You could profit off your health insurance

In yet another part of the new health-care law that favors consumers, insurance companies will be forced to spend a minimum of the premium you pay on health care and quality. For smaller companies the figure is 80 cents on the premium dollar. For employer plans covering over 50 people, the requirement is 85 cents. This is similar to a law passed a few years ago requiring charities to spend a minimum of your donations on the cause for which they are collecting.

If the insurer fails to meet the minimum, they will be forced to issue rebates to customers. The idea is to encourage better health care over excess spending on administration, marketing and executive bonuses by the insurance company. Some insurers are already complaining, which might indicate an inequality in paid premiums on their part to health care delivered.

Others are threatening to stop offering insurance to the individual market, with Georgia, Iowa, Maine and So. Carolina afraid this could lead to loss of coverage. But industry analyst, Les Funtleyder, says Health and Human Services has considerable latitude in making adjustments for insurers’ marketing needs. It would seem that the consumer can expect a higher quality of health care with this new ruling since many plans only spend from 60 to 80 cents on the dollar.

The new rule goes into effect January 1, and in 2012 up to 9 million customers could get rebates averaging $164. It’s nice to know for once that the consumer is getting a break with the greedy health insurers paying the bill. It is also pathetic that this must be done to keep these companies honest. The $164 could be a discount on premiums or payment direct to policyholder.

In the future, customers can shop for health insurance using this new gauge of just how well insurers pay benefits, but must be mindful of the new jargon. The ratio companies spend on care is “medical loss ratio.” They’ve known this all along but as long as they were able to get away with spending only 60 percent of your premium on your health care, the greedy ones did it.

And remember, the Republicans have said repeatedly that they would repeal the health care act.

Read more on this subject here.

Read more health care posts here.

MEDICAL IDENTITY THEFT ALSO NEEDS YOUR ATTENTION…AND NOW – PART 5

I plan to bring this series on medical identity theft to an end today with the startling but not new fact that it can kill you. Dramatic? Yes. Overstated? No. I did a blog in April of 2007, “If Stealing Your Name and Personal Data Weren’t Enough…Medical ID Theft Increases.” It follows a fictitious person who goes to the emergency room, gets the blood type of the thief who stole the real person’s identity, because the crook had an appendectomy in the real person’s name. If that didn’t do him or her in, the real person is given a drug to which they are highly allergic. All because the bad guy’s medical files were merged with the real person’s. Health care providers had become more cautious over this potential mistake even then, and it has only become worse. Even Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum confirms: "People can die from this crime." Naturally, the organized crime element discovered there was a fortune to be made on medical identity theft IDs (selling for $50) as compared to financial identity theft (Social Security numbers going for $1). In some cases this results from the desperation of some 45 to 50 million Americans without health insurance. Here’s a great line from a Bankrate.com article written by Amy Buttell Crane : “Financial identity theft might wound your wallet, but medical identity theft can kill you.” Bankrate is a leading provider of financial information and research, and you should read this article if you have the time. The basics: “Medical identity theft occurs when criminals obtain information such as a health insurance identification or Social Security number and use it to get health care or to obtain reimbursement from insurers and others for false claims.” Crane says the least of your problems will be the financial side of medical ID theft. Do you realize just how grave a statement this is when financial identity theft has been the leading consumer fraud for the last seven years, causing billions of dollars of damages to consumers, as well as business and government? Since the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is so full of loopholes, and the federal government isn’t even enforcing the provisions that might help victims, the medical consequences are made much worse, according to Crane. This could affect victims’ lifetime care insurance caps, and make it near impossible to get future medical, life, long-tern and supplemental insurance. And here’s the shocker: “a 2006 PriceWaterhouseCoopers study, "The Global State of Security," reveals that data security isn't a high priority at health care facilities in the United States and around the world.” But everyone doesn’t think the “identity crisis” is for real. Jim Harper, author of a book I wouldn’t recommend on the subject, thinks medical identity theft is a “marginal risk” along with things like being hit by lightning, or being involved in a terrorist attack. Crane quotes him further: "The definitions that are being used to compile these statistics are overbroad." In other words, don’t cry wolf until you’ve discovered you just received the wrong blood in a transfusion. Pam Dixon adds: "one person being victimized by medical identity theft is a problem and something we need to be concerned about." That seems to be the major problem with business and government today; unless the harm is done to the masses, they can live with it and expect us to, and that is why the poor consumer continues to suffer needlessly in the growing identity crisis.

