correction

Author Correction: Quantum wave–particle superposition in a delayed-choice experiment




correction

Author Correction: Management of IBD during the COVID-19 outbreak: resetting clinical priorities




correction

Correction: Ketamine metabolites, clinical response, and gamma power in a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial for treatment-resistant major depression




correction

Author Correction: Insights into parathyroid hormone secretion




correction

Author Correction: Vitamin lipid nanoparticles enable adoptive macrophage transfer for the treatment of multidrug-resistant bacterial sepsis




correction

Publisher Correction: Optomechanical detection of vibration modes of a single bacterium




correction

Author Correction: “Dysfunctions” induced by Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery are concomitant with metabolic improvement independent of weight loss




correction

Author Correction: Comprehensive molecular characterization of mitochondrial genomes in human cancers




correction

Author Correction: <i>Cdkn1a</i> deletion improves stem cell function and lifespan of mice with dysfunctional telomeres without accelerating cancer formation




correction

Correction to: AFF1 and AFF4 differentially regulate the osteogenic differentiation of human MSCs




correction

Correction: Humanized bone facilitates prostate cancer metastasis and recapitulates therapeutic effects of Zoledronic acid in vivo




correction

Correction: Importance of gastric cancer for the diagnosis and surveillance of Japanese Lynch syndrome patients




correction

Correction to ‘Genotyping of Malaysian G6PD-deficient neonates by reverse dot blot flow-through hybridisation’




correction

Author Correction: Proteomic and interactomic insights into the molecular basis of cell functional diversity




correction

Author Correction: Climate change: an enduring challenge for vector-borne disease prevention and control




correction

Correction: A characterization of personal care product use among undergraduate female college students in South Carolina, USA





correction

Recent Social Security blogs—some corrections


Recently, Brookings has posted two articles commenting on proposals to raise the full retirement age for Social Security retirement benefits from 67 to 70. One revealed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the program actually works and what the effects of the policy change would be. The other proposes changes to the system that would subvert the fundamental purpose of the Social Security in the name of ‘reforming’ it.

A number of Republican presidential candidates and others have proposed raising the full retirement age. In a recent blog, Robert Shapiro, a Democrat, opposed this move, a position I applaud. But he did so based on alleged effects the proposal would in fact not have, and misunderstanding about how the program actually works. In another blog, Stuart Butler, a conservative, noted correctly that increasing the full benefit age would ‘bolster the system’s finances,’ but misunderstood this proposal’s effects. He proposed instead to end Social Security as a universal pension based on past earnings and to replace it with income-related welfare for the elderly and disabled (which he calls insurance).

Let’s start with the misunderstandings common to both authors and to many others. Each writes as if raising the ‘full retirement age’ from 67 to 70 would fall more heavily on those with comparatively low incomes and short life expectancies. In fact, raising the ‘full retirement age’ would cut Social Security Old-Age Insurance benefits by the same proportion for rich and poor alike, and for people whose life expectancies are long or short. To see why, one needs to understand how Social Security works and what ‘raising the full retirement age’ means.

People may claim Social Security retirement benefits starting at age 62. If they wait, they get larger benefits—about 6-8 percent more for each year they delay claiming up to age 70. Those who don’t claim their benefits until age 70 qualify for benefits -- 77 percent higher than those with the same earnings history who claim at age 62. The increments approximately compensate the average person for waiting, so that the lifetime value of benefits is independent of the age at which they claim. Mechanically, the computation pivots on the benefit payable at the ‘full retirement age,’ now age 66, but set to increase to age 67 under current law. Raising the full retirement age still more, from 67 to 70, would mean that people age 70 would get the same benefit payable under current law at age 67. That is a benefit cut of 24 percent. Because the annual percentage adjustment for waiting to claim would be unchanged, people who claim benefits at any age, down to age 62, would also receive benefits reduced by 24 percent.

In plain English, ‘raising the full benefit age from 67 to 70' is simply a 24 percent across-the-board cut in benefits for all new claimants, whatever their incomes and whatever their life-expectancies.

