Esq.

We are pleased to announce that this June 7 Lewis Insler will be speaking at the Westchester County Bar Association on Retirement Accounts and Social Security Benefits - What You Need to Know for Agreements, QDROs and Financial Planning. For more information please visit the Westchester County Bar Association website by clicking here.