Payments Status, by State, February 28, 1959
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
and Michigan were receiving the highest monthly benefit-an average Notes and Brief Reports of $96.39 in Alaska and $95.93 in Disability Insurance percent were receiving benefits in the Michigan-and those in Mississippi Benefits in Current- $60-$89 range, and only 1 in 15 was were receiving the lowest benefits- receiving less than $60.00. Minimum an average of $77.81. Benefits rang- Payments Status, by State, benefits were being paid to only 0.2 ing from $90 to $116 were being paid February 28, 1959” percent of all disabled-worker bene- to 67 percent of the disabled-worker At the end of February 1959, the flciaries. beneficiaries in Michigan and to 27 old-age, survivors, and disability in- Among the 50 States and the Dis- percent in Mississippi. Only 14 per- surance program was paying disabil- trict of Columbia, disability insur- cent of the disability insurance bene- ity insurance benefits to 255,000 dis- ance beneficiaries living in Alaska ficiaries in Michigan but 48 percent abled workers aged 50-64-a ‘IO-per- cent increase from the number in Number and average monthly amount of disability insurance benefits 1 in December 1957. The accompanying current-payment status and percentage distribution by amount of beta&t, table shows the average monthly by State, February 28,1959 benefit amount as of February 28, 1959, and gives a percentage distribu- cumber Percent of dlsabflity beneEciaries receiving- state ’ Of diS- - - - - tion of the number of beneficiaries (ranked by size of AvdeEgeability - T- ability according to the size of their benefit. average benefit) benefit 83 4 ‘ )116 The data are classified by the bene- fl%% !Mal 24” % Y “E- _-I -- I’ - -- - _-- - .- - ficiaries’ State of residence at the end Total _______________ $88.11 254,701 100.0 0.2 0.9 5.6 19.1 25.4 20.4 21.2 7.2 of February 1959. _- -- _- Alaska ________________---. 96.39 69 100.0 0 2.9 10.3 iiT 19.1 41.2 10.3 In February 1959 the average dis- Michigan _______________-. 95.93 10,010 100.0 &, .3 2.5 10.8 19.2 20.6 33.5 13.2 ability insurance benefit amounted Connecticut _____________. 91.99 3,933 loo.0 2.7 14.8 23.6 24.8 9.0 Ohio ____________________-. Ql.98 13,638 1w.o :: 3.5 14.8 E-i 21.6 26.5 to $88.11-$15.35 more than the aver- Arizona __________________. 91.88 2,089 100.0 :: .4 3.4 13.9 $,2 21.2 25.0 1Z New Jersey ______________. 91.83 9,029 loo.0 15.5 22.4 25.1 age in December 1957. The higher California _____________---. 91.74 18,798 100.0 :i 2: 15.0 24.7 21.2 26.4 E Washington- ----_-------. 91.57 3,890 160.0 (4; .2 3.0 15.2 24.7 23.5 26.6 average resulted chiefly from provi- Indiana _______________-_-. 6,519 100.0 .l .6 4.2 15.0 22.9 22.2 26.0 ii; sions in the 1958 amendments that Nevada... ____________-__. i:::: 271 100.0 0 0 3.4 16.5 24.4 22.6 24.8 Wisconsin. _ --_______----. 91.18 4,;;; :g.; 4.2 16.2 22.1 21.7 24.8 10.0 (1) repealed, effective August 1958, Utah ____________________. 91.01 :i 2 4.6 15.4 21.4 21.9 11.5 the “offset” provision, under which Pennsylvania ____________. Qo.88 21,136 1OO:O .l .6 3.7 14.3 ii:; 26.1 23.1 6.8 disability insurance benefits were re- Oregon- _ _ _ _ __ __ ____ __ ____ 2,194 loo.0 16.1 24.4 25.2 West Vlrginla _________---- tiEi 4.809 100.0 Pj2 :i i.! 13.7 24.7 2 duced by payments based on disabil- IlllnOiS ________________---- 90.58 13,993 100.0 414 16.7 2: 24.6 8.9 ity payable under certain other pro- Montana. ____________--__ 90.12 754 100.0 1: :g" 17.2 16.6 11.8 Florida- __________________ 89.95 8,893 100.0 .I .Q 2 17.4 18.6 2: 9.6 grams, and (2) increased benefits by Wyoming _____________---- 269 100.0 4:9 15.5 Colorado __________________ %Z.i 1,515 loo.0 :f :t 16.8 2: $3: ::: about 7 percent, effective January New York ____________---- .5 4”:; 18.4 20:5 Delaware _________-__---- Z:S “E ET: :: 5.0 21.6 18.9 18:s 1E 1959. Another factor increasing the Idaho. ________________---- 88.63 559 loo.0 0 :: 19.5 22.0 22.4 5:s average beneflt was the rise in the Minnesota ____________-___ 2,912 100.0 1.0 i: 19.1 21.4 22.1 Maryland- _ _ _____________ iFi’4 3.545 loo.0 :: 617 19.1 21.5 2: proportion of benefits computed on Hawaii- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ 87.10 588 109.0 .2 ::, 5.5 E 24.6 18.5 2:Q the basis of earnings after 1950; the Kansas_.