ObamaCare to undermine financial, home privacy?
posted at 12:55 pm on August 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Will ObamaCare force Americans to reveal their banking data? At National Review, Diana Furchtgott-Roth points out an interesting section of HR3200 dealing with health-care identity cards and what data will be required for them. In Section 163, HR3200 envisions a national health-service card that handles electronic transactions for financial responsibility, including apparently patient-responsible payments:
Buried in the 1,017 pages of the House Democrats’ health-care bill is a little-noticed provision that for the first time could give the government access to the checking or credit-card information of every American. Under section 163, which is entitled “Administrative Simplification,” the bill sets new “standards” for electronic transactions between individuals and their health-care providers.
According to section 163, the standards will “enable the real-time (or near real-time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service . . . ” In addition, they will “enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with related health care payment and remittance advice.”
What is envisioned is a “machine-readable health plan beneficiary card” that, in addition to information about a person’s medical history, will contain checking-account or credit-card information, so as to allow electronic payments and, if a person is lucky, occasional remittances. Since under the proposed legislation everyone would be required to have health insurance, all Americans would have to provide this information.
The required collection of such data is unprecedented. At no other time has the government sought to collect this type of financial information from everyone in America.
My reading of Section 163 is somewhat more ambiguous than NR’s. Here is the complete text of the section:
SEC. 163. ADMINISTRATIVE SIMPLIFICATION.
2
(1) IN GENERAL- Part C of title XI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 1173 the following new section:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink(a) Standardizing Electronic Administrative Transactions-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘SEC. 1173A. STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.
‘(a) Standards for Financial and Administrative Transactions-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(A) be unique with no conflicting or redundant standards;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink‘(B) be authoritative, permitting no additions or constraints for electronic transactions, including companion guides;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) be comprehensive, efficient and robust, requiring minimal augmentation by paper transactions or clarification by further communications;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
25
‘(D) enable the real-time (or near real-time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink2
‘(G) describe all data elements (such as reason and remark codes) in unambiguous terms, not permit optional fields, require that data elements be either required or conditioned upon set values in other fields, and prohibit additional conditions; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink2
‘(H) harmonize all common data elements across administrative and clinical transaction standards.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(A) clarify, refine, complete, and expand, as needed, the standards required under section 1173;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(B) require paper versions of standardized transactions to comply with the same standards as to data content such that a fully compliant, equivalent electronic transaction can be populated from the data from a paper version;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink11
‘(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(D) require timely and transparent claim and denial management processes, including tracking, adjudication, and appeal processing;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink2
‘(E) require the use of a standard electronic transaction with which health care providers may quickly and efficiently enroll with a health plan to conduct the other electronic transactions provided for in this part; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
‘(F) provide for other requirements relating to administrative simplification as identified by the Secretary, in consultation with stakeholders.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink‘(A) a process and timeframe with milestones for developing the complete set of standards;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) an expedited upgrade program for continually developing and approving additions and modifications to the standards as often as annually to improve their quality and extend their functionality to meet evolving requirements in health care;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) programs to provide incentives for, and ease the burden of, implementation for certain health care providers, with special consideration given to such providers serving rural or underserved areas and ensure coordination with standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria being adopted under the HITECH Act;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(D) programs to provide incentives for, and ease the burden of, health care providers who volunteer to participate in the process of setting standards for electronic transactions;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(E) an estimate of total funds needed to ensure timely completion of the implementation plan; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(F) an enforcement process that includes timely investigation of complaints, random audits to ensure compliance, civil monetary and programmatic penalties for non-compliance consistent with existing laws and regulations, and a fair and reasonable appeals process building off of enforcement provisions under this part.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall adopt and regularly update standards consistent with the goals described in paragraph (2).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(2) GOALS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS- The goals for standards under paragraph (1) are that such standards shall–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(3) TIME FOR ADOPTION- Not later than 2 years after the date of implementation of the X12 Version 5010 transaction standards implemented under this part, the Secretary shall adopt standards under this section.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink‘(4) REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC STANDARDS- The standards under this section shall be developed, adopted and enforced so as to–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(5) BUILDING ON EXISTING STANDARDS- In developing the standards under this section, the Secretary shall build upon existing and planned standards.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink3