Thus, Robert Shapiro mistakenly writes that boosting the full-benefit age would ‘effectively nullify Social Security for millions of Americans’ with comparatively low life expectancies. It wouldn’t. Anyone who wanted to claim benefits at age 62 still could. Their benefits would be reduced. But so would benefits of people who retire at older ages.

Equally mistaken is Stuart Butler’s comment that increasing the full-benefit age from 67 to 70 would ‘cut total lifetime retirement benefits proportionately more for those on the bottom rungs of the income ladder.’ It wouldn’t. The cut would be proportionately the same for everyone, regardless of past earnings or life expectancy.

Both Shapiro and Butler, along with many others including my other colleagues Barry Bosworth and Gary Burtless, have noted correctly that life expectancies of high earners have risen considerably, while those of low earners have risen little or not at all. As a result, the lifetime value of Social Security Old-Age Insurance benefits has grown more for high- than for low-earners. That development has been at least partly offset by trends in Social Security Disability Insurance, which goes disproportionately to those with comparatively low earnings and life expectancies and which has been growing far faster than Old-Age Insurance, the largest component of Social Security.

But even if the lifetime value of all Social Security benefits has risen faster for high earners than for low earners, an across the board cut in benefits does nothing to offset that trend. In the name of lowering overall Social Security spending, it would cut benefits by the same proportion for those whose life expectancies have risen not at all because the life expectancy of others has risen. Such ‘evenhandeness’ calls to mind Anatole France’s comment that French law ‘in its majestic equality, ...forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in streets, or steal loaves of bread.’

Faulty analyses, such as those of Shapiro and Butler, cannot conceal a genuine challenge to policy makers. Social Security does face a projected, long-term funding shortfall. Trends in life expectancies may well have made the system less progressive overall than it was in the past. What should be done?

For starters, one needs to recognize that for those in successive age cohorts who retire at any given age, rising life expectancy does not lower, but rather increases their need for Social Security retirement benefits because whatever personal savings they may have accumulated gets stretched more thinly to cover more retirement years.

For those who remain healthy, the best response to rising longevity may be to retire later. Later retirement means more time to save and fewer years to depend on savings. Here is where the wrong-headedness of Butler’s proposal, to phase down benefits for those with current incomes of $25,000 or more and eliminate them for those with incomes over $100,000, becomes apparent. The only source of income for full retirees is personal savings and, to an ever diminishing degree, employer-financed pensions. Converting Social Security from a program whose benefits are based on past earnings to one that is based on current income from savings would impose a tax-like penalty on such savings, just as would a direct tax on those savings. Conservatives and liberals alike should understand that taxing something is not the way to encourage it.

Still, working longer by definition lowers retirement income needs. That is why some analysts have proposed raising the age at which retirement benefits may first be claimed from age 62 to some later age. But this proposal, like across-the-board benefit cuts, falls alike on those who can work longer without undue hardship and on those in physically demanding jobs they can no longer perform, those whose abilities are reduced, and those who have low life expectancies. This group includes not only blue-collar workers, but also many white-collar employees, as indicated by a recent study of the Boston College Retirement Center. If entitlement to Social Security retirement benefits is delayed, it is incumbent on policymakers to link that change to other ‘backstop’ policies that protect those for whom continued work poses a serious burden. It is also incumbent on private employers to design ways to make workplaces friendlier to an aging workforce.

The challenge of adjusting Social Security in the face of unevenly distributed increases in longevity, growing income inequality, and the prospective shortfall in Social Security financing is real. The issues are difficult. But solutions are unlikely to emerge from confusion about the way Social Security operates and the actual effects of proposed changes to the program. And it will not be advanced by proposals that would bring to Social Security the failed Vietnam War strategy of destroying a village in order to save it.