The Bankrate.com article closes with seven points the experts recommend to help prevent medical ID theft: 1) Demand to look at your medical records; 2) Shred all personal health-related documents; 3) Place all confidential mail in the box at the Post Office; 4) Protect your ID; 5) The law allows you to request restrictions on communications between your health care providers and third parties, but it isn’t backed by HIPAA; 6) Check any medical records you are able to access online; 7) If necessary, request private medical information communication by alternative means, to prevent something like changing your address.

Uninsured v. Insured: The huge difference Health Care Reform means

New and old House republicans say they are committed to creating jobs, but they want to deny those Americans currently out of work medical assistance by repealing the Health Care Act of 2010. More than 61 percent of the uninsured have no more than a high school education, thus, not likely to find a job with benefits. Some 40 percent of uninsured have family incomes below the federal poverty level of $22,050. The plaintiffs make their case as follows.

The new health care law will provide incentives for employers to offer coverage to low-income workers. Young adults are the highest uninsured, but could remain under their parent’s plan to age 26. Over half of uninsured adults have no access to medical care, delaying conditions needing attention that develop into serious health problems. The law also prevents insurers from rejecting individuals or raising premiums due to pre-existing conditions.

Since the bulk of the new health care reform bill doesn’t go into effect until 2014, these are only a few of the items that will make a difference.

Read more in an excellent report from the Kaiser Commission here.

Health insurance industry still fighting health care reform

Wendell Potter, former media relations director for CIGNA, has written an expose of the health insurance business and it isn’t at all favorable to the consumer. In his book, Deadly Spin, he points out that the industry is governed by corporations that care little for the patients, but are greedy for profits. Between 2000 and 2008, private insurers hiked premiums by over 90 percent but payouts to care providers were up by only 72 percent.

Profits of the five biggest health insurers totaled an astronomical figure of $12.2 billion in 2009, an increase of 56 percent from 2008, reports Potter from his position as a Fellow with Center for Media and Democracy.

Photo by Shannon Kringen

Potter says that we are the only industrialized nation that connects health insurance with the act of being employed. And because of a ridiculous maze of federal and state regulations, there exists a “central ideological conflict.” The only thing the liberals and conservatives can agree on is that there is something wrong. What’s wrong? The author states he is convinced that “…managed care companies are fundamentally dishonest.”

Potter’s Senate testimony in 2009 revealed how health insurance companies make promises that they do not plan to keep. They actually show contempt for regulations that are in place to protect consumers. And they cease doing business with small companies whose medical claims surpass underwriter expectancy. To overcome all these obstacles, the insurance companies employ high paid PR executives—like Potter was with CIGNA—to do the dirty work of lobbying.

Michael Moore’s film, Sicko, helped him to decide to leave CIGNA and launch his current attack to expose the health insurance business for what it is. A greed laden industry obsessed with profits over providing the services they tout in misleading advertising and promotion. Potter says he needs to apologize to Moore for the role he played in the insurance industry’s attack campaign on Sicko.

It should be obvious to all that conservatives agree with this avarice and by attempting to scuttle President Obama’s Health Care Reform, plan to continue their support.

Read more here and here.

COMMENTS WELCOMED.

How do U.S. drug costs compare with other forms of universal health care?

Photo by Fibonacci Blue

Our neighbor to the north is the best example, and the comparison is very unfavorable when it comes to U.S. citizens. In Canada, the per capita spending on drugs is $509, in contrast with $728 in this country. Drug prices in Canada average from 35 percent to 45 percent lower than here, which has prompted Americans to spend around $1 billion per year north of the border. One of the reasons is a system of centralized buying that controls costs. The GOP has made sure so far that this doesn’t happen here.

In conversations with two Canadian families that have recently left that country to resettle in the U.S., I hear nothing but admiration for their form of socialized medicine. They agree it is not perfect, but it does exceed U.S. health care in both costs and full coverage of its citizens. Also, the Canadian Patented Medicine Prices Review Board has the authority to set fair and reasonable prices on patented drugs.

Our new health care law does provide saving for seniors in dealing with the “doughnut hole, which could translate to all citizens in the long term. Of course, if you are flush and don’t worry about the costs of your medications, or you don’t really care if your fellow Americans have medical coverage, go ahead and bash President Obama’s health care reform.

Read more here.

Read earlier posts, “Drug makers desert public over profits 1 and 2.”

