Library Collections: Document: Full Text


As I Saw It

Creator: Robert Irwin (author)
Date: 1955
Publisher: American Foundation for the Blind
Source: American Printing House for the Blind, Inc., M. C. Migel Library
Figures From This Artifact: Figure 2

Previous Page   Next Page   All Pages 


Page 53:

487  

Some states, including New York, removed the top limit entirely leaving it to the administration to give as adequate relief as possible with the funds available. The states are responsible for determining the amount of the individual monthly grant based on an investigation of the needs of the blind person, and may pay more or less than the federal maximum. However, the Social Security Act has always included a limit on the amount of reimbursement to the states that the Federal Government will give with respect to any individual recipient of aid.

488  

This has had the effect of suggesting to the states that such an allowance is adequate. For example, if the Federal Government reimburses a given fraction of any payment up to a maximum of $30.00 per month on account of any individual there is a tendency for the states to limit the amount of relief to $30.00, even though in certain communities under certain conditions three times this amount is often inadequate. For this reason every time the Social Security Act has come up for any amendment, efforts have been made to increase the federal share of expenses. The first amendment passed in 1939 raised the amount of possible Federal contribution to $20.00 per month, still on a fifty-fifty matching basis. The amendment, however, provided that the Federal Government pays fifty per cent of the administrative cost.

489  

As time went by the fifty per cent reimbursement was deemed insufficient for many states to carry on anything like a satisfactory relief program. It was thought that perhaps a plan could be worked out based on average income in the various states so that the less prosperous states would be reimbursed up to two-thirds of their expenditures while in the more prosperous states the reimbursement should not exceed fifty per cent. This plan, however, was never put into effect as representatives of the prosperous states contended that on a fifty per cent reimbursement basis they did not receive back in federal grants nearly as much as they paid over to the Federal Government in taxes.

490  

Other ways were found to help the low income states. In 1946 the maximum federal share of the individual payments to needy blind persons was increased from $20.00 to $25.00 per month. This amendment also provided that the Federal Government, instead of matching state funds on a fifty-fifty basis, would pay two-thirds of the first $15.00 of the average monthly payment to blind individuals and one-half of the balance of all expenditures within the $45.00 total maximum. Carrying this principle further, an amendment of 1948 increased the maximum on individual payments to $50.00 per month, specifying that three-fourths of the first $20.00 of the average monthly assistance payment and one-half of the balance within the $50.00 total maximum would be paid by the Federal Government. (See chapter introductory remarks.)

491  

This has had the effect of easing the burden of the low income states, but it has also sometimes had the effect of keeping the grants down to an amount for which more than a fifty per cent reimbursement would be received.

492  

Ever since the passage of the Social Security Act of 1935 Congress has been importuned to amend the law so as to extend the benefits of the old-age and survivors insurance plan to cover blind people under sixty-five years of age giving them the same benefits that they would receive were they of that age. Many other countries having social security programs somewhat resembling those in the United States have made some such provision for the blind, notably Canada and Great Britain.

493  

Another criticism brought against the Social Security Act was that it did not permit sufficient flexibility of administration to encourage the industrial blind to become self-supporting. The original Title X of 1935 gave as its purpose "to furnish financial assistance to needy individuals who are blind." The 1939 amendment, however, specified that "the state agency shall, in determining need, take into consideration any other income of an individual claiming aid to the blind."

494  

In the operation of the Act it was argued that blind people of low productivity had little or no incentive to work when opportunity was afforded. It was pointed out that many blind persons having lost their sight in adult life adjust themselves very slowly to working without the aid of sight. It was also pointed out that when a blind person earned less than the relief grant and when this grant was reduced by the amount received in remuneration of his labor he got little besides physical exercise as a result of his efforts. The American Foundation for the Blind, the American Association of Workers for the Blind, and the National Federation of the Blind joined forces in bringing this weakness in the law to the attention of Congress. As a result the Social Security Act in 1950 was so amended as to permit states to disregard up to $50.00 per month of a blind man's earnings when calculating his resources. This amendment was permissive up to 1952 after which date it becomes mandatory upon states receiving federal reimbursement.

Previous Page   Next Page

Pages:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56    All Pages