‘(6) IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT- Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a plan for the implementation and enforcement, by not later than 5 years after such date of enactment, of the standards under this section. Such plan shall include–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink2
‘(b) Limitations on Use of Data- Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the use of information collected under this section in a manner that would adversely affect any individual.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink‘(c) Protection of Data- The Secretary shall ensure (through the promulgation of regulations or otherwise) that all data collected pursuant to subsection (a) are–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘with reference to’ and all that follows and inserting ‘with reference to a transaction or data element of health information in section 1173 means implementation specifications, certification criteria, operating rules, messaging formats, codes, and code sets adopted or established by the Secretary for the electronic exchange and use of information’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) Requirements for data content using available and established national standards.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) Infrastructure requirements that establish best practices for streamlining data flow to yield timely execution of transactions.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) Policies defining the transaction related rights and responsibilities for entities that are transmitting or receiving data.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) by inserting ‘on behalf of an individual’ after ‘1978)’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by inserting ‘on behalf of an individual’ after ‘for a financial institution.’CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(1) used and disclosed in a manner that meets the HIPAA privacy and security law (as defined in section 3009(a)(2) of the Public Health Service Act), including any privacy or security standard adopted under section 3004 of such Act; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(2) protected from all inappropriate internal use by any entity that collects, stores, or receives the data, including use of such data in determinations of eligibility (or continued eligibility) in health plans, and from other inappropriate uses, as defined by the Secretary.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink1
(2) DEFINITIONS- Section 1171 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d) is amended–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink‘(9) OPERATING RULES- The term ‘operating rules’ means business rules for using and processing transactions. Operating rules should address the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 1179(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d-8(a)) is amended, in the matter before paragraph (1)–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) Standards for Claims Attachments and Coordination of Benefits -CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
(1) STANDARD FOR HEALTH CLAIMS ATTACHMENTS- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall promulgate a final rule to establish a standard for health claims attachment transaction described in section 1173(a)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d-2(a)(2)(B)) and coordination of benefits.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink(2) REVISION IN PROCESSING PAYMENT TRANSACTIONS BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) IN GENERAL- Section 1179 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d-8) is amended, in the matter before paragraph (1)–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) by striking ‘or is engaged’ and inserting ‘and is engaged’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) by inserting ‘(other than as a business associate for a covered entity)’ after ‘for a financial institution’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
(B) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by paragraph (1) shall apply to transactions occurring on or after such date (not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act) as the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall specify.
This pertains more to being prepared for electronic transactions rather than requiring them, at least as far as the patient-provider transaction is concerned. The point salient to the “individual” have to do with eligibility rather than payment, which already happens, especially in Medicare. In fact, one of our providers has recently gotten very particular about calling for verification on every visit. Section 1173A (4) covers payments and remittances, but only as regards to providers, not patients, and electronic payments and remittances from the insurers to the providers, at least as far as my reading goes.
This section does note that the establishment of electronic verification may include a machine-readable identity/insurance card, but it doesn’t mandate it. The verification process is more on the backs of providers and insurers, not on the patient. Some plans already have such cards, although most don’t. The last two insurers I’ve had use simple plastic with text, and my wife’s Medicare Advantage plan uses a laminated paper card.
The same is true about the issue of home visitations. People have construed Section 440 as mandating home visitations for implementing wellness programs aimed at children, but they’re missing a key word here:
SEC. 440. HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
‘(a) Purpose- The purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children.
That word, of course, is voluntary. This section provides more funding in the form of block grants to existing state programs that already provide home visitation for families who are unable to get regular clinic visits for financial or other reasons. It doesn’t provide any new federal mandate for such programs, although it does require states to prove the effectiveness of the programs they fund with the block grants.
There is a legitimate argument to make that any government program that is voluntary can be made compulsory at some time, especially once government becomes completely responsible for our health care. That’s one good reason to oppose ObamaCare, among many, and certainly these sections make for good “what-ifs” along those lines. As currently constructed, though, the evidence doesn’t support the conjecture for the specific arguments above.
