Can Anyone Explain This One To Me?

     A contracting notice posted by the Social Security Administration:

The purpose of this request for information (RFI) is to conduct market research to determine potential vendors that are capable of providing mobile Livescan fingerprinting services nationwide.

     I'm sorry but it sounds a little black helicopterish, if you know what I mean.

Chasing An Elusive Goal

     From a contracting notice posted by the Social Security Administration (SSA):

SSA is seeking the assistance of a contractor to conduct an evaluation of the Retaining Employment and Talent After Injury/Illness Network (RETAIN) demonstration projects. RETAIN is a joint demonstration with the Department of Labor (DOL) that will test early interventions to help workers stay at work or return to work after experiencing a work-threatening injury, illness, or disability. The ultimate policy goal is to reduce long-term disability - including the need for federal disability programs - and increase labor force participation among those individuals. ...

RETAIN is loosely modeled on several promising early intervention programs run by the Washington State workers' compensation system, including the Centers of Occupational Health and Education (COHE), the Early Return to Work program, and the Stay at Work program. These programs provide early intervention and return-to-work services for individuals with work-related health conditions. Preliminary results from COHE suggest a significant (26%) reduction in long-term transitions to SSDI. This demonstration will draw from and test key features of these Washington programs, in other states and/or for a population beyond workers' compensation (i.e., for non-occupational injuries and illnesses), and with an increased emphasis on employment-related supports.

Developing and conducting a rigorous evaluation of the interventions is a key component of RETAIN. In this joint demonstration, DOL will award cooperative agreements to states to operate RETAIN projects, and SSA will provide an independent, comprehensive national evaluation of all of the state projects. The national evaluation will include a process analysis, a participation analysis, an impact analysis, and a cost-benefit analysis. As part of the RETAIN evaluation, we will analyze the impact of these programs on the following broad outcomes:

In Case Of A Government Shutdown

     Even though Republicans control the House, the Senate and the White House there's a risk of a government shutdown at midnight Friday.  Money Magazine talks about what happened at Social Security the last time this happened:

In 2013, the Social Security Administration delayed 1,600 medical disability reviews and 10,000 Supplemental Security Income redeterminations on each day of the shutdown, a government report found.

Bill Introduced On Rep Payees

     From a press release issued on December 5:

Today, Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX) and Ranking Member John Larson (D-CT) introduced the Strengthening Protections for Social Security Beneficiaries Act of 2017 (H.R. 4547), bipartisan legislation to improve and strengthen the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) representative payee program. ...

The Strengthening Protections for Social Security Beneficiaries Act of 2017:

• Strengthens oversight by increasing the number of performance reviews of payees, requiring additional types of reviews, and improving the effectiveness of the reviews by the requiring the Protection and Advocacy system of each state to conduct the reviews, on behalf of the Social Security Administration (SSA).
• Reduces the burden on families by eliminating the requirement to file an annual payee accounting form for parents who live with their children and for spouses.
• Enhances personal control by allowing beneficiaries to designate their preferred payee in advance of actually needing one; and ensures improved selection of payees by requiring the SSA to assess the appropriateness of the preference list used to select payees.
• Improves beneficiary protections by increasing information sharing between the SSA and child welfare agencies, and by directing the SSA to study how better to coordinate with Adult Protective Services agencies and with state guardianship courts.
• Limits overpayment liability for children in the child welfare system.
• Ensures that no beneficiary has a barred payee by codifying the ban on individuals with certain criminal convictions from serving as payees and prohibiting individuals who have payees from serving as payees for others.

     I don't like the idea of greater involvement of Protection and Advocacy systems. I think that's asking for trouble. Social Security isn't good at that sort of interface. Unfortunately, there will always be some representative payees who rip off the people they're trying to help. I strongly doubt that this sort of thing would help.

Self-Referential For Good Reason?

     Jeff Caplan at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram has written another piece on the effects of the horrible hearing backlog at Social Security. I'll give you an excerpt, even though he's quoting me, since I was stating some things that most reading this already already know but which haven't been stated in this sort of article before:

... Initially [claimants with their own stories of hardship due to the hearing backlog] who contacted the Star-Telegram, said they were hesitant to air their grievances publicly for fear it would be detrimental to their cases.

