What should the United States do about the dramatic spike in the number of people who claimed to be disabled during the weak economy in order to get disability payments?

There isn't a whole lot that can be done, short of limit the money going into the program (which is already being planned) , and slightly tighter criteria to catch fraud. Why ? Because a Huge part of the population is aging and wearing out ... The Boomers are hitting their 60s

This makes sense if you understand the way that SSDI works.  It certainly doesn't indicate massive fraud or waste. It's not just the severity of your medical problem that determines if you are disabled. You must meet all the criteria: 1) You must not be working at something that pays $1040 gross a month or more. There are a lot of people who would otherwise be disabled enough to qualify for social security except that they've managed to find a way to get a job. It could be that their dad has a business and he employees them, they've fond a sympathetic person who's hired them, or they're hanging on by the skin of their teeth to a job they can just barely do or can almost do. In a labor shortage a lot of disabled people get jobs. Come a recession, many disabled people lose their jobs and are not qualified/able to get another job. AND 2)Your condition must be "severe" or found on the "list of disabling conditions." The list can be found at: http://www.ssa.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/AdultListings.htm. AND 3) You have have contributed to the system and done so in the recent past. Unless you are very young at least 5 years of contributions (20 credits at a max of 4 per year) are required, at least 10 credits of which must be earned within the past 10 years.  Note: if you have a disabling condition and yet struggle to find work without success for years you may no longer qualify for SSDI because your last 10 credits may not be within the past 10 years. This also keeps career criminals, illegal aliens, people who have been recently released from long jail terms and people released from long-term institutionalization, etc., from collecting SSDI. AND 4)If your condition is severe but not on the list mentioned above you must not be able to do the work you did previously. AND 5) If your condition is not on the list above, you must not be able to do other work. Not only the severity of your condition is considered "We consider your medical conditions and your age, education, past work experience and any transferable skills you may have." Thus a young surgeon who has lost both hands in an accident may be denied because at his age and with his extensive education he could go on to a new career where a 55-year-old teamster with severe arthritis in his back and no high school diploma may not be able to get a job in another field and so could be approved. Age is definitely a factor and a lot of the workforce is aging. references for above information: http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dqualify5.htm#a0=4 http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dqualify2.htm P.S.: as to the somewhat snide comment about mood disorder and musculoskeletal problems, note that the long approval process actually indicates that the examiners are taking the time and effort to sort out who is and who is not actually qualified under the law to collect benefits for disorders that have a wide range of severity. This means the system is working.

Improve the economy?  People do what they have to do to survive.  I'll bet, although it's not in the article, the numbers skew toward the older set & they probably have some amt of disability.  I have 4 neighbors in my middle-class working neighborhood that haven't had a job offer in years, not even 7-Eeven. They're all 60+.  What else are they supposed to do? Besides, do you really want a working career bottled up behind a bunch of 70 yr olds who want to retire but can't?

If this was occurring in a time of economic prosperity, I would probably be in favor of capping the total payouts of the program, increasing funding for program administration to reduce fraud, and tying the growth of the program to inflation. Doctors who are signing off on high numbers of disability patients should be investigated, to ensure that they are using the proper standards outlined by federal government policy. With interest rates this low, however, and the economy making a very precarious recovery, I think the best move is to do nothing. If the money being cut would just be used to pay down the deficit, then it's money we would be taking out of the economy, arguably when it needs it most. We will not see any major benefits from pursuing such cuts, certainly not enough to outweigh the loss in demand that would accompany the decrease in consumer spending. The dollar is strong relative to other currencies right now. Stocks are at all-time highs. The U.S. is doing something right. Our debt is projected to be flat with GDP in coming years. Congress should be focusing on a Grand Bargain for future entitlement spending and then give it a rest with all this deficit malarkey.