Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

Obamacare Will Collect and Share Americans' Data 'Without the Consent of the Individual'

J.D. Tuccille | 6.25.2013 1:27 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Insurance Marketplace
U.S. Government

If you were starting to fret that the National Security Agency was the only government body that cared enough to stalk you, fret not! It turns out that the concerned folks slapping together Obamacare exchanges plan to hoover up your personal information in something called a Data Services Hub in order to determine your privileges and exemptions under the new government health care regime. Even better, officials intend to share your data with federal and state agencies, private contractors and consultants, explicitly without asking for your leave to do so.

John Merline of Investors Business Daily reports:

The Health and Human Services Department earlier this year exposed just how vast the government's data collection efforts will be on millions of Americans as a result of ObamaCare.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., asked HHS to provide "a complete list of agencies that will interact with the Federal Data Services Hub." The Hub is a central feature of ObamaCare, since it will be used by the new insurance exchanges to determine eligibility for benefits, exemptions from the federal mandate, and how much to grant in federal insurance subsidies.

In response, the HHS said the ObamaCare data hub will "interact" with seven other federal agencies: Social Security Administration, the IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense and — believe it or not — the Peace Corps. Plus the Hub will plug into state Medicaid databases.

And what sort of data will be "routed through" the Hub? Social Security numbers, income, family size, citizenship and immigration status, incarceration status, and enrollment status in other health plans, according to the HHS.

The Center for Consumer Information & Insurance Oversight at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services provides some reassurances for those concerned by such concentration of personal information.

For all marketplaces, CMS is also building a tool called the Data Services Hub to help with verifying applicant information used to determine eligibility for enrollment in qualified health plans and insurance affordability programs.  The hub will provide one connection to the common federal data sources (including but not limited to SSA, IRS, DHS) needed to verify consumer application information for income, citizenship, immigration status, access to minimum essential coverage, etc.  CMS has completed the technical design, and reference architecture for this work, is establishing a cross-agency security framework as well as the protocols for connectivity, and has begun testing the hub.  The hub will not store consumer information, but will securely transmit data between state and federal systems to verify consumer application information. Protecting the privacy of individuals remains the highest priority of CMS.

No stored consumer information? Privacy is the "highest priority"? Well, that's all right, then. Except … Damn it. Government agencies often say one thing publicly, and quite aother privately. Merline points out that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services portrayed the Data Services Hub in a somewhat different light in an obscure regulatory notice filed on February 6, 2013:

In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, CMS is establishing a new system of records titled, "Health Insurance Exchanges (HIX) Program," to support the CMS Health Insurance Exchanges Program established under provisions of the Affordable Care Act (PPACA) … The system of records will contain personally identifiable information (PII) about certain individuals who apply or on whose behalf an application is filed for eligibility determinations for enrollment in a qualified health plan (QHP) through an Exchange, and for insurance affordability programs.

So, the database "will contain personally identifiable information" after all. And just how "highest priority" is the privacy of the stored data?

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM
A. Entities Who May Receive Disclosures Under Routine Use

These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the HIX without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. …

Among the listed "entities who may receive disclosures under routine use" without your consent are federal agencies, state agencies, agency contractors, consultants, CMS grantees and non-profit entities operating exchanges for states.

Those are just the entities authorized to have access to your information, As we know, employees of government agencies from local police departments to the Internal Revenue Service have a history of misusing databases for fun and profit.

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Fancy Infused Liqueurs and Pre-Mixed Margaritas in Peril in Tennessee!

J.D. Tuccille is a contributing editor at Reason.

PolicyCivil LibertiesObamacarePrivacy
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (131)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. MJGreen   12 years ago

    Well sure. Why would they start caring about consent now?

  2. Tman   12 years ago

    So I guess HIPAA is out the window now huh.

    1. tarran   12 years ago

      No. It will remain to inconvenience family and friends and as a club to punish companies with health data that are unmutual with white house goals.