Authors

Image Source: © Sam Mircovich / Reuters
      
 
 




correction

There’s no recession, but a market correction could cause one

Before last Friday’s employment release, some pessimistic observers feared a recession was near. The latest GDP release from the BEA showed real output growth slowed to a crawl in the first quarter, rising at an annual rate of only 0.7 percent. And that followed the report on March employment that had shown an abrupt slowdown…

       




correction

Recent Social Security blogs—some corrections


Recently, Brookings has posted two articles commenting on proposals to raise the full retirement age for Social Security retirement benefits from 67 to 70. One revealed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the program actually works and what the effects of the policy change would be. The other proposes changes to the system that would subvert the fundamental purpose of the Social Security in the name of ‘reforming’ it.

A number of Republican presidential candidates and others have proposed raising the full retirement age. In a recent blog, Robert Shapiro, a Democrat, opposed this move, a position I applaud. But he did so based on alleged effects the proposal would in fact not have, and misunderstanding about how the program actually works. In another blog, Stuart Butler, a conservative, noted correctly that increasing the full benefit age would ‘bolster the system’s finances,’ but misunderstood this proposal’s effects. He proposed instead to end Social Security as a universal pension based on past earnings and to replace it with income-related welfare for the elderly and disabled (which he calls insurance).

Let’s start with the misunderstandings common to both authors and to many others. Each writes as if raising the ‘full retirement age’ from 67 to 70 would fall more heavily on those with comparatively low incomes and short life expectancies. In fact, raising the ‘full retirement age’ would cut Social Security Old-Age Insurance benefits by the same proportion for rich and poor alike, and for people whose life expectancies are long or short. To see why, one needs to understand how Social Security works and what ‘raising the full retirement age’ means.

People may claim Social Security retirement benefits starting at age 62. If they wait, they get larger benefits—about 6-8 percent more for each year they delay claiming up to age 70. Those who don’t claim their benefits until age 70 qualify for benefits -- 77 percent higher than those with the same earnings history who claim at age 62. The increments approximately compensate the average person for waiting, so that the lifetime value of benefits is independent of the age at which they claim. Mechanically, the computation pivots on the benefit payable at the ‘full retirement age,’ now age 66, but set to increase to age 67 under current law. Raising the full retirement age still more, from 67 to 70, would mean that people age 70 would get the same benefit payable under current law at age 67. That is a benefit cut of 24 percent. Because the annual percentage adjustment for waiting to claim would be unchanged, people who claim benefits at any age, down to age 62, would also receive benefits reduced by 24 percent.

In plain English, ‘raising the full benefit age from 67 to 70' is simply a 24 percent across-the-board cut in benefits for all new claimants, whatever their incomes and whatever their life-expectancies.

Thus, Robert Shapiro mistakenly writes that boosting the full-benefit age would ‘effectively nullify Social Security for millions of Americans’ with comparatively low life expectancies. It wouldn’t. Anyone who wanted to claim benefits at age 62 still could. Their benefits would be reduced. But so would benefits of people who retire at older ages.

Equally mistaken is Stuart Butler’s comment that increasing the full-benefit age from 67 to 70 would ‘cut total lifetime retirement benefits proportionately more for those on the bottom rungs of the income ladder.’ It wouldn’t. The cut would be proportionately the same for everyone, regardless of past earnings or life expectancy.

Both Shapiro and Butler, along with many others including my other colleagues Barry Bosworth and Gary Burtless, have noted correctly that life expectancies of high earners have risen considerably, while those of low earners have risen little or not at all. As a result, the lifetime value of Social Security Old-Age Insurance benefits has grown more for high- than for low-earners. That development has been at least partly offset by trends in Social Security Disability Insurance, which goes disproportionately to those with comparatively low earnings and life expectancies and which has been growing far faster than Old-Age Insurance, the largest component of Social Security.

