Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ColtonGang who wrote (176321)	8/31/2001 8:41:30 AM
From: H-Man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I am against all subsidies. Not just the ones that do not suit my agenda. But tax credits for losses and foriegn taxes paid can hardly be called subsidies. And taking legal tax credits cannot be called cheating.

To: ColtonGang who wrote (176321)	8/31/2001 9:01:39 AM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769667

<<I'm against all subsidies except where human life can be improved, >> So burning 20% less gas wouldn't improve the air?

To: ColtonGang who wrote (176321)	8/31/2001 10:53:22 AM
From: goldworldnet	Respond to of 769667

Congressman signs on to sue government Rep. Ron Paul joins physicians in suit over privacy regulations By Jon Dougherty © 2001 WorldNetDaily.com A Republican congressman has joined a respected physicians group in a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Resources for issuing regulations plaintiffs say violate constitutional privacy protections. "Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has joined the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons as a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed today in Houston against HHS and Secretary Tommy Thompson to overturn new federal medical privacy regulations as unconstitutional," said Kathryn Serkes, a spokeswoman for the AAPS. The libertarian-minded Paul – a surgeon by profession – has long opposed the HHS regulations because they allegedly open up a patient's medical records to unreasonable invasions of privacy by government and private entities. "Far from protecting privacy, these rules give government officials and certain private interests a new federal right to access medical records without consent," Paul said in a statement released by the organization. "AAPS deserves the gratitude of every American for fighting to stop these regulations, and I am pleased to support their efforts," he added. In its suit, the organization claims the rules – written under the authority of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPPA – violate the First, Fourth and 10th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Paperwork Reduction and Regulatory Flexibility Acts. The agency's privacy regulations "expressly reiterate the traditional expectation of privacy by patients in their medical records," said the complaint. But they also "simultaneously allow government virtually unrestricted access to those same records without a warrant." Furthermore, the suit claims that HHS failed to promulgate the final regulations within the time period specified under HIPAA. The lawsuit seeks declaratory judgments that the regulations: Violate the Fourth Amendment by requiring physicians to allow government access to personal medical records without a warrant or patient consent, and authorizing the government construction of a centralized database of personal medical records with personal health identifiers; Violate the First Amendment to the extent they chill patient-physician communications "by requiring them to be subject to warrantless review by government"; Violate the Tenth Amendment to the extent they govern purely intrastate activities by physicians in using and maintaining medical records for patients; Violate HIPAA and lack statutory authorization to the extent they regulate medical records other than electronic transmissions, were not promulgated within the time period expressly required by Congress, and increase administrative costs. The suit also describes how the regulations violate a number of state laws and constitutional protections that "grant a specific right to privacy." "Law enforcement agencies will have unrestricted access to all records – including notes about drug use, family interactions and other confessions. But it gets even worse," said the statement. "Not only can doctors be fined or imprisoned – up to $50,000 and one year – for withholding records, patients can be denied treatment if they refuse to sign the consent form." "We've tried everything else. We've appealed to Congress; we've testified at HHS; we've generated tens of thousands of public comments and frozen up the HHS e-mail server with public response. None of it has done any good," said the group's executive director, Dr. Jane Orient, in explaining why AAPS resorted to a lawsuit. "We had nothing left to do short of leaving our patients to the mercy of government spies or resorting to civil disobedience by refusing to violate our ethical code and our patients' privacy, or file a lawsuit. We choose to work through the courts," she added. Joining in the suit are Dawn Richardson, Rebecca Rex and Darrell McCormick. Richardson, a patient from Austin, Texas, is president of a group known as Parents Requesting Open Vaccine Education, or PROVE, a non-profit association. Rex is a patient from Houston, Texas, and is vice president of PROVE. McCormick is a patient who resides in Gainesville, Fla., and a former billing manager for about 500 physicians at the Shands Healthcare System at the University of Florida, also in Gainesville. Serkes said even Paul was showing signs of desperation. "Sometimes, even a member of Congress has to sue the government to get anything done," she said. She added that some analysts have said they believe the suit may succeed. "They say the Tenth Amendment issue is probably the strongest," she told WND. AAPS is a non-partisan association of physicians in all specialties. Established in 1943, the group says it exists "to protect the sanctity of the patient-physician relationship from third-party intrusion" and accepts no "government grants or contracts." "Our organization doesn't extort our member physicians to the tune of tens of millions of dollars a year in membership fees," Serkes said, "so we don't do lawsuits for the 'public relations' benefit of it. The leadership just didn't feel there was any other choice." worldnetdaily.com * * *

To: ColtonGang who wrote (176321)	8/31/2001 12:03:00 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Once again an analysis of your opinions shows such shallow thinking. The most life saving vaccines in the world are food and clear water. There is a constant shortage in many places in the world. The cost of transportation and the technologies that help getting just what's needed where and when for the least cost are the vaccines that save life. Having the knowledge on how to treat many simple maladies can save many from disease. Your work is so absolutely dependent on technology and you are clueless to see all the interdependence and only have a very limited view of what's important. Like the importance of telling the truth. Your lies or truth. Message 16285507 tom watson tosiwmee