      1. amelia   12 years ago

        Yep. On-the-ground service providers can’t reveal a thing about anyone. My mom is in residential rehab right now, recovering from a broken hip. People disappear from the facility and the staff can reveal nothing. So the person you were watching Jeopardy with in the lounge last night could be on her death bed and you can’t be told about it. She was concerned about one woman who went away, so we called the closest hospital and found out she was in ICU. Took my mom to visit her. On the way back to rehab she asked me if she could get in trouble for telling other residents that she visited her. I said “no” since she’s not an employee. I hope I was right!

        1. Paul.   12 years ago

          No, your mom can’t get in trouble. Worry not. Besides, the NSA already knows your mother was there.

          1. Libertymike   12 years ago

            Yes, because Amelia’s mom is not a “covered entity”- just thought I’d throw in the legal jargon.

            1. Paul.   12 years ago

              You know who else isn’t a covered entity?

              1. Libertymike   12 years ago

                Shawn Kemp?

                Antonio Cromartie?

              2. Ted S.   12 years ago

                Lady Godiva?

    2. Lord Humungus   12 years ago

      lawsuits here we come.

    3. sloopyinca   12 years ago

      So I guess HIPAA is out the window now huh.

      According to Dumbphy, it never existed for cops anyway. Why shouldn’t the rest of the government leviathan get to use our personal medical records as they see fit?

      1. Duke   12 years ago

        Here’s the great thing about HIPAA: only the government can file a lawsuit for wrongful disclosure of PHI. No private cause of action exists for victims of the wrongful disclosure. So the FedGov has used HIPAA violations to shakedown hospitals and providers. Thanks BIll Clinton — you’re a true humanitarian!

        1. Libertymike   12 years ago

          HIPAA is really about the manner in which “protected health information” is released.

          It most certainly is not some kind of overarching shield against disclosure of PHI.

    4. Ted S.   12 years ago

      No; HIPAA was never intended to keep one’s data private from the state.

    5. HazelMeade   12 years ago

      The secret FISA court overrides HIPPA.

  3. Almanian!   12 years ago

    But the government does have a history of protecting PII, and govt systems are virtually un-hackable, right? So I think everyone should feel secure about this.

    Top. Men.

    1. UnCivilServant   12 years ago

      As a government IT guy… I wish that weren’t sarcasm. We’re thin on the ground and maligned by the very people who rely on our work while they deny the diversion of funding from their fiefdoms to keep the agency foundations intact.

      The last place my data is safe is in the very databases I’m charged with overseeing because the people who use it most hamstring my ability to make it safe and reliable.

      1. Tman   12 years ago

        Oh….goody.

      2. JW   12 years ago

        Wasn’t it the Dept of the Interior, which had its systems so riddled with security flaws and holes, that they just cut off Internet access?

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          Am I the only one who would rather have government databases be completely incompetently designed and used rather than super-efficiently so? I’d rather deal with fuckups than with them efficiently collecting everything about me.

          1. John   12 years ago

            That sounds nice. But the incompetence doesn’t prevent their misuse. They are very competent at misusing the data even if they can’t do anything else with it.

          2. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

            Except that ID thieves may get some most excellent PII to fuck you with. Because the government has this idea that there are no limits on its ability to collect data. And to abuse it, but that’s another matter altogether.

            1. Tman   12 years ago

              Well, ID Thieves don’t need this database to get that information. It’s already pretty much available. That doesn’t mean I’m thrilled that yet another database is getting created because that just compounds the problem.

              Most people have no idea how many times their PII has been breached already. I could show you servers in the Middle East and other black market sites that would blow your mind.

              1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

                I think the government is more likely to have that information all wrapped up neatly for cross-referencing.

              2. Agammamon   12 years ago

                Well, its mainly available because the government requires its collection by various agencies and private entities and then has no particular incentive to secure it as the government has no accountability for screw-ups.

            2. Episiarch   12 years ago

              That’s going to be the case no matter what. I’d rather that the government be incompetent and evil instead of competent and evil.

              1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

                Incompetent, weak, and evil. And nearsighted, like Mr. Magoo.

