Saturday, May 16, 2009

Do electronic medical records imply a national ID card?


I don't know. But the idea has been around for awhile:

As privacy concerns have assumed center stage, the many compelling advantages of the UHI [Universal Health Identifier] including aspects of a UHI that will promote privacy are getting lost in the debate. A unique identifier would allow for more rapid and accurate identification and integration of the proper patient records, so patients can receive safer and higher quality health care. Every aspect of health care from making sure the right person gets the right blood transfusion to making sure the right insurance company pays for care requires accurate identification of individuals. A unique identifier is desirable because the identifier used today is a person's name. Since names are not unique we have to collect additional information to identify an individual such as birth date, gender, SSN, and mother's maiden name. As more information is collected error rates increase. It is currently estimated that there is an error rate of 5 to 8 percent in identifying patients. In addition, the information many people have an opportunity to see personally identifiable information. Replacing a name with an identifier could reduce errors and provide greater privacy protection.

A UHI can improve confidentiality, by providing accurate identification without unnecessarily disclosing a patient's identity. For example, it can eliminate the need to use names on many claims forms and clinical records. It can replace the multiple pieces of identifying information (e.g., name, birth date, gender, SSN) about a patient that today must accompany clinical and financial information to ensure positive identification.


Thursday, May 14, 2009

OP/ED: Repealing Real ID IS the right thing to do.

ATTN: Those opposed to the Real ID

"Even though more than 30 states are moving to satisfy those requirements and even though she has the authority to give the remaining states additional time to do so, the former governor of Arizona apparently is OK with once again giving terrorists a pass to gain access to our airplanes, government facilities, banks, etc."  - Frank Gaffeney

Bar none, repealing Real ID is the right thing to do. 
by Sheila Dean 

The Department of Homeland Security, by reputation is no friend of We The People and our Constitutional entitlements, but they did finally get something right.  They threw up their hands when 30+ U.S. states said NO to the Real ID Act of 2005's regulations and were corralled into a repeal of this terrible legislation. 

Be on your toes, the Heritage Foundation and Frank "Gaffe"ney, news parrot of the Center of Security Policy, are twisting the facts for a fearmongering knock against hard won progress by The People over Real ID's tyrannical posture. 

Gaffney alludes to the same number of states [30] who have flatly denied Real ID to move forward in their state, regardless of extension deadline or DHS grant status. U.S. State governments and citizens alike went out of their way to push back against this.

In this Washington Post account, Mark Gaffney is abusing his objective stance as a major news contributor to further agendas set by the Heritage Foundation, a funded foundry for GLOBALISTS, whose ballpark future for all of us include an eventual subcutaneous microchip for their convenience.

Gaffney's complete quote is as follows:

Ms. Napolitano has her way, the Uigars will be able to get Virginia driver's licenses - like 13 of the 21 Sept. 11 terrorists - as she says she intends to repeal the Real ID Act. That statute, which requires (among other things) that the 50 states meet a high standard for issuing driver's licenses, was adopted belatedly on the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. The commissioners emphasized that fraudulently obtained identity documents are "weapons" in the hands of our enemies 
The secretary's helpmate in repealing the Real ID Act is Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, Hawaii Democrat. He is expected shortly to introduce a substitute dubbed the Pass ID Act. That title certainly is appropriate insofar as the draft bill seemingly would allow virtually anyone - including Guantanamo detainees, illegal alien employees of international organizations and a class called "other nonimmigrant aliens who are authorized to remain in the United States for an indefinite period" - to be eligible for temporary driver's licenses or other IDs.
Ms. Napolitano seems to want political cover for eviscerating the statute's eminently sensible and much-needed requirements with respect to driver's licenses. Even though more than 30 states are moving to satisfy those requirements and even though she has the authority to give the remaining states additional time to do so, the former governor of Arizona apparently is OK with once again giving terrorists a pass to gain access to our airplanes, government facilities, banks, etc.

