Streamlining Social Security

The Social Security Administration is searching for better procedures to handle claims and appeals, now bogged down under enormous backlogs of cases. It is the prudent thing to do. But the process is not being helped by some of the very groups that should be supportive.

A New York Times story revealed recently that a preliminary draft proposal for changes in hearing procedures was under consideration. So it is, although at a relatively low staff level--so low that the matter has not yet reached any of the four deputy commissioners, let alone Commissioner Dorcas R. Hardy or Dr. Otis R. Bowen, the secretary of health and human services. Nevertheless, the reception given the news was shrill, with cries of foul, accusations of a conspiracy to place obstacles in the way of appeals, and charges that once again the Reagan Administration was trying to squeeze pensioners. Rather than these wild, roundhouse responses, the proposal needed serious, constructive engagement in the process.

As matters now stand, those who are under Social Security face delays of four to six months in challenging a decision. And if they choose to carry the appeal further to the federal courts, where there already is a backlog of 44,000 cases, months and even years can be added to the process.

Part of the problem, according to the Social Security Administration, is that the present procedures are informal. Some of the tentative proposals that are now under consideration would make the process more formal. One requirement would be for all evidence to be filed in advance of hearings to facilitate a quicker judgment. Another would discourage amendments or elaborations of claims during the appeal process. These seem to us to be reasonable proposals. But there needs to be careful study to reassure applicants that the rules will serve to facilitate decisions rather than to deny access to protections of Social Security to the eligible.

Prompt processing of claims and timely adjudication of appeals are essential to the fair functioning of the system. So we welcome the efforts to improve that process while protecting those for whom the programs were established.