just had to forward this---okay, now I'm like a kid who catches on to the game---how might I link this to CS to justify my sending it---well, as we lose our rights and freedoms and gain these wonderful "medical ID" numbers(how will they be worn?) do you think there will be mandatory "testing" also?---oh goodness, so and so goes to jail as they found the forbidden CS in his system.
SAY GOODBYE TO MEDICAL PRIVACY Aside from psychological reasons, why can't the Clintons be straight-forward about things? It's easy to understand why Bill wouldn't want to be candid about his "affairs," but what about his policy proposals? If the Clintons' ideas were superior, they would have no motive to be deceitful about them, right? Think again. The truth is that they know that despite liberalism's virtual monopoly in the mainstream press, the universities, and most of our other cultural institutions, it is still not the majority philosophy among most voters. So they have to disguise many of their programs or, in some cases, secrete them from the public altogether. Remember Hillary's notorious plan to socialize American medicine? While pretending that it was going to be produced by the people "from the bottom up," she kept her task force meetings secret to the point of earning a rebuke by U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth. But why? What did she have to hide? Well, plenty, as it turns out. Hillary's 1,300-page plan would have nationalized 14 percent of the nation's economy, a fact she could ill-afford to have disclosed. And now, she and Bill both claim to have learned their lesson from that fiasco. But are they honest about that lesson? What they want you to believe is that they are willing to compromise and abandon their goal of nationalized health care. Actually, the only lesson they learned is that to accomplish their goal of socialized medicine they must do it incrementally, one inconspicuous step at a time. Although Hillary Care suffered a humiliating defeat in 1994, some of its insidious components survived and became law in 1996 with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), a.k.a., Kennedy-Kassebaum. Hillary's plan contained a provision regarding a "unique health identifier" (a patient ID number) that could be used to track each person's medical history electronically from cradle to grave. This WorldNetDaily gem was resurrected and codified into law in HIPAA in 1996. So far, our Brave New World medical ID numbers have not been created, but soon will be if something isn't done. contributor David Limbaugh is an attorney practicing in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, a political analyst and commentator. Though the provision for the creation of the medical ID numbers is already in the law, Texas Congressman Ron Paul has been successful so far in leading an effort to block appropriations for implementation of this provision. This week, this appropriations bill (HR 4577) will be voted on again, and if it passes, the unique health identifier -- the medical ID number -- will be created for all of us. It gets worse. This year, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed "medical privacy regulations" that will apply to all individuals, whether their health care is paid for privately or by the government. Those who love freedom and cherish privacy should be alarmed about these developments. Here's why: While Clinton touts the medical ID number and the proposed medical privacy regulations as enhancing our medical privacy, they do just the opposite. The assignment of these numbers is the first step toward universal health care, and the regulations severely undermine our privacy. The government will be entitled to access our private medical records without our consent and the government -- not you -- will decide who else will have access to our records. Under the regulation's health plans, providers, hospitals, researchers, medical students, government agents, law enforcement officials, and whomever else the government decides will have access. Are you nervous yet? If not, be aware that the regulations will also limit patients' access to their own records, especially in malpractice cases. And they will limit our right to sue others for breaching our medical confidentiality. If Ron Paul fails to convince Congress again to block funding for creating the ID numbers, all is not lost. He also has prepared a bill to repeal the HIPAA provision that requires the adoption of our ID numbers. This is a good start but another provision also empowers the government to adopt those privacy regulations that authorize the collection and sharing of our medical records without our consent. Congress should repeal that provision as well. Once again, the Clintons, under the guise of expanding our rights, are taking them away. If we don't derail this train now, our chances of thwarting Hillary's grandiose scheme to socialize health care may be out the window. [WND Exclusive Commentary] FRIDAY JUNE 9, 2000 by David Limbaugh WorldNetDaily -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
