Real ID + National Healthcare connection indisputable

[CNHT]

It is an indisputable fact that if you support national health care, you will be supporting a national ID.

Therefore I would hope that this time we do not make a hero out of candidates like Carol Shea Porter by featuring the likes of her, when we fight against Real ID.

She is no more against Real ID than those who are pushing for it because she and Hodes have both promised to push for national health care.

This piece is from a religious group, but they are right about the connection between Real ID + National Health Care.
It mentions HIPAA of 1996 which I cite all the time.

Adding this link to the act itself, which makes a great charade of 'privacy' issues: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/


National ID Cards

Current law puts the government in a position to inappropriately monitor the movements and transactions of every citizen. Not only is the national ID movement underway, it is now a reality.

Students of Bible prophecy recognize this as a possible fulfillment of the prophecy found in the book of Revelation which reveals that the antichrist will be able to track and control all financial transactions. The scripture says that NO MAN will be able to buy or sell anything unless he has the mark.

He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark of his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. [Revelation 13:16-17]

Bill Clinton first proposed a national medical identification card in 1993 as part of his ill-fated plan to provide universal health insurance. After the failure of his health system plans, however, the government has incrementally been achieving his plan one piece at a time. Sometimes the bills are presented as "for the kids" (e.g., the 1997 Kidcare bill) and sometimes as "stop the fraud" (e.g., the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act known as Kennedy-Kassebaum), or "thwarting terrorists" (2005 Real ID Act), but the bottom line is to require computerized reporting and to gather more and more information about American citizens on government databases.

The "cradle to grave" aspect was originally started with the 1993 Comprehensive Child Immunization Act which authorized the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) "to establish state registry systems to monitor the immunization status of all children." HHS has since sent millions of taxpayers' money to the states to put children on state databases, often without their parents' knowledge or consent.


The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 which was intended to stem the tide of illegal aliens coming into our nation, prohibits the use of state driver's licenses after Oct. 1, 2000 unless they contain Social Security numbers as the unique numeric identifier "that can be read visually or by electronic means." The Act authorized the federal Department of Transportation to establish national requirements for birth certificates and drivers' licenses... in essence, transforming state drivers licenses into national ID cards.

Further, the Immigration Act ordered the development of a smart card that "shall employ technologies that provide security features, such as magnetic stripes, holograms, and integrated circuits." This magnetic stripe is expected soon to contain a digitized fingerprint, retina scan, voice print, and other biometric identifiers, and it will leave an electronic trail every time you use it.

The Welfare Reform Act requires that, in order to receive federal welfare funds, states must collect Social Security numbers from "commercial driver's license" applicants. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997, under the pretense of making "technical corrections" to the welfare act, deleted the word "commercial," thereby applying the requirement to all driver's license applicants.

The 1998 Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (known as Deadbeat Dads), established a federal "instant check" new-hires directory. Employers are now required to "screen" every new employee or job applicant against the new government database of child support order obligees.

Today, American citizens without drivers' licenses that conform to the federal standards find themselves essentially stripped of their ability to participate in life as we know it. Americans cannot get a job, open a bank account, apply for Social Security or Medicare, exercise their Second Amendment rights, or even take an airplane flight, unless they can produce a state-issued ID that conforms to the federal specifications.

The Real ID Act, supported by Republican politicians and backed by President Bush says that driver's licenses and other ID cards must include a digital photograph, anticounterfeiting features and undefined "machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements" that could include a magnetic strip or RFID tag. The Department of Homeland Security would be charged with drafting the details of the regulation.

Provisions of the 2005 Real ID Act says that states would be required to link their DMV databases if they wished to receive federal funds. So rather than imposing a direct mandate on the states, the federal government is blackmailing them into complying with federal dictates.

The establishment of a "national" drivers' license and birth certificate makes a mockery of the 10th amendment and the principles of federalism. While no state is "forced" to accept the federal standards, is it unlikely they will refuse to comply when such action would mean none of their residents could get a job, receive Social Security, board a train or airplane, have access to medical care, national parks, federal courthouses and other areas controlled by the federal government.


National Health Identity Card

Insurance companies and public health researchers, say the advantages to a national health identity card would outweigh the disadvantages. Doctors and hospitals would be able to monitor the health of patients as they switch from one insurance plan to the next. Patients would not have to wade through a cumbersome bureaucracy to obtain old records. Billing would be streamlined, saving money. A national disease database could be created, offering unlimited opportunities for scientific study.

One advantage mentioned is that if we had a streamlined system like what's being proposed, it could decrease the cost of health care delivery or reduce the cost of insurance. Does anyone honestly believe they would receive that benefit? I contend that if a savings were realized, it would be the insurance companies that reaped greater profits and the patient would get nothing. Much of the high price of health care delivery now is caused by bureaucracy and greed of the insurance industry.

Privacy advocates and some doctors' groups warn that sensitive health information might be linked to financial data or criminal records and that already tenuous privacy protections would be further weakened as existing managed care databases, for example, are linked. They say that trust in doctors, already eroded by managed care, would deteriorate further, with patients growing reluctant to share intimate details. And in a world where computer hackers can penetrate the Pentagon's computer system, they ask, will anyone's medical records be safe?