But even if the lifetime value of all Social Security benefits has risen faster for high earners than for low earners, an across the board cut in benefits does nothing to offset that trend. In the name of lowering overall Social Security spending, it would cut benefits by the same proportion for those whose life expectancies have risen not at all because the life expectancy of others has risen. Such ‘evenhandeness’ calls to mind Anatole France’s comment that French law ‘in its majestic equality, ...forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in streets, or steal loaves of bread.’

Faulty analyses, such as those of Shapiro and Butler, cannot conceal a genuine challenge to policy makers. Social Security does face a projected, long-term funding shortfall. Trends in life expectancies may well have made the system less progressive overall than it was in the past. What should be done?

For starters, one needs to recognize that for those in successive age cohorts who retire at any given age, rising life expectancy does not lower, but rather increases their need for Social Security retirement benefits because whatever personal savings they may have accumulated gets stretched more thinly to cover more retirement years.

For those who remain healthy, the best response to rising longevity may be to retire later. Later retirement means more time to save and fewer years to depend on savings. Here is where the wrong-headedness of Butler’s proposal, to phase down benefits for those with current incomes of $25,000 or more and eliminate them for those with incomes over $100,000, becomes apparent. The only source of income for full retirees is personal savings and, to an ever diminishing degree, employer-financed pensions. Converting Social Security from a program whose benefits are based on past earnings to one that is based on current income from savings would impose a tax-like penalty on such savings, just as would a direct tax on those savings. Conservatives and liberals alike should understand that taxing something is not the way to encourage it.

Still, working longer by definition lowers retirement income needs. That is why some analysts have proposed raising the age at which retirement benefits may first be claimed from age 62 to some later age. But this proposal, like across-the-board benefit cuts, falls alike on those who can work longer without undue hardship and on those in physically demanding jobs they can no longer perform, those whose abilities are reduced, and those who have low life expectancies. This group includes not only blue-collar workers, but also many white-collar employees, as indicated by a recent study of the Boston College Retirement Center. If entitlement to Social Security retirement benefits is delayed, it is incumbent on policymakers to link that change to other ‘backstop’ policies that protect those for whom continued work poses a serious burden. It is also incumbent on private employers to design ways to make workplaces friendlier to an aging workforce.

The challenge of adjusting Social Security in the face of unevenly distributed increases in longevity, growing income inequality, and the prospective shortfall in Social Security financing is real. The issues are difficult. But solutions are unlikely to emerge from confusion about the way Social Security operates and the actual effects of proposed changes to the program. And it will not be advanced by proposals that would bring to Social Security the failed Vietnam War strategy of destroying a village in order to save it.

Authors

Image Source: © Sam Mircovich / Reuters
      
 
 




correction

Coronavirus 'is a true black-swan event,' sparking corrections across global markets

International investors believe coronavirus is truly a global phenomenon, and the entire global stock market has been taken down.




correction

Market correction could hit once Wall Street realizes fewer rate cuts are coming, Blackstone warns

Blackstone's Joseph Zidle predicts the Fed will cut rates but says Wall Street won't get what it wants, and stocks could fall as much as 20%.




correction

Private investors in trading surge as coronavirus sparks market correction

As world markets take a turn for the worse, investors use ETFs as they hope to profit from any bounceback 




correction

Clarifications & corrections

Our 17 February 2019 serialisation of Tom Bower's biography of Jeremy Corbyn included an allegation that the Palestinian Return Centre blamed the Jews for the Holocaust. The PRC has..




correction

Corrections and clarifications

Articles of 22 October 2018 and 28 January 2019 may have suggested that Camilla Austin was knowingly involved in a £13.7m pension scam run by her father. The court found no wrongdoing.




correction

Clarifications & corrections

A report on match-fixing allegations in Greek football said that Olympiacos were set to be relegated and that their owner Evangelos Marinakis faced a fine and life ban from football.




correction

Clarifications & corrections 

An article on May 6 about the UK's death toll from coronavirus said that the fourday Cheltenham Festival was 'allowed to go ahead from March 16'. We are happy to clarify that the Festival in fact ran...




correction

Indigenous people in the federal correctional system [electronic resource] / Hon. John McKay, chair

