back to article Scandal-smashed OPM will no longer do govt's background checks – for obvious reasons

The US government is creating a new agency to process background checks for federal employees and contractors seeking security clearance. The Obama administration said it will instruct the Department of Defense (DoD) to oversee the establishments of the National Background Investigations Bureau (NBIB). The new agency will take …

  1. GrumpyKiwi

    So it'll be in the same building and with the same organisation and the same people who *****d up previously, but with a new acronym. That should work nicely.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "the same building and with the same organisation and the same people"

      Maybe not the worst solution if they've learned by their mistake. Would you prefer an outfit that's yet to learn?

      1. GrumpyKiwi

        I have yet to encounter a government department who's response to failure was "lets not do that again" as opposed to the normal response of "lets do it again, only this time spend twice as much money on it".

    2. asdf

      tire metaphor for ya

      Nothing fixes a flat quite like rotating the tires.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      There is one difference: Another thick bureaucratic layer on top of all the rest.

    4. Mark 85
      Trollface

      I'm sure they will have a new telephone number and maybe (?) a new IP address so the Chinese can't find them. </cynicism>

  2. channel extended

    New OPM

    The new agency will be created, but the old one will not be killed. THIS is how the US wound up with a several trillion dollar deficit.

    Plus they will simply duplicate the old software ( after all it works! ) and hire the same people.

    1. asdf

      Re: New OPM

      Actually the majority of the deficit is due to successive generations giving themselves entitlements like the Boomers who are spending 3 dollars for every 1 they put in during the lifetime through Medicare (pre Obama care). Their solution a decade ago was to vote themselves a prescription drug entitlement.

      1. Lars Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: New OPM

        @asdf, Are you shure it has nothing to do with spreading democracy on credit. And could it be that big pharma and the insurance companies or as they are called, if I remember right, the medical industrial complex has screwed the system and not the Boomers. Things aren't that difficult if you really want to understand.

      2. GrumpyOldBloke

        Re: New OPM

        @asdf - maybe add a dollar or two on top of public health for military spending (on and off books) and another one for bailing out Wall Street. Add a dollar for the ongoing expansion of the federal government under both parties. Perhaps a dime for constant meddling in other countries affairs and it all starts to add up.

        Medicare is expensive but that may have something to do with having the worlds most expensive medical solutions, the developed worlds worst food and being the worlds largest consumers of pharmaceutical products. There are numerous examples around the world of better outcomes at lower costs but lobbying and some irrational belief in exceptionalism may explain the determination of the US to stick with what its got. As everything must be a market based, something you buy rather than something you do, don't expect change anytime soon. Pray you live long enough to enjoy your $3.

      3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: New OPM

        "the Boomers"

        Ageism. The only remaining Politically Correct ism.

        1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

          Re: New OPM

          @Doctor Syntax, true enough. The only problem with these kids and their ageism is, some of us are still perfectly capable of knocking them onto their arse.

          This boomer prefers respect, but is perfectly willing to settle for fear of reprisal.

      4. Wzrd1 Silver badge

        Re: New OPM

        Erm, the reason for the deficit is the over 50% of the federal budget going into the DoD, with its massive fraud, waste and abuse still rampant.

        As for hiring the same people, don't be silly. They'll hire the same contracting firms, plus a new contract for new software, which will have cost overruns and failure to perform, but will be protected by hiring the DoD personnel after they leave the service.

        I've witnessed that very thing, repeatedly.

        1. 2StrokeRider

          Re: New OPM

          In fact 50% of the Federal budget did not go to DoD. You can find the actual OMB numbers here. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2015/assets/budget.pdf

          You may have been confused by appropriated funds vs mandatory spending. The US spends far more on social programs than DoD.

          Starting a new Mutilletter division is silly beyond reason. Just fix what you have don't start yet another failure.

        2. tom dial Silver badge

          Re: New OPM

          Sanity check:

          For fiscal year 2015 while military + (discretionary) veteran benefits were just under 60% of the discretionary budget, military + (total) veteran benefits were barely 20% of the total budget, considerably less than either Medicare and Health spending ( 27%) or Social Security (33%).

          The need for new software is not clear, since entry to the OPM network apparently was based on compromised credentials in a contractor's system.

  3. Kurt Meyer

    The Burgeoning Bureaucracy

    the Department of Defense (DoD)

    the National Background Investigations Bureau (NBIB)

    the Federal Investigative Service (FIS)

    the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

    I can't help but think that if only the US government had created an investigatory bureau years ago, they might have saved themselves the bother.

    1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

      Re: The Burgeoning Bureaucracy

      "I can't help but think that if only the US government had created an investigatory bureau years ago, they might have saved themselves the bother."

      Nah, they really only need to come up with yet another acronym to slap on the same old crap.

      1. Kurt Meyer

        @ Wzrd1 :Re: The Burgeoning Bureaucracy

        Oh, there'll be a new acronym certainly, but not on the same old crap. This won't be just a simple "rebranding". The ever expanding government will create new crap to with their new acronym.

        Then we will all be safer. ;-)

  4. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

    Time to create another TLA. I hereby move the FIA* (Federal Intelligence Agency) be founded and furnished with an appropiate budget forthwith.

    *okay, I borrowed that from "Attack of the Killer Tomatos". Best C-movie ever. Top agent Mason Dixon drives around in a car that has "FIA - unmarked car pool" stencilled on its doors. The movie also shows what the president does all day.

  5. a_yank_lurker

    Titanic?

    Why do I have a feeling of shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic about 30 minutes after hitting the iceberg?

    1. Mark 85

      Re: Titanic?

      I thought it was more like getting the dance band to play a snappy tune and take everyone's mind off the fact that the deck is tilting at an odd angle.

  6. -tim
    Black Helicopters

    Yet another security agency

    Will they get snazzy new uniforms? Maybe something designed by Hugo Boss?

    Will they have their own black helicopters? After all they have sensitive documents to move around.

    1. Kurt Meyer

      Re: Yet another security agency

      "Will they get snazzy new uniforms? Maybe something designed by Hugo Boss?"

      Some say those Hugo Boss designed uniforms were snazzy, and some have questions about them:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY

    2. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: Yet another security agency

      Whats wrong with Brooks Brothers?

      Re the black helicopters: those are for the suburbs and rural areas. It's windowless white vans in urban areas.

      1. Kurt Meyer

        Re: Yet another security agency

        "Whats wrong with Brooks Brothers?"

        They make a decent suit of clothes, but Hugo Boss has previous form.

        The youtube video mentioned above will give some explanation.

        Good call on the white vans.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Yet another security agency

      Having had a security clearance my entire adult life, a life that goes back to the bronze age, I'll explain it to you simply.

      They use contractors "to keep the costs down", costing more than keeping a federally employed body in that position.

      OPM wasn't the first agency to perform background checks, there used to be real federal employees conducting them. Now, we "save money" by farming it out to for-profit enterprises, for quite a bit more.

  7. Mikel

    effective, efficient, and secure

    Error in operator precedence

    1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

      Re: effective, efficient, and secure

      Typical government, "Faster, cheaper, better. Pick two".

  8. NotBob

    Yay

    Am I the only one excited by the possibility of personal information about me being in and eventually leaked or stolen from yet another agency?

    No one else is excited?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like