Senate health care bill: the five paragraphs you must read
By Sue Blevins and Robin Kaigh
Mon Nov 23, 4:00 am ET
Washington and New York – "There is no such thing as a little freedom," said
Walter Cronkite. "Either you are all free, or you are not free."
Whether you're for or against federal efforts to help people buy health
insurance, you should know that the reform bill before the Senate would mandate
a healthcare system that is definitely "not free."
What most of us know about the Democratic bill is that it requires nearly all
Americans to have health insurance. What most of us don't know is that it
requires us to buy a minimum level of insurance approved by the federal
government, and forces health plans and providers to share our personal health
information with the federal government and other entities.
If this bill becomes law, we could each be assigned a national beneficiary ID
number or card (possibly an electronic device). And our personal health
information will flow electronically to the US secretary of Health and Human
Services (HHS) – and many others – without our consent.
Sound farfetched? Buried in the Senate bill's 2,074 pages are provisions that
actually permit and foster such things. Freedom and privacy are often lost in
the fine print – which is why we've been studying the Senate bill since it was
released Nov. 19 to help uncover the facts. Here are five highly invasive
provisions Americans should know:
1. Mandatory insurance
Bill text: "Sec. 1501. Requirement to Maintain Minimum Essential
Coverage.... An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013
ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an
applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such
month."
Translation: Uncle Sam will now serve as your national insurance agent and force
you to buy "minimum essential coverage" – or else you'll have to pay an annual
fine.
However, what Congress considers "minimum essential coverage" and "essential
health benefits requirements" includes comprehensive coverage that many neither
need nor want. Plus, those who prefer to carry catastrophic-only coverage won't
have a free range of options for such coverage.
Bottom line: In a free society, the government should not force citizens to buy
any product nor should the government mandate citizens' level of
health-insurance coverage.
Rather than imposing penalties to coerce people into government-sanctioned
health insurance, Congress should offer incentives to help those who wish to buy
insurance but find it unaffordable.
Congress could allow everyone to deduct the full cost of health insurance (and
provide tax credits for those with no tax liability), while offering assistance
to those who can't afford insurance and subsidize high-risk pools for those with
preexisting conditions.
Helping those in need is a much better way to reform our nation's healthcare
system than overhauling the entire system and putting Big Brother in charge of
deciding what is acceptable coverage for nearly every American.
2. Electronic data exchanges
Bill text: "Sec. 1104. Administrative Simplification…. (h) Compliance. – (1)
Health Plan Certification. – (A) Eligibility for a Health Plan, Health Claim
Status, Electronic Funds Transfers, Health Care Payment and Remittance Advice. –
Not later than December 31, 2013, a health plan shall file a statement with the
Secretary, in such form as the Secretary may require, certifying that the data
and information systems for such plan are in compliance with any applicable
standards (as described under paragraph (7) of section 1171) and associated
operating rules (as described under paragraph (9) of such section) for
electronic funds transfers, eligibility for a health plan, health claim status,
and health care payment and remittance advice, respectively."
Translation: Requiring everyone to buy federally sanctioned health insurance,
and then forcing qualified plans to comply with Administrative Simplification
requirements, provides the government and health industry with power they would
not be able to exercise in a free market.
Administrative Simplification rules are a product of the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996. They lay the foundation for
a nationally linked database of personal health information. A federal
"Nationwide Health Information Network" (NHIN) is well under way in the United
States, without assurances that individuals will control their personal health
data.
Bottom line: Americans should be able to contract privately with the insurance
companies of their choice. Patients should be able to decide whether to have
electronic or paper medical records, and not have the government require
electronic records, which are then included in a nationally linked database.
3. Real-time health and financial data
Bill text: "Sec. 1104. Administrative Simplification…. (4) Requirements for
Financial and Administrative Transactions. – (A) In General. – The standards and
associated operating rules adopted by the Secretary shall – (i) to the extent
feasible and appropriate, enable determination of an individual's eligibility
and financial responsibility for specific services prior to or at the point of
care.... (i) Eligibility for a Health Plan and Health Claims Status. – The set
of operating rules for eligibility for a health plan and health claim status
transactions shall be adopted not later than July 1, 2011, in a manner ensuring
that such operating rules are effective not later than January 1, 2013, and may
allow for the use of a machine readable identification card."
Translation: Administrative Simplification rules are being expanded to gather
real-time financial and health data on individuals through a tracking ID,
possibly a "machine readable" ID card (electronic device).
Bottom line: Moving forward with real-time data collection without an ethical
patient consent provision means everyone loses their health-privacy rights.
Congress needs to enact strong patient consent provisions for all health data,
especially data collected "real-time."
4. Health data network
Bill text: "Sec. 6301. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.… (f) Building
Data for Research. – The Secretary shall provide for the coordination of
relevant Federal health programs to build data capacity for comparative clinical
effectiveness research, including the development and use of clinical registries
and health outcomes research data networks, in order to develop and maintain a
comprehensive, interoperable data network to collect, link, and analyze data on
outcomes and effectiveness from multiple sources, including electronic health
records."
Translation: Your personal health information may soon be studied by government
scientists. Washington is creating a new research center that plans to use
patients' electronic health records for conducting research and creating disease
registries. The data network is comprehensive and includes use of electronic
health records.
Bottom line: Federal funds should not be used to collect data electronically and
conduct research on patients' personal health information without their consent.
5. Personal health information
Bill text: "Sec. 6301. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research…. (B) Use of Data.
– The [Patient-Centered Outcomes Research] Institute shall only use data
provided to the Institute under subparagraph (A) in accordance with laws and
regulations governing the release and use of such data, including applicable
confidentiality and privacy standards."
Translation: Think your health privacy is protected? It's not. This language
refers to "applicable confidentiality and privacy standards," but HIPAA's
so-called privacy law permits individuals' personal health information to be
exchanged – for many broad purposes – without patients' consent (See 45 CFR
Subtitle A, Subpart E – Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information;
section 164.502(a)(1)(ii) "Permitted uses and disclosures").
Bottom line: Trust is a must for ensuring quality healthcare. Thus, as stated
above, Congress needs to pass a strong, ethical patient consent law that ensures
patients have control over the flow of their personal health information.
What about the consent of the governed?
All told, the national mandatory health-insurance bill puts the federal
government in charge of individuals' insurance choices and data privacy. This
philosophy of governing is the opposite of America's founding principle: consent
of the governed.
Without health freedom and privacy rights, Congress is opening the door for many
wrongs to be committed – all in the name of covering the uninsured.
Sue Blevins is president of the Institute for Health Freedom in Washington.
Robin Kaigh is an attorney and medical-privacy advocate in New York.

I DON'T REMEMBER GIVING MY CONSENT.