STONEWALLED BY AARP WHEN THEY TAKE SAME ROAD AS ALBERTSONS/OSCO AND DOMINICK’S

Back in April of 2006, I signed up for the American Assn. of Retired Persons (AARP) prescription plan made available through the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA). By April 12, 2006, I had received a mailing from Walgreens soliciting my business and offering help with my Medicare Prescription Drug Program. The mailing was disguised with an address to “The Dunning Household” but there was no doubt in my mind where Walgreens got my name. It had to be from my signing up with Medicare because nothing else had changed. I contacted AARP in May of 2006 to ask why, without permission, my name had been given to Walgreens. In a series of e-mail replies, I was recommended to a general number at United Health Care who administers the program for AARP. When calling this number, the person answering had no idea what I was talking about, and referred me to another number where I left a message that was never returned. Back to AARP where I asked for a direct contact at United Health Care, which they refused to give me, referring me back to the useless number, eventually blowing me off with “I am sorry but I do not have further information.” I have been an AARP member for over 25 years and, needless to say, I was shocked when this organization refused to provide assistance in my concern over the privacy of my personal data. United Health Care finally sent me their “Notice of Privacy Practices” in November of 2006 which you can read here, and, considering the number of ways they disclose your information, probably explains how Walgreens got my name. By the way, I received another Walgreens mailing still soliciting my prescription business in January of 2006, this time addressed to “The Dunning Family.” And then in June of 2007, AARP automatically signed me up for their “RX Prescription Solutions” program, also administered by United Healthcare, with an opt-out date that was impossible for me to meet. It said I could cancel later which I decided to do, primarily so I could monitor the activity using my private information. I was deluged with mail touting everything from an upgrade in the Medicare prescription program to trying to sell me drugs by junk mail. One particular mailing included six medications I currently take or have taken, indicating how AARP/United Health Care could save me money buying through them. I decided to cancel RX Prescription Solutions. If you are having similar problems, or have an opinion on this issue, contact AARP and tell them how you feel. OK. So what’s all the hullabaloo for if this is only about unwanted junk mail? The problem, of course, isn’t receiving the mail, it is the database that was created with my personal data, including health information, that concerns me. Even when I cancelled the program, they still retained my sensitive data, just moving it to another inactive database they will eventually use to try and sign me up again in the future. And this isn’t over-reaction because in my 35 years as a junk mail data broker, I have witnessed thousands of databases like this one created, and most of them are still around in the archives, some with minimum security, and could provide the next avenue for attack by the ID crooks.

New House Speaker-to-be completely detached from reality

Either the media in Ohio where John Boehner is from is dropping the ball, or the man has just elected to secede from an authenticated world. Me thinks it is the latter. He called the American health care system the best in the world. Richard Cohen in The Washington Post, went to the “CIA World Factbook” to discredit Boehner’s statement.

To begin with, the United States is 49th in life expectancy, trailing Japan, France, Spain and Great Britain. And that’s just for starters. In infant mortality we are better off than Africa, but lag behind Cuba, Italy, Hungary, Greece, Canada, Portugal, the U.K., Australia and Israel. Either Boehner has a lousy research team, or he just chooses to ignore facts and go with the typical Republican strategy of “scare tactics.” Me thinks it is the latter.

If you make these stupid statements enough times, the population eventually begins to believe your lies. Unfortunately, America’s health care system comes in first only when you consider health-related bankruptcies.

There are 51 million in the U.S. without health insurance. John Boehner would have these families, including the babies who will never make it to their first birthday, hang around and wait for a GOP that is full of road blocks to President Obama’s policies, but completely devoid of how to tackle any of the major problems that face this country.

Read more here.

Read earlier posts on health care reform here.