                1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

                  And thinking it is bad-assed (when it really is not) like Commander McBragg.

          3. db   12 years ago

            Yeah, until the ATF “misplaces” your machinegun registration document and your copy can’t be verified against the official database.

        2. Tman   12 years ago

          The VA had a security breach in 2006 that was over 25 million people. Sure, I trust them.

          1. JW   12 years ago

            They promised they’ll never lose another laptop with the patient database on it.

            WTF? Who the fuck carries a full database WITH THEM?

            1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              A database full of blues.

            2. Episiarch   12 years ago

              People whose IT staff can’t write a usable, secure web app to save their lives?

              1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

                People called Romanes, they go, the house?

              2. Paul.   12 years ago

                People whose IT staff can’t write a usable, secure web app to save their lives?

                This.

                1. Paul.   12 years ago

                  Although in fairness, a lot of what gets bandied about in the media is largely inaccurate.

                  “The AP got HACKED!!!” when in reality they got dumbassed.

                  This ‘database’ may have been a report that was pushed out from the database, but the media referred to it as a ‘database’. It could just have easily been a big assed Excel spreadsheet of data elements.

                  However, data loss is data loss.

                  1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                    Oh, I realize not to put any faith in what some moron reporter says, especially about computers (CRASH OVERRIDE! ACID BURN! CEREAL KILLER!), but I have seen incompetence from government IT staff that would stun you.

                    1. Paul.   12 years ago

                      I’m tough to stun these days. I’m currently involved in a DNS forwarding issue with a huge enterprise, and their top people have no idea how DNS works. Private sector. There’s no excuse.

                    2. Episiarch   12 years ago

                      Yeah, I’ve seen incredible incompetence in the private sector too, and sometimes I just cannot understand how these people still have jobs. Then I realize that their bosses are probably even more incompetent than them and know even less.

                  2. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

                    “The AP got HACKED!!!” when in reality they got dumbassed.

                    Yeah, this is what I think of every time I see that some site got “hacked” via a DDOS attack. No, they didn’t get hacked, they got vandalized. Someone tore down the digital billboard that is their website.

                    It’s the media, though. juvenile acts of vandalism aren’t scary enough.

              3. Fluffy   12 years ago

                Based on my experience, government IT security usually reasons like this:

                1. No web apps. They’ll get hacked!

                2. Put all the data in a warehouse. Then make sure that warehouse runs super slow. Users should just deal with it.

                3. Close warehouse at night and on weekends. BECAUSE SECURITY!

                Those three things are a recipe for frustrating the 2 or 3 people in each government agency who actually want to do any work, so eventually 1 of those 2 or 3 people says to themselves, “Well, if I download the main tables to my laptop, my queries will run faster AND I can do work at night and on weekends!” Then they lose their laptop.

                If IT departments don’t want users to do stupid things like download vast amounts of data to their laptop, they should fix it so you can do decent data analysis over the network. Or they should shut their yaps.

                1. briny   12 years ago

                  The last time I looked (back when I was working there P/T), the VISTA system databases were running on PICK with a Windows wrapper, so I wouldn’t be surprised that someone working on it had the real deal on his laptop. FWIW, I’m a disabled veteran as well, so I was in the databases when the laptop was lost.

                  Not this any of that really matters. The VA sent me a Privacy brochure and I actually read the damn thing. I should have kept myself ignorant. Every federal agency, state agency, county and city agency, even though you’ve never interacted with that [whatever] agency has complete access to your VA medical records. That (especially) includes your pysch records. Now how’s that for scary. If you’re a Veteran, well golly gee, you are already in personal health information exchange with access to All.

                  I should drop some expletives here but I’ll spare ya.

      3. sarcasmic   12 years ago

        I need approval from a committee of government idiots with no understanding of relational databases before I can alter table structures. It’s maddening.

        1. AlexInCT   12 years ago

          People like you will be dealt with when your betters have control of your healthcare information and can use it to control your access, young man……

      4. Lord Humungus   12 years ago

        and not to mention the “Snowden factor”:

        All it takes is a USB drive and you could download most/all? the data. Hello, identity theft. Hello, blackmail.

