Tell Me About Sharepoint

     I notice that this blog gets some hits from Social Security's Intranet Sharepoint platform. Sharepoint is collaborative software which can be used either on an Intranet or over the Internet with password access. Sharepoint looks like it might be useful software for many organizations. How widespread is access to Sharepoint within Social Security? Does everyone have access to the whole thing or are there layers of access? How well does it work? Does most people like participating? How hard is it to set up a new collaborative effort within Sharepoint? Do you think it would be useful software for a professional group?

One Little Thing Not Mentioned In Yesterday's Press Release

     In addition to partially duplicating and to some extent contradicting Social Security's Listing of Impairments, the additions to the Compassionate Allowance list announced yesterday won't even be effective until August 13, 2012, a point that was not mentioned in the press release. What was the point of announcing a policy that won't even be in effect for more than three months?

     Once Social Security gets a new Commissioner next year this whole compassionate allowance thing needs to get folded into the Listings. That's what the Listings are for. If the Listings were inadequate, they should have been amended. There was no need to add another layer on top of the Listings. It's just confusing to those who have to administer the program.

Additions To Compassionate Allowances

     Social Security has sent out a press release announcing that 52 conditions have been added to the agency's Compassionate Allowance list. Several of the conditions listed are already in Social Security's Listings of Impairments, often with restrictions not included in this list, meaning that this list to some extent contradicts Social Security's regulations! I have not done an exhaustive survey. I expect there are others where an item on this list is included in the Listings but under a more general description. I believe that hepatoblastoma might be an example since all tumors of the liver meet Listing 13.19. Also, if I remember correctly, tabes dorsalis used to be in the Listings but was removed. Here are the newly added conditions with my notation in bold of the ones where there is a Listing:

• Aicardi-Goutieres Syndrome
• Alobar Holoprosencephaly 
• Alpers Disease
• Alpha Mannosidosis
• Carcinoma of Unknown Primary Site Listing 13.27
• Cerebrotendinous Xanthomatosis
• Child Neuroblastoma Listing 113.21
• Child Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Listing 113.05
• Chondrosarcoma with multimodal therapy
• Cornelia de Lange Syndrome-Classic Form
• Ewings Sarcoma 
• Follicular Dendritic Cell Sarcoma with metastases
• Fucosidosis - Type 1
• Galactosialidosis - Early Infantile Type
• Glioma Grade III and IV
• Hallervorden-Spatz Disease
• Hepatoblastoma
• Histiocytosis
• Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome
• Hydranencephaly
• Hypocomplementemic Urticarial Vasculitis
• Hypophosphatasia Perinatal lethal Form
• I Cell disease
• Infantile Free Sialic Acid Storage Disease
• Juvenile Onset Huntington Disease
• Kufs Disease Type A and B
• Lissencephaly
• Lymphomatoid Granulomatosis Grade III 
• Malignant Brain Stem Gliomas - Childhood
• Malignant Melanoma with metastases Listing 13.03
• Mastocytosis Type IV
• Medulloblastoma with metastasis
• Merkel Cell Carcinoma with metastases
• Myocolonic Epilepsy and Ragged Red Fibers Syndrome
• Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis Obliterative Bronchiolitis 
• Ohtahara Syndrome
• Orthochromatic Leukodystrophy with Pigmented Glia
• Pearson Syndrome
• Pelizaeus-Merzbacher Disease-Classic Form
• Pelizaeus-Merzbacher Disease-Connatal Form
• Peripheral Nerve Cancer - metastatic or recurrent Listing 13.13.B
• Perry  Syndrome 
• Rhabdomyosarcoma 
• Rhizomelic Chondrodysplasia Punctata
• Schindler Disease Type 1
• Smith Lemli Opitz Syndrome
• Spinal Nerve Root Cancer- metastatic or recurrent
• Stiff Person Syndrome
• Tabes Dorsalis
• Wolf-Hirschhorn Syndrome
• Xeroderma Pigmentosum Listings 8.07 and 108.07

Office Closures In Georgia

From the Moultrie, Georgia Observer:

With the Moultrie Social Security office on the budget chopping block, officials are hoping a way (sic) to find a way to prevent the closure scheduled for the end of June.

The agency said this week that the closing was based on a review of the office, significant budget shortfalls and other service options available to residents. The move is anticipated to save $2.1 million over 10 years.

In Georgia the Social Security Administration also closed its Swainsboro office in December, Patti Patterson, regional communications director in Atlanta, said in an email response. So far the agency has closed eight offices nationally with expected savings of $2 million annually.

The 2012 closings all are of offices that employ less than 11 and serve less than 80 visitors a day, Patterson said. Moultrie’s office has 11 employees and serves about 60 people per day. Those employees will be offered employment in other nearby offices.

Service Limitations Shock Senator

     Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii says he is "shocked" by the limited service that the Social Security Administration is offering in West Hawaii, which receives a visit from two Social Security employees once a month. On their last visit 80 people were lined up outside the door before the satellite office opened. Only 20 were allowed in at a time.

Is Social Security Privatization Unconstitutional?

     I cannot find a link but the April issue of The New Yorker includes an interesting letter to the editor from Bruce Brown, former law clerk to Chief Justice Warren Burger. He was writing in response to a Jeffrey Toobin piece in the New Yorker on the oral argument of the health care case at the Supreme Court. Brown wrote that there is an argument out there that if the individual mandate requiring purchase of health care insurance is unconstitutional that any plan to "reform" Social Security which contains a mandatory contribution to an investment owned by the contributor may also be unconstitutional. A mandatory contribution seems to be an integral part of all the Social Security "reform" plans proposed by the right.

     Update: One right wing proponent of privatization, Andrew Biggs, seems to concede that if the health care mandate is unconstitutional that Social Security privatization would be even more unconstitutional since Social Security privatization could not be justified under the Constitution's commerce clause. What Biggs openly wants, however, is for the courts to find all of Social Security unconstitutional. Right wing schemes to "reform" Social Security are all aimed at undermining and ultimately destroying Social Security.

The Attacks On Social Security Never Let Up

     Sylvester Schieber, who was George W. Bush's appointee as Chairman of the Social Security Advisory Board, has a new book out, The Predictable Surprise: The Unraveling of the U.S. Retirement System. Predictably, the book is hostile to Social Security. Here are some excerpts from Robert J. Samuelson's review in the Washington Post:

[Social Security] has become what was then [the 1930s] called “the dole” and is now known as “welfare.” This forgotten history clarifies why America’s budget problems are so intractable. ...

What we have is a vast welfare program grafted onto the rhetoric and psychology of a contributory pension. The result is entitlement. ...

By all rights, we should ask: Who among the elderly need benefits? How much? At what age? If Social Security and Medicare were considered “welfare” — something the nation does for its collective good — these questions would be easier. We would tailor programs to meet national needs. But entitlements are viewed as a higher-order moral claim, owed individuals based on past performance. So a huge part of government spending moves off-limits to intelligent discussion.

      We once had a broad consensus on Social Security. People like Schieber have been paid to disrupt that consensus. Those who support the continued existence of Social Security need to understand that there is a group of well-paid "experts" based in Washington whose job is to undermine Social Security. They are funded by right-wing enemies of Social Security. Schieber is one of this group. They produce books, blog posts, op ed pieces and studies. They are always available to speak on television and at conferences. They get appointed by Republicans to be on prestigious commissions and boards. They pose as scholars but they are just polemicists.
     Samuelson's fawning review has already drawn a response from Jared Bernstein.

Happy Easter