COMMENTS WELCOMED

WARNING OUT ON HEALTH DATA STORAGE SITES

In a recent San Francisco Chronicle article, the World Privacy Forum is reporting about the hazards of giving up your personal health records to companies that collect and maintain them, supposedly so you can easily manage your health needs. The catch, according to the WPF, is that most of these companies are not subject to federal regulations relating to consumer privacy and security. Doctors, hospitals and insurers must follow the guidelines of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) which establishes basic privacy and security standards on the handling of health information. But the same rules don’t apply to those companies outside the parameters of accepted health care givers. California, as usual, comes through with their Confidentiality of Medical Information Act that prevents these new health data collectors from marketing your private information without your permission. I did a post on one of these companies in October 2007 and learned some interesting facts. Microsoft’s Health Vault collects and stores your data, providing other health devices to manage your health, and guarantees you complete control. I wasn’t satisfied with their “Privacy Statement” in relation to how the data was secured online, so I contacted them and asked about whether or not it was encrypted, and, if so, at what level. (Lower levels of encryption are not secure against hackers) The answers I received were a series of explanations about online protocol security and the difference between high and low levels of encryption, all of which I knew. What I wanted was a commitment to what level Microsoft used in Health Vault. What I received was, and I quote: “As for the security on Microsoft's servers, I do not know. I am not a network or system administrator, but I'm sure they are using the best the industry has to offer.” Let’s see, how long would it have taken the guy to find out…five, ten minutes? Google is supposedly rolling out its own version of a medical services plan in early 2008, consisting of an online profile, a search for physicians, advice on health issues, and the ability to share this information with family and caregivers. With the recent extension of California’s data breach notification law to include medical information and insurance data, there is hope that other states with data breach laws will follow. After all, it was the Golden State’s S.B. 1386 landmark legislation that required ChoicePoint to admit to the breach in early 2005 that ushered in the identity crisis. If there was ever a need for control of private information, it is our medical records, which not only contain things like our Social Security number, but also ailments and medications taken that could prove harmful in seeking a job or health or life insurance. Not that we intend to cover it up, but rather the fact that in so many of these databases, there is so much inaccuracy. You might input your medical data correctly, but what if a doctor or a hospital makes a mistake and confuses you with someone with a life-threatening disease? But wait, that’s already happened without the help of these new databases.

More on the personal health information issue later.

MAKING SURE YOU PUT YOUR MEDICAL RECORDS WITH SOMEONE YOU CAN TRUST

It isn’t often that I get a chance to talk about a company that collects your name and private information and do it on a purely positive note. If the business I am talking about is assembling your personal medical data, my skepticism and curiosity both rise significantly. The skepticism part wasn’t necessary, but my curiosity got the best of me when I learned about yet another Personal Health Records Provider (PHR).

MyMedicalRecords.com, headquartered in Los Angeles, “seeks to empower health care consumers and medical professionals by facilitating access to consumer medical records and associated vital documents (such as living wills, birth certificates and insurance policies).” Founded in 2005, “Our Mission is to give consumers greater control over their personal health and medical records, as well as other vital information.” It was the “give consumers greater control” phrase on their website that caught my eye, and led me to an intensive inspection of just how the company operated.

I was both surprised and elated by the transparency of their representative, Scott Smith, MMR’s Director of Public Relations. Starting with a comment on this blog’s recent post series, “How Long Before We Accept Inevitability of Personal Health Records Databases? Part 3,” Scott very diplomatically introduced me to MMR, which I had somehow missed in my research of PHRs. It had been my loss because over the period of a couple of weeks, I found a company that started its business by first making sure consumer privacy issues were firmly dealt with, which is unheard of in the junk mail business where I come from. With that in place, they went on to develop a program that deserves your attention if you are searching for a PHR.

To begin, MMR requires all record input via fax or file upload. Fax eliminates the risk of transmitting data over the Internet, but their browser does support 256 bits of encryption. Accounts are secured by a unique combination of user ID and password, and protected from multiple attempts to open an account. MMR employees have no access to any information, and I am assured there is a complete purge of data, including backup storage, when a participant cancels. This kind of company—compared to doctors and hospitals—is not subject to HIPAA, but MMR still conforms to its guidelines.

In a study by MyMedicalRecords comparing its features to Microsoft’s HealthVault, the service offered by MMR is fully integrated with a multiplicity of tools that allow the person to manage their personal health care information, including actual copies of medical records. According to the study, HV is like a centrally located computer server connecting to an array of third party service providers, each requiring individual set up and coordination.

There are other important comparisons. First, the HV sign-up involves 4 steps compared to MMR’s single step. Although HealthVault as a stand alone is free, many of their third party services you might want or require are not. Added together they could total $407 per year, and include CapMed Online, Peakworks fitness management, eSound Health Food Journal, CapMed Ice, which allows Physicians to access emergency information, and the MySelfHelp module dealing with grief and depression.

Also, HealthVault does not accept the faxing of documents from third party providers for things like lab tests, radiology reports, patient charts, but MMR does. None of HV’s third party services offers voice mail or a built-in drug interaction tool which come with a MyMedicalRecords account.

There’s more and we’ll get to it in the next post.

More proof we need universal health care?

The Obama administration is already giving in to large corporations and insurance companies threatening to cancel or deny health coverage to employees and the public in general. McDonald’s even implied that the new laws could force the company to eliminate existing coverage for their workers. Large insurers like WellPoint, Aetna and Cigna object to the fact that they must cover seriously ill children. In the transition period, more insurers and employers are likely to seek waivers that will delay or weaken the new health law.

