law offices	
silver & silver
42 west lancaster avenue
meyer silver-	third floor	 cynthia J. silver
O 'shea	ardmorb . PA 19003-1311	or counsel
lawrence J. weinstein dennis J. gruenke
610-688-1800
e-mail info@silver2law.com
• MEMBER PA & NJ BARS
January 3, 2006 Dear Commissioner Barnhart:
The Social Security Administration's (SSA) proposal to increase by two years the age categories used in making disability decisions must be reconsidered. These changes fail to take into consideration the true nature of the struggles of those afflicted individuals who need to apply for Social Security Disability.
Social Security has claimed that the average health of the elderly population is improving.
However, this general statement fails to take into account the impact of education, income and
race on disabled individuals. The lower the education an individual has attained, the more likely
that they will become disabled. Just being disabled can prevent someone from having the
opportunity to obtain higher education. Those who are poorer also have higher rates of disability.
Being poor often interferes with getting quality health care. In addition, Blacks and Native
Americans have higher rates of disability in their fifties than whites do. Overall, such a blanket
statement that the average health of Americans is improving fails to account for those Americans
who struggle with education and income and may be of a particular race. For those large groups
of Americans, raising the age categories in the grid rules will have a tremendously negative
impact on their lives.	!
Social Security has also justified the proposed changes by opining that work opportunities have
increased for older Americans. This is not an accurate statement when applied to blue-collar
jobs  Many older Americans who have traditionally worked at blue-collar jobs do not have the
skills, education or knowledge to allow them to succeed in a white-collar job. The addition of jobs
for older Americans that the SSA refers to is mainly happening in the white-collar sector, not the
blue collar one.	,
Social Security has justified the proposed changes by relying on Congressional action taken in raising the retirement age  While Congress raised the retirement age it took no action in altering the age that widows and widowers are eligible for benefits if they become disabled. Also, just because Americans are living more years, this does not mean that they are living more years without disability.
The Grid Rules are in place to benefit those individuals with disabilities who have the most adverse vocational characteristics. Therefore, SSA's proclamation that it knows that there are "many jobs" that older individuals can perform and adjust to is Illogical. Currently, the Grid Rules are already rather stringent. For those under 55 there is only one rule that leads to a finding of disability in the light grid, that of an individual age 50-54, illiterate or unable to communicate in English, and has an unskilled work history or no past work history.   The sedentary grid includes a few more categories of workers, but sedentary work "represents a significantly restricted range of work."    Finally, SSA's theory that older workers are able to adjust to other work is' not supported by any fact SSA has provided no evidence to support this theory. Just because some Americans are in better health now than they were fifty years ago, does not mean that most Americans who have never done a specific job, will be able to adjust to a new careen at age fifty or fifty-five without an incredible amount of vocational adjustment or at all. Again, health, income and education all are factors in making a successful adjustment to job responsibilities. Those
El/B'd	0Z829960T1?:O.L	:WOdJ  T2:,LT  9002-£0-N«f

individuals who are applying for benefits are not likely to have had the ability to make such an
adjustment.	
While SSA says that they will save billions of dollars by altering the Grid Rules, money alone
should not justify the changes, especially when the most vulnerable members of our society
those who are disabled, will be hurt by the proposed changes.	•!
Respectfully submitted

0£859960T t7:

9002-£0-NWf