[Ottawa] : House of Commons, Canada, 2018




correction

Hispanic Resources: News & Events: CORRECTION: Next Monday!: Reading and Conversation with Portuguese Poet Ana Luisa Amaral

Portuguese poet Ana Luísa Amaral will participate in a conversation and reading from her new book of poems What’s in a name? (New Directions, 2019) translated by Margaret Jull Costa. Amaral is one of Portugal’s most exciting poets whose work has been described as “small hypnotic miracles […] reminiscent of Szymborska and of Emily Dickinson”. This event will include a display of special editions of authors that have shaped Amaral’s literary work and scholarship, like Emily Dickinson, William Shakespeare, and Sophia de Mello Breyner Andresen. Sponsored by the Hispanic Division in collaboration with Instituto Camões and the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at Georgetown University. 

Date and time: Monday, April 8, 2019 / Book display (4:00-5:00 p.m.) / Reading and Conversation (5:00-6:00 p.m.)
Location: Hispanic Reading Room (LJ-240), Thomas Jefferson Building (2nd floor), Library of Congress.

Free tickets available via Eventbrite:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/poetry-reading-conversation-with-ana-luisa-amaral-tickets-58858781199

Click here for more information.




correction

Lower limb deformities: deformity correction and function reconstruction / Sihe Qin, Jiancheng Zang, Shaofeng Jiao, Qi Pan, editors

Online Resource




correction

Correction: Dynamic covalent polymer networks via combined nitroxide exchange reaction and nitroxide mediated polymerization

Polym. Chem., 2020, 11,2761-2761
DOI: 10.1039/D0PY90053B, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Yixuan Jia, Yannick Matt, Qi An, Isabelle Wessely, Hatice Mutlu, Patrick Theato, Stefan Bräse, Audrey Llevot, Manuel Tsotsalas
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

Correction: Block copolymer hierarchical structures from the interplay of multiple assembly pathways

Polym. Chem., 2020, 11,2762-2762
DOI: 10.1039/D0PY90057E, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Alessandro Ianiro, Meng Chi, Marco M. R. M. Hendrix, Ali Vala Koç, E. Deniz Eren, Michael Sztucki, Andrei V. Petukhov, Gijsbertus de With, A. Catarina C. Esteves, Remco Tuinier
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

Correction: A facile PEG/thiol-functionalized nanographene oxide carrier with an appropriate glutathione-responsive switch

Polym. Chem., 2020, 11,2923-2923
DOI: 10.1039/D0PY90048F, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Bingjie Hao, Wei Li, Sen Zhang, Ying Zhu, Yongjun Li, Aishun Ding, Xiaoyu Huang
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

Correction: Flow-facilitated ring opening metathesis polymerization (ROMP) and post-polymerization modification reactions

Polym. Chem., 2020, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/D0PY90065F, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Selesha I. Subnaik, Christopher E. Hobbs
To cite this article before page numbers are assigned, use the DOI form of citation above.
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

[ASAP] Correction to Specific <italic toggle="yes">Z</italic>-Selectivity in the Oxidative Isomerization of Allyl Ethers to Generate Geometrically Defined <italic toggle="yes">Z</italic>-Enol Ethers Using a Coba

The Journal of Organic Chemistry
DOI: 10.1021/acs.joc.0c00990




correction

Correction: Gold alloy-based nanozyme sensor arrays for biothiol detection

Analyst, 2020, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/D0AN90044C, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Junshu Lin, Quan Wang, Xiaoyu Wang, Yunyao Zhu, Xi Zhou, Hui Wei
To cite this article before page numbers are assigned, use the DOI form of citation above.
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

[ASAP] Correction to EcoFlex: A Multifunctional MoClo Kit for <italic toggle="yes">E. coli</italic> Synthetic Biology

ACS Synthetic Biology
DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.0c00177




correction

[ASAP] Correction to Toggling Preassembly with Single-Site Mutation Switches the Cytotoxic Mechanism of Cationic Amphipathic Peptides

Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c00608




correction

[ASAP] Correction to Photoactivatable Prolyl Hydroxylase 2 Inhibitors for Stabilizing the Hypoxia-Inducible Factor with Light

Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c00599




correction

Correction: Preparation of carbon dots by non-focusing pulsed laser irradiation in toluene

Chem. Commun., 2020, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/D0CC90181D, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Huiwu Yu, Xiangyou Li, Xiaoyan Zeng, Yongfeng Lu
To cite this article before page numbers are assigned, use the DOI form of citation above.
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

Correction: Colloidal synthesis of porous red phosphorus nanoparticles as a metal-free electrocatalyst for the hydrogen evolution reaction

Chem. Commun., 2020, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/D0CC90201B, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Cheng-Ying Chan, Chao-Hung Chang, Hsing-Yu Tuan
To cite this article before page numbers are assigned, use the DOI form of citation above.
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

CORRECTION: Library Closing Early Jan. 7

On Tuesday, January 7, 2020, all buildings of the Library of Congress will close at 1 p.m. ET due to anticipated inclement weather. All public areas are closed and all public events are canceled for the remainder of the day.




correction

Rare Books Revealed: Text Corrections in Printed Books

While working on the Patricia D. Klingenstein Library’s hidden collections cataloging project, I’ve found some examples of the different methods authors and printers used to fix small errors in a text after an item was printed. Shown below are a few examples of the corrections that were made directly to the page. In the first...

The post Rare Books Revealed: Text Corrections in Printed Books appeared first on New-York Historical Society.




correction

American corrections : concepts and controversies / Barry A. Krisberg, Susan Marchionna, Christopher J. Hartney

Krisberg, Barry, author




correction

Gas turbine parameter corrections Allan J. Volponi

Online Resource




correction

Correction: Two-dimensional porous nickel oxalate thin sheets constructed by ultrathin nanosheets as electrode materials for high-performance aqueous supercapacitors

CrystEngComm, 2020, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/D0CE90057E, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Chenglan Zhao, Yuqian Jiang, Shunfei Liang, Fang Gao, Li Xie, Lingyun Chen
To cite this article before page numbers are assigned, use the DOI form of citation above.
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

Correction: Synthetic-biology-based discovery of a fungal macrolide from Macrophomina phaseolina

Org. Biomol. Chem., 2020, 18,3392-3392
DOI: 10.1039/D0OB90051F, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Yohei Morishita, Terutaka Sonohara, Tohru Taniguchi, Kiyohiro Adachi, Makoto Fujita, Teigo Asai
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

Correction: Nickel-catalyzed cyanation of phenol derivatives activated by 2,4,6-trichloro-1,3,5-triazine

Org. Biomol. Chem., 2020, Advance Article
DOI: 10.1039/D0OB90052D, Correction
Open Access
  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence.
Liang Wang, Yaoyao Wang, Jun Shen, Qun Chen, Ming-Yang He
To cite this article before page numbers are assigned, use the DOI form of citation above.
The content of this RSS Feed (c) The Royal Society of Chemistry




correction

[ASAP] Correction to “Hemoglobin Adducts and Urinary Metabolites of Arylamines and Nitroarenes”

Chemical Research in Toxicology
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00117




correction

Patron Services: CORRECTION - Orientation to the Manuscript Division

Join the Manuscript Division for a focused research orientation to resources located in the Manuscript Reading Room. Learn how to find materials for your research projects and how to utilize the Manuscript Reading Room’s resources in-person and remotely. The session includes general information on conducting research in the Manuscript Reading Room and time for Q&A about research strategies or steps on specific research projects. All researchers are welcome.

 Date: Saturday, November 16, 2019, 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM EST

 Location: Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson Building, Room LJ-139B

 Click here for more information and to register.

 Request ADA accommodations five days in advance at (202) 707-6362 or ADA@loc.gov.

 

 

Click here for more information.