In a 2009 New York Times/CBS News poll, 72 percent of Americans favored a form of universal health care similar to Medicare for those under age 65, with 40 percent willing to pay $500 per year more in taxes. Here is a list of countries worldwide with some form of universal healthcare: United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, France, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Greece, Ireland and there are more.

The question arises, is it the consumer who doesn’t want universal healthcare coverage, or is it the large insurance carriers? Just who is this administration listening to?

Read more here and here.

Drug makers desert public over profits - Part 2

One of the biggest problems when pharmaceutical companies abandon certain drugs is the “scrambling” necessary to take care of patients. Dr. Richard Schilsky, professor of medicine and chief of hematology/oncology at the University of Chicago said, “We literally don’t know from week to week who’s going to be able to be treated.” Erin Fox, manager of the Drug Information Service at the University of Utah Health Care says it is a daily disaster.

The Institute of Safe Medicine Practices surveyed 1,800 health care workers this past summer that confirm it is a “mess” out there. More than hald indicated that in the past year they either “always” or “frequently” been confronted with shortages of common drugs. Two deaths resulted from a morphine shortage. Another patient woke up in the middle of surgery because they were under-sedated.

Read more here.

Get off Pelosi's back!

While President Obama has recently been somewhat mute on achievements of the Democrats, current House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has been targeted by many, including those in her own party, as the "fall guy" for their problems.  This would include the economy, and related issues like unemployment.  No one gives her credit for pushing for more stimulus money, which many say could have created more jobs by now.  The White House said no.

Instead of concentrating on joblessness, Obama and the Senate went all out for health-care reform, while Pelosi in the House passed several jobs bills that didn't make it out of the Senate.  The Speaker was busy all this time and was instrumental in passing the President's health-care reform, financial reform and cap-and-trade bills.  She also serves as a major force in combating GOP efforts to undermine Social Security and medicaid.  Nancy sticks up for the little guy and gal, and Democrats should stick up for Nancy.

Read more here.

The Democrats need to fight and here’s why

Sure, they’re discouraged, feeling like they have been hung out to dry by a fickle and uninformed public. The midterms shouldn’t have been a huge surprise; although it is obvious the Dems thought they “might” be saved at the last minute by Hispanics, Blacks, and the youth vote. It didn’t happen, at least in most of the country. Where something did happen was in California where Latinos put a Democrat in the Governor’s chair and reelected another Dem to the Senate.

So now in a lame-duck Congress, the left has to prevail, at least in two issues. One, they mustn’t allow the repeal of the Health Care Reform Act. A majority of Americans agree with this, and the GOP had better take notice. Since John Boehner, the new Republican House Speaker-to-be, has said it is his priority to repeal this law, the Democrats must stand together in strong opposition to Boehner.

The second is the GOP push to make the tax cuts permanent for the wealthy. It should be pointed out to the public, particularly those who aren’t millionaires, that this move will increase the deficit by $700 billion, and why do such deficit-conscious Republicans want to put this country in that kind of position. I personally believe there is room to move the identification of “the wealthy” from the current $250,000+ figure to perhaps $1 million.

Eugene Robinson in The Washington Post said it is time for President Obama to stand his ground, and quit taking crap [my word] from the bullies. Right on!

Read more here.

Read earlier posts on Health Care Reform here, and tax breaks for the wealthy here.

COMMENTS WELCOMED

I pledge allegiance to the GOP Pledge?...or not – Part 3

If you are a part of the Tea Party then you’re going to love the “Pledge to America.” With more insight into this poppycock, you find that it would require Congress to confirm a Constitutional authority for any legislation, to post bills online 72 hours before a vote, and single out each measure to prevent the adding on of numerous provisions. The GOP has heard this repeatedly from the “tea baggers” and has apparently given in to their demands.


As an example, this would mean the Health-care legislation would not have passed. And as indicated by Perry Bacon, Jr. in The Washington Post, the public would have a few days to read legislation and propose changes. Stop me if I am wrong, but aren’t our congressional leaders supposed to listen to their constituents first, then make the decision as to what is best for the country? Isn’t that what we send them to Washington for?

Oh, wrong. That’s why the Congress has some of the lowest ratings today that it ever has. Bacon comments that these things weren’t even done often when Republicans ran things from 1995 to 2006. There is one big difference between the “Pledge” and the “Contract.” In 1994 the GOP proposed 12-year term limits for members of Congress. Actually, if we could ever get this passed, it would solve a lot of this country’s political problems.

