Reel

LAWMAKERS, March 29, 1984

LAWMAKERS, March 29, 1984
Clip: 489329_1_1
Year Shot: 1984 (Actual Year)
Audio: Yes
Video: Color
Tape Master: 11246
Original Film: LM 138
HD: N/A
Location: Capitol Building and Environs, misc.
Timecode: -

[19.56.38-WETA credit/sponsor credit/title sequence] [19.57.26-Paul DUKE, Cokie ROBERTS, Linda WERTHEIMER in studio, seated around triangular desk, DUKE faces camera] DUKE introductions of co-hosts. This weeks program: a profile on Gary HART'S 10 years in CONGRESS as his bid for PRESIDENT causes a stir; "CARPETBAGGER" challenge to HOUSE members up for REELECTION; and a discussion of HOUSE vote on a bill to make it tougher to disqualify people from SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY BENEFITS-for 3 years "cheaters" have been targeted by the administration with sometimes severe results. [19.58.06-Rep. Barney FRANK (D-MA) seated at desk] FRANK-many were taken by surprise by the stories of cruelty to genuinely needy people over the past years. DUKE v.o.-the search for "cheaters" produced an avalanche of complaints that truly disabled were cut. [19.58.19-Louie BELLUCCI, an older middle-aged man seated,] DUKE v.o.-BELLUCCI suffers from nerve disorder, result, almost constant pain. BELLUCCI says if his benefit is taken away, he will lose his apartment, won't afford food, gas money, etc. [19.58.54] shot of apartment door knocker. BELLUCCI opens door to walk out. DUKE v.o.-he will go to Social Security office to appeal decision. Since 1981, 470,000 recipients have been taken off rolls. [shot of men and women entering a revolving door into an office-shot of woman sitting across desk from a social worker-close shot of paper that woman is reading] DUKE v.o.- 2 thirds of removed recipients have been restored, but appeals process takes about nine months, and there is no benefit in the meantime. Process terrifies recipients and wreaks havoc with the DISABILITY system. [19.59.26-Lou ENOFF, Social Security Administration, seated] ENOFF says that no one knew that the review system in place would not be adequate for the mass of appeal cases that followed the 1981 reforms. [19.59.38-Rep. FRANK at desk] DUKE v.o.-REAGAN administration says problems were inadvertent, but critics say the changes were too harsh and too hasty. FRANK-the ADMINISTRATION has said to 10s of thousands of sick people their illnesses no longer qualify for disability, even though the illness hasn't changed. [19.59.56-shot of front center podium of HOUSE chamber] DUKE v.o. when the reform bill to alleviate the denial of benefits reached HOUSE FLOOR this week, was bipartisan support. REPUBLICANS joined in criticism of REAGAN ADMINISTRATION position. [20.00.06-Rep. Christopher SMITH (R-NJ), standing to speak to HOUSE] SMITH says was troubled by numbers of truly disabled losing benefits. [20.00.14-Rep. Barber CONABLE (R-NY)] CONABLE-Executive Branch in retrospect implemented reviews in way that did not take into account the problem of length of appeal for disabled people denied benefits. [20.00.27-DEMOCRAT CONGRESSMEN speaking] DUKE v.o.-DEMOCRATS took opportunity to call the ADMINISTRATION "callous". [20.00.36-Rep. Claude PEPPER (D-FL) addresses HOUSE] PEPPER says it is the "cruelest, most sordid story in the history of our country". [20.00.59-Rep. Fortney STARK (D-CA)] STARK says the system has "struck fear in the hearts" of vulnerable citizens. DUKE v.o.-reform bill sailed through the HOUSE 410 to 1, but REPUBLICANS still insisted that DISABILITY needs to be monitored to get rid of abuses. [20.01.17-Rep. Bill ARCHER (R-TX)] ARCHER reminds colleagues that CONGRESS mandated the investigation, because many knew of cases where beneficiaries were fit to work or actually working for pay while drawing DISABILITY. "Cheaters" undermined credibility of entire program. [20.01.40-activity on the podium of the HOUSE chamber] DUKE v.o. the ADMINISTRATION has responded by proposing to delay the reviews of DISABILITY cases in order to prevent a new law from passing. Many REPUBLICANS think the timing of this is suspicious. [20.01.51-Rep. John HEINZ (R-PA)] HEINZ-A charitable interpretation is that the problem took this many months to come to the WHITE HOUSE'S attention [HEINZ'S tone is doubtful]. [20.02.15-ENOFF] ENOFF says there is no sudden surge of interest by the WHITE HOUSE in response to CONGRESS' proposals, there has been interest all along. [20.02.22-Rep. FRANK] DUKE v.o. FRANK argues the interest is greater on CAPITOL HILL. FRANK-There is bipartisan support for the idea that sick people who are already saddened by disability to some degree do not need the aggravation, and the government should leave their benefits alone. [20.02.42-DUKE] DUKE-the fight isn't over, but it's clear that legislation or moratorium will prevent people losing benefits while appealing their cases. It shows the difficulty in trying to provide for the needy while removing non-needy from rolls. [20.03.05-ROBERTS] ROBERTS-Also dramatizes the difficulty of REPUBLICANS in an ELECTION YEAR, not wanting to be portrayed as heartless, REPUBLICAN legislators beg WHITE HOUSE to do something. It seems the WHITE HOUSE is willing to end the removals until after the ELECTION. [20.03.30] DUKE-Does this necessarily mean that there will be a new wave of Social Security SPENDING on the HILL? ROBERTS-No, the recent budget from the HOUSE budget committee recommended program spending increases not to exceed rate of inflation, except for DEFENSE (duh). It's a moderate budget for HOUSE DEMOCRATS in an ELECTION YEAR. [20.04.12]