Monthly Archives: September 2014

An Instructive Graph

Posted on by
Reply

This one is from the Census Bureau’s Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013. The headline of the report is that American household median income stagnated for the second straight year and remains, in real terms, 8% lower than it was in the last year before the Panic of 2008. The graph below reflects that.2013MedianHouseholdIncome

What interests me about this graph, though, is not the end result snapshot, but the slopes of the graph’s separate lines, the changing levels of median incomes, as we come out of recessions and panics over the last 50 years.

Notice: coming out of nearly every one those dislocations, either immediately after it was over or shortly after, the slopes are up. Median household income recovered quickly for all groups indicated. To be sure, there were some significant lags in this—blacks often, Hispanics coming out of the 1990 mini-recession, for instance. However, even coming out of the 2000 dot-com bust, incomes “merely” stagnated overall (although with that one, incomes didn’t fall very much, either).

But coming out of the Panic, this administration’s policies have set a new record for holding back a recovery—incomes have not stagnated (would that we’d done that well); they’ve been pushed down.

Personal Health Information Security

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve had HIPAA—the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act—for nearly 20 years. This act requires, among other things, all handlers of our personal medical information (primarily, but not exclusively, our doctors, hospitals, and health coverage plan providers) to have our permission to pass that information along, even to other doctors, hospitals, and health coverage plan providers and to take adequate steps to safeguard that information when it’s in their hands or being passed along.

It seems that this administration doesn’t consider itself bound by that same law. The latest example of this evident lawlessness is ObamaMart. The GAO has completed its own assessment of ObamaMart’s security and security practices, and it’s unimpressed.

…weaknesses remained in the security and privacy protections applied to HealthCare.gov and its supporting systems.

This is a year after ObamaMart’s rollout and the discovery of its lack of security. This is four years after HHS, through its CDC, began developing ObamaMart and…testing…it. It boggles my pea brain that security problems of this magnitude could still exist.

In the report, the GAO makes six recommendations to the Department of Health and Human Services to implement security and privacy controls to protect sensitive material. The report also makes 22 recommendations to resolve technical weaknesses in security controls.

Problems with the site ranged from the agency not setting up an alternate processing site for HealthCare.gov systems to allow them to be recovered if the site was hacked or went down to the strength of passwords.

These are basic things that any Computer Science 101 freshman knows. But wait—there’s more.

In addition to these weaknesses, we also identified weaknesses in security controls related to boundary protection, identification and authentication, authorization and configuration management. Collectively, these weaknesses put HealthCare.gov systems and the information they contain at increased and unnecessary risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or loss.

These are more of those things any freshman learns. And these are more of the sorts of things that HIPAA was designed to protect.

The HHS has denied some of these problems exist.

HHS has agreed with three of the six recommendations and has agreed with all 22 technical recommendations.

This isn’t incompetence. These folks are extremely intelligent and talented. Nor is this laziness. These folks are among the hardest working in government. No, this shortfall was deliberate.

Among the issues that concerned the administration’s own technical experts at the time was that security testing could not be completed because the system was undergoing so many last-minute changes.

Because securing citizens’ personal information is only an afterthought to this administration. Because obeying the principles and spirit of HIPAA and related Federal laws, if not their letter, just doesn’t matter to this administration.

Rules, and Rules

Posted on by
Reply

In a northern California grade school, there’s a dress code. And there can be no exceptions to the rule.

A young girl was told by her school that she couldn’t wear a T-shirt to pay tribute to the lives lost on Sept 11, 2001.

School leaders say they have a good reason for banning the sixth-grader’s Sept 11 memorial T-shirt on Thursday. When her stepfather tried to get permission, school administrators say it violated their dress code.

District Senior Director for Community Relations Trent Allen said that students were only allowed to deviate from the uniform on free dress days, and 9/11 isn’t one of those days.

It’s very much an important part of the academic process, but need to enforce dress code policy. If you start making exceptions it is hard to draw the line.

Emphasis added to that last. Because there’s a hint there regarding the bureaucratic nature of rules.

Obamacare, Errors, and Attitudes

Posted on by
Reply

The AP has an article that goes into the pitfalls and pratfalls that Obamacare faces this fall, 2014 enrollment period. I’m interested in one error in particular and the attitude of one Democrat in particular who voted for Obamacare’s passage.

The error was the overpayment by the Federal government of many of the subsidies it handed out to…defray…the premium costs of having an Obamacare health plan. Overpayments could occur from a plan buyer underreporting income, from ObamaMart not correctly matching income data with subsidy accruals, and so on.

As a result of having discovered those overpayments, the government is trying to recoup them from the recipients. Congressman Bill Pascrell (D, NJ) disagrees with making people pay back part of their premium subsidy.

Why should individuals be punished if they got a bump in salary? To me, this was not the ACA I voted on.

Indeed, why should individuals be punished? Yet they would be, if Pascrell’s attitude prevails, by paying out more subsidy than was due. Oh, wait, the individuals being punished are taxpayers.

Of course Pascrell (and his fellow Democrats) know this; they just don’t care about those individuals. Taxpayers, after all, are just money trees with which to fund Democrats’ voters.

Graduated Escalation

Posted on by
Reply

A five-week campaign of US airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq has forced them to conceal their movements and blunted their acquisition of territory, US officials said.

However, the reaction of the group’s fighters—moving and living in more stealthy ways—also makes them harder to target.
…
The group…is now less likely to operate openly, having fighters hide among local populations.

Another lesson this administration has chosen to disregard, this lesson from our Vietnam War.

President Barack Obama authorized only scattered potshots for “humanitarian” reasons. At the time, ISIS forces were exposed, moving in bunches, and vulnerable to serious destruction had there been a serious air campaign launched against them.

With his decision to not strike hard, Obama has given these terrorists time to adapt to the battlefield, and he has made their destruction much harder to achieve.

With his decision to give the terrorists time to adapt by hiding among civilians—as Obama knew that they would do, with the Vietnam War’s lesson of the Viet Cong before him—Obama also has made the destruction of these terrorists much more…expensive…to achieve.

And he still can’t recognized these as terrorists; he insists on legitimizing their behavior by calling them militants.

‘Twas a famous Commander in Chief.