        1. UnCivilServant   12 years ago

          2.5 TB Thumb Drives? Where?

          1. Lord Humungus   12 years ago

            ok, parts of… or filtered down slices.

          2. PapayaSF   12 years ago

            There’s a 1TB out now.

          3. Paul.   12 years ago

            1tb removable drive in my hand right now. Costco, $79.95. Shop smart, shop S-Mart.

            Once you compress it? Text data (if that’s your format output) will compress way…wwwayyy down.

            1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              Say, who verifies that the information the government says it has on you actually is true? What’s to stop them from just making it up, then clouding the source by invoking “NATIONAL SECURITY?”

              1. Paul.   12 years ago

                For yuks, I sometimes look myself up on those sites like “Spokeo”.

                I’m always more fascinated by what they have on my that’s not correct, than what ‘s correct.

                I mean, yeah, they know I own a home valued between X & Y. Yeah, that’s public info on the King County Parcel Search website.

                But the wrong stuff? Always gives me a chuckle.

                1. Agammamon   12 years ago

                  Heh, I just checked that out and I don’t exist. I’m outside the system biotches!

              2. Agammamon   12 years ago

                No one? Who verifies the No-Fly list? Who verifies E-Verify?

            2. playa manhattan   12 years ago

              “This is my BOOM stick!”

            3. BakedPenguin   12 years ago

              1tb removable drive in my hand right now. Costco, $79.95.

              How far tech has come.

              1. playa manhattan   12 years ago

                For a factory refurbished drive, no less.

      5. DontShootMe   12 years ago

        Wait, how did you slip through? I thought the FedGov expressly shopped for IT folks without working security knowledge?

        1. UnCivilServant   12 years ago

          State Gov. Same bureaucracy, less pay.

          1. Almanian!   12 years ago

            GODDAMNIT SONOFABITCH!

            Now my stomach hurts….

      6. Brett L   12 years ago

        I guess I’ll thell the story again about how a co-worker at the FL Dept of Corrections tried to tell everyone for six weeks that we had a SQL injection problem before emailing the CIO his SSN to his home email, and explaining how my coworker got all of this information from a public-facing website. We’re fucked.

        1. AlexInCT   12 years ago

          Did he get fired and prosecuted for acts of espionage? He didn’t have to move to Russia or Equador to avoid the man, did he?

          1. Brett L   12 years ago

            No. The CIO made very sure that no shit was to roll down on my co-worker. Eventually, being worth a shit drove us both to seek other employment.

            1. Bill Dalasio   12 years ago

              So, in other words, the CIO was one of those rare breeds, a semi-thoughtful bureaucrat.

  4. JW   12 years ago

    My doctor’s office keeps pushing this electronic management system on me. I can make appts and get scrip refills through email, etc.

    While all that is appealing to me, I just don’t trust it enough to not be part and parcel of Obamacare.

  5. sarcasmic   12 years ago

    Let’s say that you are honest with your physician about the use of certain politically incorrect chemicals. Does this mean that information about that illegal activity will be fair game for any government agency that might be interested?

    1. Lord Humungus   12 years ago

      anxiety? take away the guns
      depression? take away the guns
      end of life? take away the guns

    2. AlexInCT   12 years ago

      That you have to ask..

      Oh wait, you were being facetious…

      Nevermind.

    3. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

      I’m not sure how anyone feels comfortable being honest with a physician, considering.

      1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

        How can you be honest when doing so could result in the loss of your guns, children, and freedom?

      2. AlexInCT   12 years ago

        Well if you are not doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about you subvertive succubus you!

        That was sarcasm in case it wasn’t blatant enough.

        And my doc prescribed me Viagra, based on the premise that since I am going to be 50 in a few months I have to have a need the stuff, without telling me. I found out about it when the free samples started showing up. I am going to get sued for breaking some poor women now…

    4. Almanian!   12 years ago

      Yeah, I REALLY like our doc and trust him….but I totally do not talk about guns or recreational pharma in his presence. At least he can claim Plausible Deniability, cause I don’t tell him shit except my physical condition (mental is ALWAYS fine….of course).

