Are cuts to Social Security Disability cuts to Social Security?

“Let me ask you a question. Do you really think that Social Security disability insurance is part of what people think of when they think of Social Security? I don’t think so.”

After Mick Mulvaney appeared on CBS’ “Face the Nation” in March to discuss Congress’ first budget proposal, we got a first taste of how our Budget Director views key features of Social Security, specifically Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI).

He went on to tell moderator, John Dickerson, he views SSDI as a fast-growing and “very wasteful program” desperately needing to be fixed.

On Monday, Congress submitted its revised second budget. And now we know exactly how Mulvaney plans on fixing this vital component of Social Security.

Among other deep cuts to social insurance programs, it is reported this newest proposal guts as much as $72 billion over 10 years from SSDI and disability benefits.

Given President Trump’s repeated campaign promises not to cut or reduce Social Security, many Americans find themselves asking one question:

Are cuts to disability insurance cuts to Social Security?

There is some truth to the statements Mulvaney made in March. Chances are good when you’re talking about “Social Security,” many people–especially younger workers or citizens who haven’t yet collected any kind of Social Security benefit–will most likely assume you’re talking about retirement benefits.

But retirement insurance is one branch on the Social Security tree. There are three major beneficiaries of Social Security: retired workers, the survivors (widows, widowers, and children) of deceased workers, and disabled workers.

The Social Security Trust Fund is actually Trust Funds. Social Security pays benefits from two funds: the Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI) and the Disability Insurance Trust Fund. The two funds combined are what we call Social Security. And when working Americans contribute to Social Security through payroll taxes, we are contributing to both.

So what was Mulvaney trying to say? Simply that in leaving Old Age and Survivors Insurance alone, a campaign promise is being kept. Since Americans consider “Social Security” to only include these types of benefits, cuts to SSDI don’t count. At a briefing on Monday, he added, “if you ask 999 people out of a thousand, they’d tell you Social Security disability is not part of Social Security.”

But as many were quick to point out, it’s hard to believe most people would fail to associate “Social Security disability” with “Social Security.”

More problematic is his insistence on separating the two trust funds and placing retirement benefits on a pedestal, leading some news publications to make statements about the budget proposal “leaving core benefits alone” as promised.

But there are no “core” benefits of Social Security. SSDI was made a core benefit of Social Security in 1956.

And as for leaving retirees’ benefits alone? The average age of a disability benefit recipient is 53.9.   In fact, five national studies on aging and disability analyzed by the journal, Demography, concluded disability in Baby Boomers between the ages of 55 and 64 is on the rise. Meanwhile, full retirement age is currently set to rise to 67.

Social Security disability therefore is a critical safety net for older Americans still years from full retirement and physically unable to work. In this respect, SSDI is as much a retirement benefit as OASI.

Is disability part of Social Security? Yes. Is a cut to disability a cut to Social Security? Yes. Any attempt to differentiate the two is a semantic argument–and it’s a semantic argument that doesn’t really work given the first two words in SSDI are “Social Security.”

Semantics aside, all Americans who have worked or are working and contributing to the Trust Funds have already paid for their SSDI benefits. Deep cuts to SSDI should outrage anyone who has worked to contribute money to this program.

And the use of nonsensical semantics to justify walking back a campaign promise should be alarming.

Mr. Mulvaney, ask the millions of Americans–many, older Americans–receiving payments for an illness or injury preventing them from working if they think of their disability benefits when someone says “Social Security.”

They do.