The administration of donald trump analyzes a change in the rules of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) which could affect hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities in the country. According to a ProPublica investigation, the proposal seeks to reduce or even eliminate benefits for disabled adults who live with low-income relatives, a measure that has raised alarms among experts, civil organizations and families.
The regulatory adjustment aims to modify the way SSI financial support is calculated, a program administered by the Social Security Administration that provides basic income to people with severe disabilities or older adults in extreme poverty. Currently, if a family already demonstrates low income through programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, they are not penalized for housing a disabled family member. The new proposal would break with that criterion.
If implemented, the government could deduct the estimated value of housing and maintenance from the beneficiary’s monthly check, even if the family barely survives financially. This would imply cuts of up to a third of income —around $330 a month in some cases—or the complete loss of support.
The impact would be significant
According to calculations cited, up to 400,000 people could be affectedincluding young people with Down syndrome, people with severe autism and older adults with illnesses such as dementia who depend on their families to live.
The story of Timid’tyra Burton illustrates the human dimension of possible change. At 22 years old, he lives in Philadelphia with multiple intellectual disabilities that prevent you from working. His monthly SSI income of $994 is not enough to become independent, so he depends on the support of his father, who earns only about $2,000 a month. A cut in that income, specialists warn, could completely destabilize their situation.
“It is unfair to reduce the benefits of a person with a disability for living with their loved ones,” said Galen Carey, of the National Association of Evangelicals, in statements reported by ProPublica. “Knowing that they contribute and are not a burden can be a source of pride.”
The underlying argument of the measure is linked to the care for an eye on public spending. Some conservatives argue that these types of adjustments could save billions of dollars over the next decade. However, critics warn that the savings would be relative. Keeping a disabled person at home is usually much cheaper They have to finance their stay in specialized institutions, the daily cost of which can multiply the SSI support several times.
Furthermore, the proposal could increase the bureaucratic burden both for families and for the administration itself. Beneficiaries would have to constantly report changes in income, expenses and housing conditions, which would involve more paperwork and supervision.
From the White House, the response has been ambiguous. Rachel Cauley, spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget, He described the reports as “speculative,” while Social Security officials insisted on their commitment to protecting vulnerable populations.
For organizations defending people with disabilities, the measure not only represents a possible economic cutbut a change of approach: moving from a support system to one that could penalize family dependency. In a country where millions face barriers to labor inclusionthe discussion about SSI becomes a reflection of how the most vulnerable sectors are valued—or neglected.
Keep reading:
- What were the “ugly laws”, the rules with which the US penalized “ugliness” and persecuted the poor and the disabled?
- Workers with disabilities could earn more in their wages in the US.