We have plenty of good arguments against HR3200, especially on cost, government intrusiveness, efficiency, and much more. Let’s not get too lost in the weaker arguments.
Update: Sorry about the formatting; the OpenCongress site isn’t terribly conducive to cut & paste. Mea culpa.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
One word can be changed, one judge can rule “mandatory”.
Anytime you have to parse words with the government…the public loses.
right2bright on August 21, 2009 at 2:20 PM
That’s exactly the problem. The language is intentionally ambiguous in order to allow the most leeway when the accompanying regulations are written. That’s where the rubber hits the road and those regulations will contain well over 10,000 pages with little or no opportunity to review or change them once in place.
You can’t say NR is right, but you can’t say they’re wrong either. This is no accident and it’s a running theme throughout this inherently dishonest monstrosity.
RadClown on August 21, 2009 at 2:23 PM
Doesn’t this mean that if you have funds available to cover the bill that you have to pay on the spot? even though you might have an electric bill sitting at home that needs to get paid?
journeyintothewhirlwind on August 21, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Even our local liberal can see this bill is garbage…an EPIC FAILURE…now you know this bill is worthless.
It’s about time, even the most ardent liberals can see how poorly this bill is written, how many “traps” there are, what a waste of time and money.
right2bright on August 21, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Sotomayor has already demonstrated she has a big gripe about any tests that don’t have the outcome she wants.
viking01 on August 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM
This sort of hair-splitting analysis isn’t really needed. As the Americans become more and more dependent on their “federal” government, it will become easier for their rulers to make them even more dependent. “We have you by the balls, but we’re not going to require you to disclose your financial information right now” is not a position about which we need to argue the advantages and disadvantages.
Kralizec on August 21, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Sarah’s next Facebook comment.
farright on August 21, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Thank you. I have been advocating this for years. The tax pyramid is inverted. Not to say that State governments are less corrupt than the Federal government, but you don’t have to drive as far to “petition your government.”
riverrat10k on August 21, 2009 at 2:30 PM
1,283 words, huh? Right now I just show my card and pay my co-pay.
Akzed on August 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM
EXACTLY! When the Statists start declaring this legislation as Garbage, it time to pull the plug on it.
Chainsaw56 on August 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Yeah. Semi-related: have you noticed the ramp up for the h1n1 vaccine? I know they want to alert us to another “health crisis” but I have never been a big advocate of government mandating anything, let alone a vaccine like this. We selectively vaccinate our kids, too. So, I already deal with doctors who are very serious about kicking people out of their practice if we do not adhere to the government recommendations. This means FLU SHOTS, which I am against. Now, if we are all in the system, what will this do for this relatively small area of patient choice? It concerns me, to put it mildly.
Mommypundit on August 21, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Wait a moment.
Healthcare MANDATORY.
Healthcare card MANDATORY.
card must include access to our private, financial data. MANDATORY.
Isn’t this illegal search and seizure? Didn’t we have a constitutional amendment about this?
kurtzz3 on August 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM
AMBIGUOUS is right. Most of the whole bill is ambiguous. How many times does it say “as the HHS deems appropriate”? They need to detail exactly WTH they mean for people to be able to trust.
Everything about this administration is ambiguous and I think it’s on purpose. It leaves room to maneuver legally, and it’s scary as hell.
NTWR on August 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM
Let’s track and attack regular Americans, but not terrorists.
rlwo2008 on August 21, 2009 at 2:45 PM
Gee, just mark ’666′ on everybody’s head and get it over with. LOL
These people are incredible. The power that exists in their imaginations is way too frigging close to becoming reality, if you ask me.
capitalist piglet on August 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Haven’t you heard? The living Constitution is dead.
1st Amendment – DEAD!
2nd Amendment – Soon to be DEAD
3rd Amendment – They’ll leave that one alone – it’s a throwaway for the Statists.
4th Amendment – DEAD!
………………….
Chainsaw56 on August 21, 2009 at 2:51 PM
You’re so not alone in your thoughts…I’ve totally thought this was “it.”
