WE NEED HEALTH CARE REFORM - don't get me wrong! I have been on both sides - selling pharmaceuticals with wonderful insurance and being one who is uninsurable and suffering through huge bills in this system as it is BUT this is not the answer.... here is just another example of pieces that haven't been completely thought through....what happened to all the HIPPA they were promoting? Why don't they have REAL forums and focus groups of NOT lobbyists but patients - ones with health insurance to see what they LIKE and ones IN NEED to see what is lacking and then meet as appointed groups and find out what would work for EVERYONE and ones that our representatives would ALSO be willing to use themselves.... JMO
Section 431(a) of the bill says that the IRS must divulge taxpayer identity information, including the filing status, the modified adjusted gross income, the number of dependents, and "other information as is prescribed by" regulation. That information will be provided to the new Health Choices Commissioner and state health programs and used to determine who qualifies for "affordability credits."
Section 245(b)(2)(A) says the IRS must divulge tax return details -- there's no specified limit on what's available or unavailable -- to the Health Choices Commissioner. The purpose, again, is to verify "affordability credits."
Section 1801(a) says that the Social Security Administration can obtain tax return data on anyone who may be eligible for a "low-income prescription drug subsidy" but has not applied for it.
Over at the Institute for Policy Innovation (a free-market think tank and presumably no fan of Obamacare), Tom Giovanetti argues that: "How many thousands of federal employees will have access to your records? The privacy of your health records will be only as good as the most nosy, most dishonest and most malcontented federal employee.... So say good-bye to privacy from the federal government. It was fun while it lasted for 233 years."
They updated their piece with comment from Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, after wondering in their article where the Electronic Privacy Information Center stood on the issue of section 431(a) of the Obamacare bill:
"We would oppose section 431(a) of the bill because it violates the intent of the Privacy Act which generally requires agencies to obtain information directly from individuals and not from other agencies."
Since the bills didn't get jammed through before Congress went on their august vacations as Obama insisted, it seems folks are getting a chance to actually read the bill and find these tidbits that would have made it through without our knowledge.
Your opinions on this mess - for me - i'm happy it wasn't shoved through in August as insisted!
Comments