      Bad enough the govt can get at all kinds of medical information already – first rule of both Gun Club and Recreational Pharma Club is…well, don’t mix those two club’s business. But the SECOND rule is….

    5. SIV   12 years ago

      Let’s say that you are honest with your physician about the use of certain politically incorrect chemicals.

      No one here is THAT fucking stupid!

    6. 2Sirius   12 years ago

      Sorry if I’m posting this in the wrong spot, but if you answer “yes” when questioned at the doctor’s office about illegal drug use, it’s documented in the medical record, and that’s translated to a diagnosis code (in this case, 305.90). Like SIV said, hopefully people would know better than to answer “yes” but the thing is, a lot of people answer honestly. But it isn’t just the drug questions that are the problem. If you mention feeling sad or discouraged, or that you’re having trouble sleeping, you have “depressive disorder” which is coded as 311. It’s in the doctor’s best interest to make sure all this information is documented, because basically the more issues he discusses with you means more diagnoses on the insurance claim form, and the more money he can expect in reimbursement. What really worries me is that Section 4101 of Obamacare provides for school-based health centers which will offer, among other things, mental health and substance use disorder assessments along with physical health assessments.

  6. SIV   12 years ago

    I hope future-President Santorum (or similar) shares abortion and miscarriage data with right-to-life pregnancy counseling groups.

    Will medical marijuana prescription data be shared with interested parties too? Only seems fair if the law stands.

  7. AlexInCT   12 years ago

    Even worse, there will come a time, sooner than later, if it isn’t already here, where they will use this information to identify their political enemies and then apply pressure to control behavior and/or access to care. They wanted this passed before people knew what was in it because they see this as a powerful political tool to ensure their grip on power. The nanny state will lord it over any and all that don’t line up to suck their daily dose of state cock.

    1. John   12 years ago

      Come now Alex. It will was just a couple of rogue employees in the Cincinnati exchange who held up approval for that cancer treatment for that Tea Party spokesman. And some liberals had their care held up too, really we just can’t tell you who they were because of privacy concerns.

      1. AlexInCT   12 years ago

        That story sure has changed huh? From rogue employees to not so rogue employees. Then from a coordinated campaign to a not coordinated by the top men campaing. Now it is on its fifth itteration and the new story is they targeted everybody for special review even if it is obvious to us that one group got special treatment to speed up their requests while the other was cock blocked.

        And that’s not going to be the end of this ever mutating story and the lame attempts to explain away clear abuse of power for political gain.

        Nixon got jibbed man.

        1. John   12 years ago

          It was all about Cincinnati. Pay no attention to the Washington based SES and career Dem hack who just took the 5th before Congress. It amazes me, their own people are taking the 5th yet the hacks still claim there was no wrong doing.

          1. Almanian!   12 years ago

            John! Look over there! Benghazi! Wait, no – frackin! Wait – look – NSA…woooo scary! Kim Kardashian had a baby! British Royalty in the oven! Who’s The Voice this year?!

            1. AlexInCT   12 years ago

              Global warming and war on coal! That’s the new distraction du jour it looks like.

              1. Almanian!   12 years ago

                KITTEHS!

        2. Almanian!   12 years ago

          BUT NEW NEWS THEY ALSOI TARGETED “ISRAEL”, “OCCUPY” and….something else “liberalish”. SO IT’S OK!

          /media govt derptards

          1. Acosmist   12 years ago

            “Israel” most likely to be evangelical Christian groups, amusingly.

  8. free2booze   12 years ago

    See, but the government your information, not you. So it’s perfectly acceptable for the feds to use their information any way they like… or something.

  9. Nazdrakke   12 years ago

    So is it safe yet to surmise that America is in the process of transitioning from late republic to early imperial period yet?

    1. John   12 years ago

      No. Early imperial Rome was still a fearsome and feared state. We are in the process of transforming from colonial Britain to labor Britain.