Mommypundit on August 21, 2009 at 2:51 PM
There is a legitimate argument to make that any government program that is voluntary can be made compulsory at some time
Yes there is. We are rightfully uneasy about trusting politicians, especially this bunch.
capitalist piglet on August 21, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Well, I comfort myself with the presumption that the antichrist won’t need a teleprompter to string together a sentence. ; )
But seriously – this power grabbing, wanting to take over big chunks of the economy…it isn’t hard to see where this is going, and it’s not good.
capitalist piglet on August 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM
With this crew of jackasses in power, what’s voluntary today will be compulsory tomorrow.
Good Lt on August 21, 2009 at 3:05 PM
journeyintothewhirlwind on August 21, 2009 at 3:11 PM
The language may be ambiguous. Our opposition is not. Maintain the pressure on your representatives. Keep them up at night worrying about their political futures. The only thing that will kill this is the fear that their phony-baloney jobs will go bye-bye.
SKYFOX on August 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM
I do selective vaccination as well, and also just say no to flu shots. This monster of a “bill” has every possibility to completely usurp our medical care decisions.
KateinCo on August 21, 2009 at 3:14 PM
I’m not giving them any information. Screw them.
Blake on August 21, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Sure, fine, the bill actually incorporates words such as “may” and “voluntary” in regards to some of the particularly chilling aspects of this bill, but this is just the initial framework from which zealous socialist bureaucrats will create further reams of onerous and detailed regulations that may very well take that last final tiny little step past the deliberately milquetoast anti-coercive words that currently provide our esteemed blogger friend Ed so much comfort. I regard those few single words to be there for the precise purpose of getting the provision through the legislative process after which they will be ignored and abused.
Having even a copy of the actual initial thousand page law on hand when visiting the doctor will not protect us either; when was the last time having a pocket-copy of the Constitution saved anyone from Leftist laws and agendas?
Kill the Bill!
Maquis on August 21, 2009 at 3:34 PM
Ay Carumba! Soon enough, the kids will need to see every specialist that has a powerful lobby.
Laura in Maryland on August 21, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Years ago when I commuted through the Times Square subway station, there were people who would stand there screaming that the government was going to tattoo us with bar codes that were the mark of the devil. They had signs, pamphlets, the whole bit.
I dismissed them as nuts, of course. Maybe I should have at least picked up a pamphlet.
RadClown on August 21, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Well, I comfort myself with the presumption that the antichrist won’t need a teleprompter to string together a sentence. ; )
We don’t think he will! We won’t be here however to know, will we.
flytier on August 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Zero is to the AC what John the Baptist was to Christ.
‘Course, Zero plans to use the blood of infants, veterans, and the elderly for his glorious baptismal font rather than water, but that’s just a quibble.
Maquis on August 21, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Watch “Schindlers List.” You will see what happens with a blind trust of Govt propaganda.
The Jews were told to board the trains to travel to their new and wonderful place. On the way they were told they could stop for a NICE SHOWER! THEY were SOooo HAPPY AS THEY WALKED INTO THE GAS CHAMBERS AND WERE Burnt and Buried in ditches on the other side.Don’t tell me it cannot happen again. I have family members who witnessed it first hand. All of my life I have been told never forget lest it happens again! Pay no attention what they say: watch what they are doing! Read the bills!
Marco on August 21, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Maquis on August 21, 2009 at 3:56 PM
A very astute observation!
flytier on August 21, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Couldn’t have hurt. ; )
capitalist piglet on August 21, 2009 at 4:18 PM
That crap about comin’ to your house and checkin’ on things healthwise…whoa.
What happens when you refuse? They’re thinkin’…whatcha got t’ hide? Yer neighbors let us in, why won’t you? Should we go get a warrant? I’m worried now for the safety of your kids…
What fun! Let’s let that Genie out and see what it does.
I seem to remember seein’ some video when I was a kid, ’bout how the commies had these health workers that traveled around and checked on the health of the worker. I didn’t like the idea then and I don’t like it now.
Obama is a liar and Truth
is killing his Marxist agenda.
Army Brat on August 21, 2009 at 6:17 PM
No. Not in my house.
davidk on August 21, 2009 at 7:16 PM
There is nothing ambiguous in this section of the bill. Read pages 59 and 60. The minute you are “in” their plan they have an open doorway into every aspect of your life.