Bacon doesn’t think the GOP would repeal the health-care law, just mess with it enough to slow it down, creating more hardships for those not covered or out of work and the economy in general. The Republicans also express ambiguity over just how they would balance the federal budget. If it gets that far, the Boehner gang would continue tax breaks for the rich.

Photo by Istolethetv

As The Dunning Letter indicated earlier, the GOP “Pledge to America” is a huge smokescreen to help them win the elections in November. How many will buy this hogwash remains to be seen, but there is time to turn this whole thing around and make some sense out of the next two years…maybe even six.

Read Part 1 and Part 2.

IS THE YOUTH VOTING REVOLUTION HERE?

According to a “Letter to the Editor” in my local newspaper, youth voters are predicting a revolution in the election process, and all signs point to a culmination of this promise in November of 2008. The young lady refers to a “reigning generation” that laments dropping a lousy situation in their laps, but she complains that the same group never asked for her or her peers’ input on the issues. Further, the younger constituents have only had the experience of two presidents to help them establish their opinions in the political process, and neither has been what they consider presidential role-models.

In the past, the youth vote has had poor turnout at the polls leading some candidates to believe they don’t deserve much effort. But a recent article in Readers Digest claims there is a new group, ages 18 to 29 called the “Millennials,” that is finding its voice, and plans to use it in the November 2008 election. They profess to be leaving you “Apathetics” behind, and do something about their future. They also accounted for 28 percent of the identity theft victim complaints in 2007, indicating to me there must be concerns for the protection of their names and personal data.

While Millennials are more liberal than their parents, they aren’t as interested in universal health care as simply reducing health care costs. They support gay marriage, but have become more religious in recent years. They voted first in 2000 when they directed their attention to John McCain because of his call for “shared sacrifice and community service.” The Arizona Senator may not be able to expect that same support in 2008. In 2004, Millennials cast almost as many votes as those age 65 plus.

In another piece on the Millennial revolution in the Zero Beta blog, 80 percent feel the economy is very important, followed by 61 percent who felt the environment was the major issue. According to one report, 40 percent of the “M” crowd is Independents, 35 percent Democrats and 25 percent Republicans. And they aren’t poor or uneducated; they are middle class, educated and savvy. But Zero Beta says the Millennials need incentives to get them to the polls, and they haven’t had them in recent years…not until now.

RD found that there was “widespread disillusionment” with the Bush administration, and apparently not a full endorsement of the Democrats by the M folk. They are firmly against the Iraq war, and want to see a sense of morality and good deeds return to the White House. Christina Gagnier of Mobilize.org puts it this way: “…we’re entrepreneurial, not for the traditional purpose of making money but for doing social good.” The White House and congressional leaders could do well by adhering to those values.

I am always looking for a grass-roots base for support in my concept that individuals should be granted control over their names and private information, and be compensated when it is sold as incentive to take on this new responsibility. On the latter, the M crowd is the perfect age group to share in this supplemental compensation to their retirement of an average of $607 each month.

Time will tell just what the Millennials want in their next President, but hopefully one of the qualities is that he or she endorses an agenda for them to take back the rights to their privacy.

The people have given a mandate

The mandate is not so much a vote for the Republicans…rather a vote against the Democrats. But it is a vote for the President and Congress to fix this country, and stop the partisan bickering that has gone on for the last ten years. That includes Democrats, as well as the GOP. The first thing every new, and old, member of Congress should do is poll his constituency to see what they really think about the major issues in front of this country.

To name a few, they are taxes, the economy, jobs, health care, Social Security, Medicare, the housing market, immigration reform and the environment. I am not convinced this mandate has drawn clear lines on where the public stands on these issues. As an example, new anticipated Speaker of the House, Republican blowhard John Boehner, comes out today with the statement that Obama’s health care reform is a “monstrosity.” He plans to repeal it.

In an October poll, 42 percent of Americans expressed a favorable view of the plan; 44 percent against.

It would appear the practice of offing anything President Obama does will continue. Since the GOP is held in lower esteem that the Democrats in another recent poll, Boehner and his conservative cronies should watch their step.

