The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) was established by statute in 1964 as a federal advisory committee to promote better administration of federal agencies. After Republicans took control of Congress in 1995, ACUS was defunded. Although the authority for ACUS remained on the books, ACUS received no appropriation and ceased to operate. ACUS finally received renewed funding in this fiscal year and resumed operations in March. Michael Astrue, as Commissioner of Social Security, is a member of ACUS.
I do not recall any ACUS report on Social Security that had any useful effect. It was and is now composed primarily of law school professors and attorneys at large Washington, D.C. law firm, none of whom have any particular knowledge or experience with Social Security. This is unfortunate since the Social Security Administration simply does more administrative law than all other federal agencies combined. Nevertheless, it is good to see ACUS back in operation. I hope that any studies they do of Social Security are done after consultation with people who do have Social Security experience.
I never understood what the Republicans had against ACUS other than their desire to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.
I do not recall any ACUS report on Social Security that had any useful effect. It was and is now composed primarily of law school professors and attorneys at large Washington, D.C. law firm, none of whom have any particular knowledge or experience with Social Security. This is unfortunate since the Social Security Administration simply does more administrative law than all other federal agencies combined. Nevertheless, it is good to see ACUS back in operation. I hope that any studies they do of Social Security are done after consultation with people who do have Social Security experience.
I never understood what the Republicans had against ACUS other than their desire to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.
5 comments:
First, it's flatly untrue that none of these law professors and attorneys have any particular knowledge or experience with Social Security.
Take, for example, Paul Verkuil (the ACUS chairman). Since at least 1978, long before becoming one of my favorite law school professors, he was studying and making recommendations about Social Security hearings and appeals.
In 2003, he was the primary author of a research paper commissioned by the Social Security Advisory Board, which was published in the Administrative Law Review ("Alternative Approaches to Judicial Review of Social Security Disability Cases").
Good enough for SSD to have garnered this much professional attention from Verkuil; even better that he's chairing ACUS.
Second, shall we step outside about whether SSA "simply does more administrative law than all other federal agencies combined"?
Yes, it's true that SSA has more ALJ's than all the other federal agencies combined. However, I highly doubt that SSA "does more" administrative law practice than (just to name a few off the top of my head)...
Agriculture, Commerce, CFTC, Education, Energy, EPA, FEC, FCC, FTC, HHS, Homeland Security, ITC, OPM, Transportation, Treasury and the VA.
The Verkuil report cited above dates to 3/02. Here’s the opening paragraph of the SSAB’s cover letter:
"We are pleased to transmit the enclosed report by Paul Verkuil and Jeffrey Lubbers, titled
Alternative Approaches to Judicial Review of Social Security Disability Cases. This year Social
Security’s disability programs will account for nearly five percent of the Federal budget, about $100 billion. Nearly 10 million people depend upon them for benefits. They deserve the close attention of policy makers and the public."
Next, here’s a paragraph from page 14. I invite your attention to comment about “smart counsel.”
"These changes were never implemented, but they are still worthy of consideration. 53 One virtue of a closed record would be to enhance the precedential
impact of district courts review on the agency since the open file practice undermines attempts to follow a case to its conclusion. Furthermore, while the open file practice may have made some sense in an era where there was little legal assistance to work up the
case at the administrative stage, today most claimants are represented by attorneys 54 who
can be responsible for that task. Today it seems that smart counsel for claimants are in effect encouraged to “game” the system by holding back key pieces of data (medical records, etc.) in order to gain remands at the judicial review phase.55 This tactic may
delay the process unnecessarily (and may cost the claimant not only valuable time but higher attorney’s fees as well).56"
JOA
And, of course, one should note the presence of Prof. Jerry Mashaw, who's experience with SSA goes back to the 1970s.
Having sat through many an ACUS meeting in the 1980s, I can say that I am delighted to see the organization being reconstituted/resurrected.
Yes, Verkuil seems to know the system quite well indeed, at least based on the above.
(Though the Appeals Council should have been proofed from Appeals Counsel.)
Anyway, three cheers for ACUS!
Post a Comment