      1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

        Hold on there, hoss. We still have a huge military, and, like Republican Rome, we’re still trusted (yes, trusted, else other powers would have larger armies) to bring our power to bear to protect weaker states. That, coupled with our economic woes and increasingly unlimited government. . .well, trouble may lie ahead.

        1. Almanian!   12 years ago

          Oh, I can see Rome CLEARLY from here. It’s all over but the crying for the USofA. Just a question of “how long before the maelstrom”.

          1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

            The triggering event will be an invasion where we actually occupy and rule a country on a permanent basis. With plunder.

            1. AlexInCT   12 years ago

              First dibs on the Canadian bacon!

              1. Almanian!   12 years ago

                I like turtles

          2. Brett L   12 years ago

            I’ll be goddammed if I’m gonna let some ragtag group of Canadians march across NY and PA even if they will sack and loot DC.

            1. UnCivilServant   12 years ago

              How about NY and NJ? They can sack NYC on the way.

              1. Brett L   12 years ago

                Its Canadians, dude. Unless they’ll take Toledo and Detroit, I’m not open to suggestion.

            2. db   12 years ago

              Let ’em waltz through Philly.

            3. Don Mynack   12 years ago

              We will if they promise to just take out D.C., then go away.

        2. Paul.   12 years ago

          Why can’t it be both?

          Imperial Labour Briton?

    2. HazelMeade   12 years ago

      Is there some sort of reason why we have to emulate the Roman empire?

  10. Brett L   12 years ago

    Huh. I just built out an ACO cohort management system for a client and they were sure that CMS was going to require them to allow opt-out of data sharing. We spent hours and hours talking about it. I guess this will simplify their processes.

  11. amelia   12 years ago

    And the Dept. of Homeland Security needs my health data because…? My therapist will soon be required to report if I express anti-government sentiments, I suppose.

    1. Scruffy Nerfherder   12 years ago

      Terroristic tendencies are genetic, last I heard.

    2. Scruffy Nerfherder   12 years ago

      Although, more likely it is to find out if you’ve been taking too many prescription narcotics, you evil bastard.

  12. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

    …in order to determine your privileges and exemptions under the new government health care regime. Even better, officials intend to share your data with federal and state agencies, private contractors and consultants, explicitly without asking for your leave to do so.

    I AM A MAN

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      They’re doing it wrong: A man, a plan, a canal: Panama.

      1. Ted S.   12 years ago

        Actually you’ve got it wrong too. It’s “A man, a plan, a canal: St. Lawrence Seaway.”

        It’s also, “Able was I ere I saw St. Helena.”

  13. LynchPin1477   12 years ago

    My God, this is the most Byzantine law I’ve ever seen. You can predict its failure on that aspect alone.

  14. Palin's Buttplug   12 years ago

    Check this out:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M…..ion_Bureau

    A database of all insurance records company – massive last year.

    Their Wiki entry is intact yet the links are dead – the company URL has disappeared without forwarding.

    1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

      Great. Now we’ve got Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith in charge of our medical records.

      1. Paul.   12 years ago

        I’d have no problem with that. People, in charge, the right ones are.

  15. Loki   12 years ago

    Couldn’t they just get all that information from the NSA? They already know everything anyway. Or better yet, just merge all Federal government departments and agencies into the NSA. For efficiency’s sake. /sarc

  16. Anders   12 years ago

    O’RLY?!?!?!?!?!?!!?

    Never saw that coming.

  17. Brandon   12 years ago

    “Consent” doesn’t seem to mean anything to this administration.

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      You’re so wrong. Consent means this to the administration: “Archaic. to agree in sentiment, opinion, etc.; be in harmony.” See, the government is us, and we’re the government, and all is as one. Everything is in harmonious balance with the government’s will, which is just a physical manifestation of the volont? g?n?rale.

  18. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

    If we really want to make the left’s heads explode, someone ought to challenge the constitutionality of Obamacare on the grounds that it violates the privacy provisions of Roe v. Wade.