MEDICAL IDENTITY THEFT ALSO NEEDS YOUR ATTENTION…AND NOW – PART 3

Earlier posts on this subject, Part 1, Part 2, point out how medical identity theft has been developing over time, and how it has begun to escalate recently since the bad guys have realized the return can be much better than its counterpart on the financial side. As an example, a medical identification number brings $50 on the street as compared to your Social Security number which is worth about $1 today. According to the World Privacy Forum in an article by Jim McKay, medical ID theft accounts for 2.7 percent to 3.2 percent of total ID theft. It takes two forms: 1) using a stolen physician’s identification number to bill for services sometimes not rendered; 2) doing the same with the patient’s ID, which can be tragic in its consequences if you are the victim and later treated for someone else’s illness. Of the $60 billion attributed to health-care fraud, $600 million is caused by medical ID theft. And, unfortunately, there is no where to turn based on the loosely written Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). So the scams are beginning to escalate, like a clerk at a medical clinic in Florida who stole and sold 1,100 patient IDs resulting in fraudulent Medicare billing of $2.8 million. Or a ring of 38 people, in Florida again, who bilked Medicare out of $142 million. Not only is HIPAA no help, sometimes it even blocks attempts for consumers to correct their medical records. HIPAA policy says that “if incorrect information leads to inappropriate treatment, the correct information must remain to preserve a paper trail.” That is bureaucracy at its best, or worst if you are the victim. McKay says the World Privacy Forum “advocates a National Health Information Network that would be established using comprehensive risk assessments that prevent medical identity theft while protecting privacy, and more mechanisms for individuals to correct errors in their medical histories, as well as notification of medical data breaches to consumers.” I am not against the concept but I think anyone in the privacy field is running scared that what might be created is another database monster—this time with our most personal data—that will be vulnerable to identity thieves. In a Washington Post piece by Michael Gerber, he is once again talking about the Microsoft and Google personal health record databases, pointing out that many privacy advocates are warning the public to be cautious, especially if the PHR is offered through a health insurance company. This may be sold as a service to policy-holders, but my guess is that it is one more way to get your private information, in some cases with the possibility of causing problems with your coverage or claims. In today’s business and government environment, we are constantly bombarded with requests for more information on our private lives, data that becomes a permanent part of some company’s or agency’s database. We are assured by privacy policies that the collector will secure our sensitive data, and the next thing we find out is that this information has been breached. The question is just where is the balance that can make all this work? We’ll get to that next.

Colin Powell is anti…anti-immigration, supports DREAM Act

Former Secretary of State and moderate Republican Colin Powell appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” recently and exclaims that Republicans should take another look at their stance on immigration. Powell, himself the son of Jamaican immigrants, said: “We can’t be anti-immigration, for example. Because immigrants are fueling this country.”

His statement lends considerable authority to the continuing opposition to Arizona’s anti immigration law, SB1070.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is hoping Democratic support of the DREAM Act, along with bipartisan backing, will help him and his party in November. That is still questionable since Hispanics currently feel the Democrats have let them down on immigration reform. But realistically, Latinos have nowhere else to turn since most conservatives want to send illegals back to their country of origin, strenuously opposing amnesty.

The DREAM Act provides a natural channel to citizenship for young illegal immigrants who will attend college for two years or enlist in the military.

Arian Campo-Flores says in his Newsweek article that “Though immigration typically ranks pretty far down the list of issues that Hispanics care most about, the level of vitriol this year has sent it back near the top.” Undoubtedly, one of the reasons President Obama decided to tackle health care reform before immigration reform. This ethnic apathy could also explain low voter turnout by Hispanics in the past.

The Dunning Letter has spoken with some Latinos who are middle class and they are 50-50 in their concern for illegals. Any non-Hispanic looks at this with the viewpoint—much similar to the past when some middle class Blacks did not support their own people—why should we care if they don’t. It is a legitimate concern and a failing only the Latino population can correct.

Colin Powell, a former general in the army, also favors the military as a means for illegals to gain citizenship, which is also endorsed by the armed forces. It is a way to strengthen the military, which already has thousands of enlistees who are not yet U.S. citizens. The Hispanic average age is just under 26, and there are 2.6 million males and 2.2 million females now living in this country age 18 to 24.

As Powell says, illegal immigrants "are doing things we need done in this country."