--..-.--.-------- 1.4 25.5 20.5 IQ. 4 proportion increased from 62 percent New Mexico ______________ :i iit.: 20.1 18.8 Massachu.?etts ____________ :: 21:6 2:: 17.2 in December 1957 to almost 69 per- Iowa __________________--- - :: 20.8 ii:: 19.0 Oklahoma-.-.-.--..------ .a i.1 21.6 E:: 19.Q cent in November 1958, the latest Virgin Islands __-__--_-- 0 0’ 40.0 Ei 20.0 date for which this information is Rhode Island _________--__ .3 21.7 3E.o 21:o 16.9 Missouri__________________ ",;GZ& ;@&!j :: 19.1 19.0 available. The average disability in- New Hampshire __________ 0 ::i 2: iif;: 21.6 14.9 Nebraska.-.---....-.----- 1,338 1OO:o 1.7 1Q:Q 20.2 16.8 surance benefit went up in each of Kentucky ________________ 4.950 100.0 2 1.6 21.9 27.8 19.8 16.5 the 14 months-from $72.76 in De- Vermont ______________-_-_ 6Q7 100.0 1.0 21.8 21.8 14.8 South Dakota ____________ 22.0 2: 22.5 16.5 cember 1957 to $88.11 in February 421 100.0 :: .7 Texas.----._----.-..------ 10,210 100.0 .3 1.6 18.0 17.1 1959. Dlst. of Co1 ___________-___ 1,097 loo.0 0 .6 E 2:: 19.7 13.3 Almost half of all disabled-worker Virginia - - _ - - _ __ _ _---_ - - - - 5,953 loo.0 ;:; 24.9 18.4 Maine.------.--..-.------ 1,702 100.0 :: ::i 19.2 :z beneficiaries were receiving monthly North Dakota ____________ 272 loo.0 10:s ~~~ 18.4 12: 4 Tennessee- _ _ _____________ :: ;:p 25: 7 18.6 14.0 benefits of $90-$116. The proportion Alabama. _________________ .7 it: 25.7 17.4 14.0 receiving the maximum amount - LOUiSlana..~ _ - - -- _ _ - - -_ - -- 10.4 27.6 15.6 14.4 Arkansas. ________________ :: $3 11.0 26.8 15.5 12.8 $116 in February 1959 and $108.50in Georgia _____ ______________ 2.4 10.4 30.8 14.0 10.0 South Carolina ___________ :: 1.9 10.8 30.2 15.0 December 1957-increased from 1.4 North Carolina ___________ .3 10.5 31.7 14.0 2: percent in December 1957 to 7.2 per- Mississippi _______________ :I! 11.7 32.4 13.9 10.1 Puerto Rlw ______________ 5:: 16:s 1Q.Q 22.1 10.1 5.4 cent in February 1959. Forty-four Foreign ___________________ 765 100.0 0 .3 1.6 10.7 26.925.3 28.2 - - - *Prepared in the Division of Program 1 Payable to disabled workers aged EO-64. Analysis, Bureau of Old-Age and Sur- 2 Beneficiary’s State of residence. vivors Insurance. : Less than 0.05 percent. Bulletin, January 1960 15 of those in Mississippi were receiving In October of 1951-the first year amendments to the Social Security benefits of $33-$74. coverage for these workers was possi- Act is shown in table 1. ble-more than half a million em- The Social Security Act Amend- ployees were covered; they repre- ments of 1950 permitted coverage, sented approximately 13 percent of effective in 1951, of State and local Coverage of State and Local all persons employed by State or local government employees who were not governments at that time. The 55 protected by retirement systems. By Government Employees percent covered in January 1959 was October 1954 coverage under this Under OASDI* more than four times the proportion provision had been extended to ap- Old-age, survivors, and disability with coverage in October 1951, and proximately 1 out of every 5 of these insurance coverage of State and local the number of covered employees had government employees. The 1954 government employees has increased increased to six times the number amendments granted eligibility for in each of the 8 years that the pro- covered in 1951. coverage, effective in 1955, to most tection of the Federal program has One reason for the rise in number employees who were under a State or been available to this group. As of was the growth in State and local local retirement system. By October January 1959 about 31/4 million, or 55 government employment, which in- 1957, 2 out of every 5 State or local creased by more than 11/2 million government employees were covered, during the period October 1951- including almost a million who were Table l.-State and local government employment, total number and January 1959.