Baucus Denounces Biggs Recess Appointment

From the New York Times:

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, denounced Bush for making Andrew Biggs, a leading proponent of privatizing the Social Security retirement program, deputy commissioner of Social Security.

``Prospects for getting real Social Security reform anytime soon just took a big hit,'' Baucus said. ``This administration is clearly not serious about leaving behind the failed schemes of the past and moving on to constructive discussions about the future of Social Security.''

Andrew Biggs Gets Recess Appointment As Deputy Commissioner

A few days after Commissioner Astrue appointed Andrew Biggs to a position as Deputy Commissioner for Policy, a position which does not require Senate confirmation, President Bush has used the Congressional recess to give Biggs a recess appointment as the number two position at Social Security, Deputy Commissioner, according to Dow Jones Market Watch. The Deputy Commissioner slot normally requires Senate confirmation. The Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee had earlier made it clear that Biggs' nomination to become Deputy Commissioner would not be go forward. With a recess appointment Biggs can serve as Deputy Commissioner of Social Security until the end of the current Congressional session.

This recess appointment can only complicate Commissioner Astrue's life. Biggs's only interest in the Social Security Administration has appeared to be in dismantling the agency in favor of private accounts. It puts Biggs in a position to try to use the resources of the Social Security Administration to push privatization. Commissioner Astrue will have the constant worry that Biggs is going to do something that will cause embarrassment.

It seems unlikely that Astrue had much warning that this was coming, since he appointed Biggs to a position that did not require confirmation just a few days ago.

Astrue's patience may be tested in coming months -- and there are many signs that Michael Astrue is not a patient man.

Federal Register Alert

Below is a description of an item that Social Security will publish in tomorrow's Federal Register. My guess is that this only concerns the extension of withholding of fees to certain non-attorneys and to SSI and is likely to be non-controversial, but we shall see.

RULES

Social security benefits and supplementary security income:

Federal old age, survivors, and disability insurance and aged, blind, and disabled--

Attorney Fee Payment System extended, eligible non-attorney representatives fee withholding and payment procedures, and past-due benefits definition, E7-06383 [SAA 2006-0097]

SSA Continues To Seach For Panacea

I have posted earlier about Social Security's preposterous efforts to obtain software that will magically reorganize disability claims files scanned under the new eDIB sytem. The software would have to eliminate duplicate copies of medical records, separate the documents by medical provider and organize the records in chronological order. I regard this quest as hopeless, because it is well beyond what is currently possible with computer technology.

There have been some questions in response to Social Security's "Request For Information" (RFI) on this subject and Social Security has posted answers to those questions. One of the answers suggests that Social Security has already wasted money on this wild goose chase. An aptly named company got that busisess. Here is the exchange:

In 2004, Panacea Consulting was awarded a contract for the Social Security Administration's requirement for document scanning services to support the Agency's initiative to improve the disability claims process. This contract required document analysis, document separation, classification, and metadata extraction after scanning documents for FO's, DDS's and hearing offices. How does this RFI relate to the documents being scanned for this contract? The Panacea contract is no longer in place. The current scanning Blanked Purchase Agreement (BPA) is with Lockheed Martin (LM). The objective of this BPA is for the contractor to digitally image paper medical and non-medical evidence and provide related activities, including data transmission and electronic and paper document control. There is no correlation between this RFI and the documents being scanned under the BPA.

OPM Meets All Goal -- According To Their Press Release

According to a press release from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), they:

...met the agency's goals for the month of March. The goals, as outlined in OPM's Strategic and Operational Plan, are a part of the agency's efforts to ensure the American public can count on the federal workforce to produce the high quality work products expected.

OPM's list of goals did not include completing work on a new register for Administrative Law Judges, but did include encrypting their Blackberries.

OIG Newsletter

Social Security's Office of Inspector General has issued its March 2007 newletter, that it calls Eye on OIG. The newsletter gives information about OIG's recent investigations and convictions.

Replacing The DOT -- Delay Order From Martin Gerry

As boring as this may seem, it is a big honking deal.

Social Security relies heavily upon the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) in making disability determinations. The DOT lists something like 12,000 different occupations in the national economy. Social Security uses the DOT in classifying the work formerly performed by a claimant and, more importantly, in coming up with alternative job possibilities for a claimant who can no longer perform his or her past relevant work. Disability claims are approved and denied based upon the DOT.

The problem is that the DOT is seriously out of date -- like 30 years or more out of date. It largely predates personal computers. No one familiar with the situation denies the obvious, that the DOT is seriously unreliable. Social Security is skating on thin ice in making disability determinations based upon the DOT and has known it for years.

The Department of Labor has replaced the DOT with something called the O*NET, but Social Security cannot use the O*NET. The information in the O*NET does not come close to meshing with Social Security's regulations. It may be hard to believe if you are unfamiliar with the DOT, the O*NET and Social Security's regulations, but there is no way to bridge the gap. So what does Social Security do? They were looking at doing their own version of an update to the DOT, but read this from The Work Suite, by John Reeves:

Although no longer listed at the International Association of Rehabilitation Professionals’ web site, http://www.rehabpro.org, it was previously reported that:

"SSA [Social Security Administration] and DOL [Deparment of Labor] have been working, both independently and together, to prepare for the transition from DOT to an updated occupationally specific data. Both agencies are preparing a joint white paper that outlines recent and planned SSA and DOL efforts to support SSA’s development of the type of data required for disability programs and vocational rehabilitation services. This document will serve as a basis for executive-level agency discussions, leading to more formal collaborative arrangements, such as an interagency workgroup established under a Memorandum of Understanding. To address the changes anticipated by the eventual obsolescence of the DOT, SSA needs to work with DOL on strategies for SSA’s development of additional occupational data while simultaneously investigating options for updating its medical-vocational policies as well."

According to one participant in the Interorganizational O*NET Task Force [IOTF], IOTF has done nothing further for the past several years. Martin Gerry (Deputy Commissioner for Disability) apparently put a hold on the DOT update that the policy people wanted, and had an RFP [Request for Proposal, a prelude to signing a contract with a vendor] ready for. [emphasis added] There is now a new Commissioner, Michael Astrue. Not surprisingly, SSA apparently has no discretionary dollars because of war in Iraq, so the need for an occupational database might be a unaddressed until after the next presidential election.

And The Winner Is ...

G. Hobbie won our first Social Security News NCAA Pool. Sorry, but your only prize is this public recognition of your prognostication skills.

We will not talk of my humiliation in this NCAA Pool. Honestly, I do know something about college basketball!