MEDICAL IDENTITY THEFT ALSO NEEDS YOUR ATTENTION…AND NOW

On February 27 of this year I posted on the new trend of health data collection, "Warning Out on Health Data Storage Sites,” which commented on Microsoft’s Health Vault, already up and running, and a Google version we should be seeing soon. There are mixed emotiions about this new concept of databases; on the negative side by privacy advocates, but on the positive side, it could save lives. It could also kill you, as expressed in a World Privacy Forum report that we will get to in a later post on this subject. But today I want to concentrate on what’s being done about the problem that is said to be much more destructive than financial identity theft: medical identity theft which represents close to 15 percent of all personal data breaches. In a recent article on Yahoo Finance, pharmaceutical company, Amgen, is being sued for lost pay by two sales representatives because they refused to go along with a scheme for them to search doctors’ confidential patient medical records. They were allegedly supposed to look for potential patients to push Amgen’s new drug, Enbrel, to treat psoriasis. Legal experts say this violates federal patient privacy law – Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The Amgen sales reps. were supposedly instructed to ask doctors if they could go through files to identify the patients they were looking for. Does that mean some doctor’s—or maybe several—allow this practice? I’m asking my docors now, and suggest that you also question yours. Haven’t these people already heard enough horror stories from HIPAA violations? If the docs do allow it, they too are guilty of disregarding HIPAA. And then there were the hospital breaches of George Clooney’s and Britney Spears’ private records, reported by the New Hampshire Union Leader, and SC Magazine . I don’t care if it is celebrity curiosity, it clearly shows how lax the security was at both hospitals. As usual, California leads the way when it comes to the privacy of its residents. On January 1, 2008, the Golden State expanded the data notification law to include medical information and insurance data. Read more here. The law requires businesses or persons conducting business in the state with personal information on individuals to disclose any breach of their system, and disclose it “in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay, consistent with the legitimate needs of law enforcement.” The three main parts of the law’s expansion are: 1) included now are medical and health insurance information; 2) it also applies to companies like Microsoft’s Health Vault and Google’s similar program; 3) in their freeze law, public records are no longer covered. It was this law, California S.B. 1386, that exposed ChoicePoint’s breach back in early 2005, actually the breach that started business, government agencies, and Congress to think about the identity crisis. Unfortunately for many in business and government, and all of both the senate and House of Representatives, that’s as far as it has gone. As of March 22, 2008, There have been 829 breaches of personal data, exposing 223,142,082 private consumer records in just over three years, according to the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse chronology.

NOW MICROSOFT WANTS YOUR PERSONAL HEALTH RECORDS

Microsoft’s new HealthVault is not such a bad idea if it didn’t portend yet another increase in the collection and selling of your sensitive data. I am not even implying that is what Microsoft has in mind, but the sale of medical related information is already big business in the junk mail industry. There are 1,403 “medical related” lists on the market representing every ailment from Alzheimers to ulcers, and each medication you take from Advil to Zoloft. There’s a new list on the market called MedTrackAlert Ailment eNewsletter where 500 thousand online consumers signed up for this free newsletter and asked for information on various health subjects, and now their names and e-mail and postal addresses are for sale. A physician does make his case for the HealthVault approach to accessible medical data: for doctors, as a patient, and if you provide health care for a family member. See article. That’s a good thing, but it never seems to stop there. First of all, the loss of your medical records by the institutions that hold them is running at a record pace. The VA breach of 26.5 million records, Ohio U., 60,000 student records, UCLA, over 800,000 records, and the list goes on. When you Google “medical data breaches” you get 234,000 hits. Second, the minute a new piece of consumer information is collected by most organizations, there is that immediate-impulse- mentality to get it ready to sell. This is demonstrated by a total of over 50,000 junk mail lists on the market, more specifically the 1,403 devoted to medical data. And there is also the alleged sale by the Albertsons food and drug chain of customer names and prescription data to pharmaceutical companies in 2004, which resulted in a lawsuit filed against the chain by Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. MS says of HealthVault, “The personal information will be stored in a secure encrypted database.” From a New York Times article. The question is, what level of encryption, and is it secure enough to ward off hackers. The TJX (TJ Maxx, Marshalls, etc. retail stores) customer credit card data was also encrypted, but at a level that allowed the crooks to steal it easily with a directional antenna while cruising the retail store’s parking lot. MS also says it isn’t expecting much information from the individual, but hopes the individual will grant permission for its release from doctors and hospitals. I haven’t signed up yet, which I plan to do just to find out the parameters of the program, but I did get some specifics from the initial stages of this process. They are: You control your HealthVault; You decide what information goes in or out of your record; MS won’t use your “health information for commercial purposes unless (they) ask and you say clearly that (they) may.” And there lies the problem, in that the complexity in any approval of the use of your name and personal data by an outside source can be confusing. It is hard to understand and digest on the spot, which is the position you are in when signing-on, or even eventually when you are contacted for approval. Trust me…data collectors always get what they want, and that is the reason we are in the identity crisis that exists today.

More on this later.