    1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

      If I can’t be forced to carry a baby to full term against my will, why should I be forced to subsidize other people’s medical care through my insurance premiums?

      1. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

        No, I mean Roe v. Wade was premised on the idea not that there was a right to abortion per se, but that the sort of government monitoring necessary to restrict it would interfere in the right of women to have private conversations with their doctor. It seems to me that requiring doctors to turn over all medical records to the government would be exactly the sort of intrusion Roe v. Wade was supposedly so concerned about.

  19. HazelMeade   12 years ago

    In the Washington Post yesterday there was a quote from Senator Wyden that the NSA could also access medical records.

    Given the fact that the medical database is going to be connected to a central hub, I don’t think there should be a shred of doubt that the NSA will have the ability to snoop on your medical records. Of course, there will be some prefunctory court order from the secret FISA court, but you won’t know about it, and you won’t know when or if that power has been abused.

    1. Sevo   12 years ago

      “Of course, there will be some prefunctory court order from the secret FISA court,”

      So you’re saying it’ll be transparent?

  20. Don Mynack   12 years ago

    If I opt out of Social Security, can they have their fucking number back? Hell if I want it…

  21. plusafdotcom   12 years ago

    “The hub will not store consumer information, but will securely transmit data between state and federal systems to verify consumer application information. Protecting the privacy of individuals remains the highest priority of CMS.”

    so, that says this nefarious “hub” is nothing more than a secure store-and-forward of database data from anywhere it IS kept to anyone who wants to access it, eh?

    I’ve been weasel-worded to before with dumber text than that, thank y’all very much.

    Now say something that resembles making any sense.

  22. Irish   12 years ago

    Many of the people in the comments have been harshly critical of the bill for this and other reasons.

  23. JW   12 years ago

    You look lost. Do you need directions?

  24. Brett L   12 years ago

    Thrash that strawman! Give him whatfor, old boy.

  25. sloopyinca   12 years ago

    It’s easy. You see, we’re a bunch of pedants here, and your use of the term “illegal alien criminals” evokes the double-negative rule, thereby making their conduct perfectly acceptable with us.

  26. SIV   12 years ago

    Only because they hate brown people.

  27. Calidissident   12 years ago

    I think a solid majority of open borders people in the commentariat oppose this bill. I’ve only seen a couple people support it, and I don’t think any of them were regulars. Even Reason writers like Dalmia and Welch have written very critical takes on the bill in Congress. Yet for some reason some people insist that everyone here supports it.

  28. KDN   12 years ago

    Don’t worry, ‘Merkin knows exactly where he is. O/U on the banhammer is 4 hours.

  29. Irish   12 years ago

    Alac is also probably American. Someone shows up that I’ve never seen before and posts a Vdare article.

    That’s like American 101.

  30. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

    I don’t see the point in some massive bill when I’m actually not that upset about the status quo. It’s annoying if illegals are getting welfare or voting or anything like that, but we could easily deal with such things if we actually wanted to. It’s clear that we don’t.

    The talk about sealing our borders to terrorists is total nonsense. We’re a fairly open society and will remain one, so long as we want to have any degree of affluence and freedom, so that’s unfeasible.

  31. Loki   12 years ago

    I don’t know, I recognize the handle, so I don’t think it’s our resident racist asshole troll. But who the hell knows for sure. We may all be sockpuppets/ figments of one demented schizo’s imagination for all I know.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Tariffs Are Breaking the Manufacturing Industries Trump Says He Wants To Protect

Eric Boehm | From the July 2025 issue

The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War

Matthew Petti | 6.6.2025 4:28 PM

Marsha Blackburn Wants Secret Police

C.J. Ciaramella | 6.6.2025 3:55 PM

This Small Business Is in Limbo As Owner Sues To Stop Trump's Tariffs

Eric Boehm | 6.6.2025 3:30 PM

A Runner Was Prosecuted for Unapproved Trail Use After the Referring Agency Called It 'Overcriminalization'

Jacob Sullum | 6.6.2025 2:50 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!