A.G. Breitenstein, director of the Health Law Institute, an advocacy group based in Boston, said: "That information will be irrevocably integrated into a cradle-to-grave medical record to which insurers, employers, government and law enforcement will have access is, to me, exactly what privacy is not. People are not going to feel comfortable going to the doctor, because now you are going to have a permanent record that will follow you around for the rest of your life that says you had syphilis, or depression, or an abortion or whatever else."

Big Brother Is Watching You!

Dr. Richard Sobel, a research fellow at Harvard Law School said, "What ID numbers do is centralize power, and in a time when knowledge is power, then centralized information is centralized power. I think people have a gut sense that this is not a good idea."

Few people today can trust the IRS, the VA, or any of those alphabet agencies with private information. National security agencies can barely keep a secret. And insurance companies are already trading information. If they have your Social Security number, they can virtually look up the entire gamut of information about you. This national id card system would just makes things easier for HMO's to get together and deny claims. Or maybe the information gets back to people in the town you live. The banker finds out that you had a heart attack and they don't want to give you a loan because of it. In 1996, a Medicaid clerk in Maryland tapped into a computerized database and sold patient names to an HMO for as little as 50 cents each. About one-third of all Fortune 500 companies review health information before making hiring decisions.

Phyllis Schlafly points out, "Allowing the government to collect and store personal medical records, and to track us as we move about in our daily lives, puts awesome power in the hands of government bureaucrats. It gives them the power to force us to conform to government health care policy, whether that means mandating that all children be immunized with an AIDS vaccine when it is put on the market, or mandating that expensive medical treatment must be withheld from seniors. Once all medical records are computerized with unique identifiers such as Social Security numbers, an instant check system will give all government agencies the power to deny basic services, including daycare, school, college, access to hospital emergency rooms, health insurance, a driver's license, etc., to those who don't conform to government health policies."

While it is easy to give in to the rhetoric of "protecting" children or some other defenseless group, we must be cautious that in a rush to provide protection in the short-term, we do not do permanent damage to our national heritage of liberty. Benjamin Franklin once wrote, those who would give up essential liberty for temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security.

History shows that when government gains the power to monitor the actions of the people, it eventually uses that power to impose totalitarian controls on the populace.

[d_goddard]

Thanks Jane... this is a WONDERFUL reason for Progressives to oppose National Healthcare!

Progressives are unified in their disdain for George Bush's Police State.
Attaching anything to it, including Nationalized Healthcare, is a serious way to kill the attached thing with FUD.

I hope MAD MAX comments on this....

[Quantrill]

I also like equating it with the police state.  They sure do hate that!

[CNHT]

Thanks Jane... this is a WONDERFUL reason for Progressives to oppose National Healthcare!

Progressives are unified in their disdain for George Bush's Police State.
Attaching anything to it, including Nationalized Healthcare, is a serious way to kill the attached thing with FUD.

I hope MAD MAX comments on this....

Historically I have been harping on this connection because the laws and 'acts' are there in place for those who want to do the research. But since some people take what we/I say with a 'grain of salt' I am always looking for more documentation to show just exactly what I mean about why sometimes, you should see what ELSE a person is for/against to know really what they are all about.

Just like when Ron Paul told us at the fundraiser why he doesn't join all these 'anti-war' groups, his answer was simply: "Because they have another bigger agenda with which I don't agree".

If their 'other agenda' nullifies their position on issue at hand, then what is the point?

OH and by the way, this was Clinton's police state doings before it was Bush's.

Who is MAD MAX?   

[d_goddard]

since some people take what we/I say with a 'grain of salt' I am always looking for more documentation to show

Ouch!
Well... like James Randi says, extraordinary claims require extraorinary proof.

Oh and by the way, this was Clinton's police state doings before it was Bush's.
[/url]
... and Lincoln's befor ethat. But neither president is really fresh in people's minds.

Who is MAD MAX?   

Uh, that was a typo.

[CNHT]

Ouch! Well... like James Randi says, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

I don't think the statement that the demon rats want to pad education 'adequacy' with so much stuff that the cost would force an income tax was a very extraordinary claim to fathom, even for the newest among you, especially in light of what's been going on up there lately.

This is not the first time they've tried to pull this; 2001 being the most recent year that we managed to fend off an actual vote on an income tax.

I just think it's funny that you found the source of my information on that issue issue (income tax) but couldn't imagine that after 20 years in this business, that is the exact place our information was coming from.

[d_goddard]

I don't think the statement that the demon rats want to pad education 'adequacy' with so much stuff that the cost would force an income tax was a very extraordinary claim to fathom, even for the newest among you, especially in light of what's been going on up there lately.

To be frank, if I had not been up at the State House a lot in person, I would not realize how matter-of-fact this is.
As it turns out, though, I was, and I do.

[error]

There's nothing extraordinary about these claims.

[CNHT]

There's nothing extraordinary about these claims.

Especially not if you watched them testify at the hearings. The school board member from my town was especially embarrassing what with all the social services she was asking for, as if this were a 'needy' district or something.