Those fears are unfounded, said prominent disability attorney Charles Hall of Raleigh, N.C. He believes the Social Security Administration follows press reports and “perhaps usually speeds up the process when a case gets reported.” ...

Hall’s advice for anyone who believes they qualify for disability benefits is to start the process immediately. Too many people, he said, are convinced they will get better and will be able to return to work.

“They view filing for Social Security disability as unpleasant and demeaning. They think of it as a one-way trip, that if they file a disability claim that they can’t ever return to work. That’s not the way it is,” Hall said. “If a claimant gets better, they can always return to work. It’s frustrating to me that many of my clients wait until they’re destitute before ever filing a claim.

“It’s bad enough if you file the claim quickly. It’s so much worse if you wait until you’re homeless.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article188307729.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article188307729.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article188307729.html#storylink=cpy

Priceless

A Picture Of Eric Conn As He Was Being Arrested At A Pizza Hut In Honduras

Newsflash: Eric Conn In Custody

     A Honduran newspaper is reporting that Eric Conn is in custody.

Anarcho-Capitalism And ALJs

     The Trump Administration has decided to reverse the position taken by prior administrations on whether Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) are officers or employees. Prior administrations had argued they were employees. The Trump Administration is arguing to the Supreme Court that they are officers.

     Sounds boring, right? The problem is that if they are officers, their appointments have to be approved by the President. ALJs would all serve at the pleasure of the President. Got your attention now?
     Under the appointments clause of the Constitution, "officers" must be appointed by the President. Employees are not appointed by the President and are protected by civil service rules. ALJs have not been appointed by the President and are protected by those civil service rules. The difference between an officer and an employee is the degree of independent authority exercised.
     "Officers" need not be confirmed by the Senate. There is a corps of about 7,000 members of the Senior Executive Service (SES) who are considered "officers" in the federal government who must be appointed by the President but who are not confirmed by the Senate. They hold, well, senior positions at agencies. The confirmation is mostly a formality. Agencies send over lists of SES appointments for routine Presidential sign-off. However, the President can always refuse to sign-off on an SES appointment or insist that a certain person get an SES appointment or insist that a person holding an SES position by removed from his or her position. Political appointees can do the same to the extent that an SES office holder work for them.

     Since none of the ALJs on duty now have been approved by the President, all actions they have taken may be considered ultra vires, to use the legal term for "beyond their powers."
     If ALJs, as presently appointed, are found to be unconstitutional, the President could decide on which of the current ALJs he wants to keep and which he wants to leave. He could fire any of them at any time if they displease him. They could be ordered about pretty much as the President desires.

     Basically, if the President's position is upheld, the independent ALJ corps as we have known it is dead.
     Why would anyone argue for Presidential appointments of ALJs? If you have an ALJ decision you disagree with, you might want it overturned on the grounds that the ALJ who decided it had no legal authority to decide it. You might make the argument if you want all disputes you have with the federal government decided in a completely political manner. More importantly, you would make this argument if, like Steve Bannon, you wanted to "deconstruct the administrative state," by which you meant returning the federal government to some supposed state of nature after it has been drowned in a bathtub to use Grover Norquist's words. Given the growth of the American economy and population, I think that would bring about what could only be described as anarchy, although the more accurate term might be anarcho-capitalism, which really is a thing. Today's Republican party is rapidly becoming an openly anarcho-capitalist party.
     What would follow if ALJs as presently appointed are found to be unconstitutional? Maybe, they continue to be hired in much the same way as now but their appointments are routinely approved by the President and there's no interference with their exercise of judgment. Maybe, Trump starts picking individual ALJs to be fired based upon what he heard on Fox and Friends that morning. Maybe, there will be a wholesale turnover of ALJs with each Presidential Administration. Maybe, appointments of ALJs become openly political. Maybe, ALJs are routinely told by those holding political appointments what decisions they must make. Maybe, Social Security ALJs are told they must not approve more than some set percentage of disability claimants. God only knows.