Question: how would you feel if they raised the minimum age of Social Security or Medicare?

[freshwest]

98. Medicare and Medicaid are not the same, nor is SSI and SSDI.

Last edited Thu Nov 22, 2012, 03:11 AM - Edit history (1)

I am not saying you do not know that, but some here may not. Below is some information from my experience with disabled people and a few links.

I have personal knowledge of persons put on SSDI prior to 55 who received Medicare 2 years later. Provisions are in place to retire workers before standard retirement ages and that will not change. Please note, I am referring to SSDI, the federal program, not SSI. AFAIK, the amounts given are the same as one who is going on full retirement, or at any rate, they are greater than those on SSI alone, who would qualify for Medicaid. Some qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid, some do not.

Obama eased these more despite RW hysteria when he got into office. I have gone with people into the SSA office and found their attitude has changed greatly since Obama took office. They are much less adversial than I found them to be in the last few decades, IMHO.

Here is a little information to ease some of the concerns people have about any change in the retirement age. Although this comes up often, the increase in age was put into effect long before Obama. Here is something from a law firm citing the C. F. R.'s and easy to understand. ALJ stands for Administrative Law Judge, who is a frequent feature in initial claims. Contrary to RW propaganda, it is not easy to be declared disabled at ages beneath those listed above, unless it is a condition from birth, and that requires a lot of documentation:

Social Security Disability Law: Borderline Age

The Social Security disability regulations provide that the Commissioner will not apply the age categories mechanically in a “borderline situation.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1563(a). The Commissioner considers a borderline situation to exist “when there would be a shift in results caused by the passage of a few days or months.” Social Security Ruling 82-46c. The Social Security disability court decisions appear to refuse to permit the mechanical application of the age rules where the disability claimant is less than a few months shy of the next age category.

Regulations
20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1563(a), 416.963(a)

The regulations generally provide that age shall be considered a factor in determining whether a claimant is disabled. However, the regulations specifically provide that the age categories will not be applied mechanically in a borderline situation. The regulations were amended in April 6, 2000 to clarify that if a person’s age category changes during the period for which SSA is adjudicating a disability claim, SSA will use the age category that is applicable to the person during the period for which SSA is deciding if the person is disabled. See 65 Fed. Reg. 17994, 17995(April 6, 2000). SSA further explained that in borderline age situations, SSA will not apply the age categories mechanically, and that a “borderline” situation means that the individual is “within a few days to a few months” of reaching a higher age category.

Tip

If you are close to a critical age, such as 50, 55 or 60, examine if the Medical-Vocational Guidelines dictate a finding of disability once you reach the next age category. If so, have your attorney argue at the hearing that the ALJ should consider you disabled six months prior to this key birthday.

Rulings
Social Security Ruling 83-10

Social Security Ruling 83-10 provides that older age is an increasingly adverse vocational factor for persons with severe impairments. *The chronological ages 45, 50, 55 and 60 may be critical to a decision.* The ruling notes that the regulations also provide that the age categories shall not be applied mechanically in borderline situations. For example, a rule for an individual of advanced age (55 or older) could be found applicable, in some circumstances, to an individual whose chronological age is 54 years and 11 months (closely approaching advanced age). No fixed guidelines as to when a borderline situation exists are provided since such guidelines would reflect a mechanical approach.

Acquiescence Ruling 88-1 (11)

AR 88-1(11) was issued in response to the Patterson v. Bowen, 799 F.2d 1455, 1458 (11th Cir. 1986), decision in the Eleventh Circuit (discussed below). In cases where the claimant resides in Florida, Georgia or Alabama at the time of the determination or decision at any level of administrative review (i.e., initial, reconsideration, administrative law judge hearing or Appeals Council) and (1) the issue of disability is resolved at the last step of the sequential evaluation process; (2) the Medical-Vocational Guidelines would otherwise direct a decision of “not disabled”; and (3) the claimant offers substantial credible evidence of his or her physical or mental impairments as proof that the ability to adapt to other work is less than the level established under the Medical-Vocational Guidelines for individuals of the particular age, a specific finding must be made as to the claimant’s ability to adapt to a new work environment.

http://www.jamesdisabilitylaw.com/borderline-age-legal.htm

This issue comes up often in threads, as if it a new program. It is not new, it has been expeced for decades. The increase in retirement age was enacted under Reagan. It should not, as I posted the link above, impact a person who is unable to work anymore. *I found this to be a great help to those who worried about age and have seen it applied.*

The upper level should be for those who are in good health. I have been surprised to find people who have just retired in their sixties, drawing pensions from their employment, social security and starting second careers making more than they did before. They are in fine shape (they were not doing physical work) and an older age for recieving social security will not impact them. We are simply getting closer to the timeline set in the eighties, AFAIK:

SUMMARY of P.L. 98-21, (H.R. 1900)
Social Security Amendments of 1983-Signed on April 20, 1983

...Raises the age of eligibility for unreduced retirement benefits in two stages to 67 by the year 2027. Workers born in 1938 will be the first group affected by the gradual increase. Benefits will still be available at age 62, but with greater reduction...

http://www.ssa.gov/history/1983amend.html

I hope this helps those worried.