The section giving the real time access to your bank accounts is plain clear and direct. They read the data, they will add funds or payments, screw up and take money out. What part of transfer to your bank account is ambiguous? Transfers are bidirectional. Everyone’s financial data in a database. And they can require your tax records too. You want the page number?
The fed will also have your medical history in a database. (both of which will be hacker paradise.)
And your in the bozoplan the moment your existing insurance goes up. I have the page number for that too.
This bill makes the government into a parasite that latches onto you and sucks the life out of you. Read the bill and add it up.
Aggregate all the components in your own mind. This thing isn’t designed to help people. Its designed to give us a permanent ruling class of political aristocrats and turn us into slaves of the state. Thats no exaggeration.
gee I almost forgot about all the computers and web sites this bloated thing will require. Didn’t they just decide to re do a website for 18 million?
dogsoldier on August 21, 2009 at 7:31 PM
Biggest bank run in history if this passes, and I’ll be the first one to pull every frickin dime I have out of the banks.
I’ll re-invest in loads of ammo if I have to.
Spiritk9 on August 21, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Property of
the United States Government.
Obama.JellyToast on August 21, 2009 at 7:35 PM
Voluntary, huh? When a policeman asks permission to search your car does it matter if you consent? If you don’t he holds you while he gets a warrant.
If he asks you if you ‘understand these rights as I’ve read them to you?’, can you choose this moment not to speak without an attorney? If he hasn’t arrested you by now he certainly will take you to the station to have your rights explained to you at length until you voluntarily answer.
Just the fact that they ask in the first place is evidence that they will eventually be given authority to, at worst, make you comply or pay a consequence at best.
flicker on August 21, 2009 at 8:08 PM
One more thing: when you are back home after spending the night in the hospital for chest pain and you get the bill in the mail, don’t you look at the bill for errors before you pay it? If the government is able to, for example, freeze a portion of your funds when you are put on a stretcher in the ER and deduct payment from your account at the end of your stay, or perhaps on a daily basis, how many years of hoop-jumping are you going to have to do to get your money back?
When I first saw these provisions I knew the government was asking you to naively open your purse to them. But also what makes you think they won’t use this to access your credit rating (almost a given) and probably eventually even your buying history? Remember: your credit/debit card history lists everything you’ve ever bought with it: from your cigarettes and liquor consumption to your high candybar and cola purchases to the Ducati you splurged on and the fact you didn’t buy a helmet.
flicker on August 21, 2009 at 8:30 PM
flicker: Bingo – “health habits” will affect your coverage, or denial thereof, and your financial records WILL be used against you.
There is nothing this administration has promoted that isn’t rife with ulterior motives.
Merovign on August 22, 2009 at 1:33 AM
The problem with the “Mays” is that an agressive administration can interpret these in the rulemaking process to be “wills”.
I believe this is one of the problems with the Hazardous items in kids materials Act (I do not recall the correct name) enacted last year.
davod on August 22, 2009 at 7:26 AM
Who would have thought even 50 or 100 years ago that these Scriptures could become reality so fast? Obamacare is just the first salvo, just a foretaste of things to come.
Christian Conservative on August 22, 2009 at 12:25 PM
So let’s see how this works:
1. A bureaucrat mistypes something or confuses you (Smith) with a stranger (Smythe) who has just run up a big hospital bill.
2. The government dutifully drains all of your accounts to pay itself (and maybe the hospital).
3. You call up Obamacare.
4. Ten hours of busy signals, elevator music, and recorded instructions (“for English, press 9″) later, you give up and call your Congressman.
5. Ten months later, your Congressman’s office staff calls to tell you that a refund is coming…right after the car dealers get their “cash for clunkers” money. Sorry, but the budget can only handle so much at a time.
6. Two years later, you finally get your money back so that you can move your family out of the shelter and buy a car so that you can begin looking for a job (you lost your old job because you couldn’t get to it after you sold your car to buy groceries because the government stole all your money). You lost your house because you couldn’t pay your mortgage and your credit rating became zero after all your accounts were drained.
landlines on August 22, 2009 at 12:26 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2