Herein we have the latest segment the GOP's Operation: ObamaSCARE! "Their coming to take your data hee hee!"
Carol Costella at CNN, taking up the No-BS tough interviewer position formerly held at CNN by Soledad O'Brien, questions Rep. Marsha Blackburn on her claim that the #Obamacare Website violates privacy concerns and HIPAA.
After stating that CNN has already checked the facts and found that the only health related question on the Obamacare sites is "Do you smoke"?, Carol goes on to ask - "What personal information are you concerned is being gathered on Healthcare.gov"?
Following a Stormageddon of words... She repeats the question. Then repeats it again. And again.
http://www.rawstory.com/...
“Carol, HIPAA requires you to…,” Blackburn began, then changed direction. “It’s the way you structure your website and the way you transit the information, the transfer rights that are there, and when you look at privacy on these websites, what you have to do is keep all of the application information in one server…and then you have to, whether it is a physical server or a cloud server…”
Costello attempted to stem the flow of words, “I’m trying to understand what kind of information you’re talking about,” she said. “What kind of information are you talking about? What specifically does the website ask that I might be afraid might shared with whomever? Specifically. What information?”
Needless to say, she never gets a direct answer.
First of, let's let Rawstory confirm that Blackburn's "concerns" are groundless.
http://www.rawstory.com/...
Republicans have seized upon the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1994 as their latest cudgel against the ACA, claiming that the privacies granted to consumers under the Act prohibit the sharing of that information. Republicans allege that consumers are violating their own privacy by sharing their health information with multiple users as they compare insurance policy rates.
The Act only applies to the sharing of their information between medical providers, though, making current Republican efforts to obstruct the law groundless, as New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. pointed out in a hearing on Thursday.
In this video Rep. Pallone points out here very deftly - and Marsha Blackburn can be seen in the background as he speaks - that personally health information isn't required on any ACA site because Pre-Existing Health Conditions Don't Apply!. Ipso Facto, Blackburn is a Big Fat Lying TOOL.
As a DBA (Database Administrator) and Web Designer with over a dozen years experience, let me respond directly to one thing that Blackburn says about "Annonymizing" the personal data.
It's clear she's received some coaching on this point, but even then that coaching was pathetically inept. In a Relational Database Model, information is kept in separate tables. For example there would be would to hold the Patients Name, potentially another to hold their Address allowing for Multiple Addresses to be used, and another to hold each specific group of information. This "Mythical" personal health information (henceforth referred to as the "MPHI" table) the GOP is so concerned about would, If the ACA Site was even gathering it - which it ISN'T, would be in it's own individual table. Any halfway decent DBA would link the two tables using a auto_incrementing primary field. (In short, a Counter that automatically adds "1" for each new record in the table and acts as a KEY to build and stabilize relationships with other tables) Using such a Key field means that even if the all the other information in the table, from the patients name, address and DOB are all updated and/or changed - the link between the two tables would remain in place because the KEY WILL NEVER CHANGE.
If someone could access this "MPHI" table they would have to also access the OTHER TABLES or else they'd have a bunch a data with an "ANONYMOUS" Key and no door to unlock with it. Without the Key And the Other Tables to Unlock With it the MPHI info alone is useless.
I'm just saying, "Annonymization" should be in part of the standard Database Design. What she may have meant to say, but didn't, is that the data should be Encrypted inside the Database, and there are several methods for that so that even if that one table is cracked, and links are established to the other relevant tables, the data Still Can't Be Read without the encryption key.
All of that would be nice, but since NO PERSONAL PRIVATE HEALTH INFORMATION IS BEING STORED IN ANY OF THESE TABLES - it's a moot point.
And Blackburn, as usual, sounds like an idiot.
Vyan