You can clearly see how twisted this is.  Someone needs to call the Washington Times and complain about Gaffney's fact errors.  30+ states are moving AGAINST the Real ID Act regardless of the pretense of extension status. The State of Arizona is not "OK" with terrorists boarding airplanes, entering federal facilities, or any other random official purpose that would have been determined by DHS in the Real ID Act.  Furthermore, former Arizona Senator Karen Johnson can confirm why Arizona hates the Real ID Act and how they had to struggle with Napolitano, just like we did, to get it to stopped in our states.  The Washington Times is irresponsible as a press outlet to allow this NSA whiner to print this in their paper. 


The Uigurs he cites in this article are Chinese muslims, some of whom federal judges determined were wrongfully detained at Guantanamo Bay and tortured. While it has been determined they are innocent, they have not yet been released into U.S. mainland custody.  The 9-11 terrorist attackers all had legal work visa granted by U.S. immigration.  They went through legal due process to obtain licenses to drive here in this country.  They were LEGAL immigrants here on temporary work visas.

The general direction of this piece is a slam at Rep. Akaka's PASS Act, which, in our community, the jury remains out on because The Real ID Act has not yet been repealed.  Although, it may be time to give it expeditious research, examination and consideration based on their push against it.  It could also be reverse psychology dumped into the press.  The PASS Act needs a careful second look after all we have been through to stop Real ID.

As unsavory as it may sound initially, we should extend some terms of affirmation to DHS and Secretary Napolitano for "doing the right thing" when it came time to repeal the federal Real ID Act.   We don't want them to go back on this and start this whole nightmare all over again.

Additionally, we need to continue to expose people like Gaffney and the Heritage Foundation for their role in globalized identity gridding and its close relationship to eugenics.

Real ID may be officially on it's way out, but we have a longer road to travel to make sure it will not continue as TWIC cards, Enhanced Drivers Licenses, Border Speed pass cards and in the centralization of our sensitive personal information into one vulnerable place for all of us.

Please respond to Gaffney, The Heritage Foundation,  the Washington Times on how they have vastly miscalculated public opposition as Real IDs cause of demise and thank Secretary Napolitano for agreeing to repeal this dangerous form of identity.


Sheila Dean 
Blog Editor, for BeatTheChip 
President of The 5-11 Campaign

Saudi Chip fails German Ethics Test

Munich - A Saudi inventor's proposal to implant semiconductors under the skins of visitors and remotely kill them if they misbehave will not be granted a patent in Germany, officials in Munich said Friday.

A GermanPatentOfficespokeswoman said the application was received on October 30, 2007 and published 18 months later, as required by law, in a patentsdatabase. But inventions that are unethical or a danger to the public are not be recognized.

Reporters said the document proposed that tiny semiconductors be implanted or placed by injection under the skin of people so their whereabouts could be tracked by global-positioning satellites. This could be used to prevent immigrants overstaying.

A model B of the system would contain a poison such as cyanide, which could be released by remote control to 'eliminate' people if they became a security risk. The document said this could be used against terrorists or criminals.

Read more: "Germany denies patent to Saudi's killer chip - Monsters and Critics" -

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Missouri lawmakers vote to reject federal Real ID Act

THIS JUST IN from JP of NCard in North Carolina

Missouri lawmakers vote to reject federal Real ID Act
The Associated Press

JEFFERSON CITY | Missouri lawmakers on Wednesday voted to direct the Department of Revenue to not comply with federal driver’s licens
e requirements.

The federal Real ID Act, passed in 2005, requires states to collect and verify certain information about applicants for driver’s licenses and state I
D cards. It was passed in response to national security concerns after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

But some Missouri lawmakers argue Real ID is an unwelcome intrusion into privacy and requires several new technologies that could increase the risk of identity theft.

The Senate voted 32-0 Wednesday to advance the bill to Gov. Jay Nixon. The bill was previously passed by the House. If Nixon signs the legislation, Missouri would join 12 other
states that have enacted similar anti-Real ID laws.

That’s a pretty strong statement right there that the federal government should back off,” said Rep. Jim Guest [featured right], R-King City, who has sponsored the measure for several years.

Real ID requires that driver’s licenses include the holder’s full name, birth date, gender, license number, digital photograph, principal address and signature as well as tamper-resistant security features. The law also sets standards for verifying a license applicant’s identity and citizenship.

States have until the end of this year to meet the federal requirements but could get an extension until May 2011.

At that time, citizens in noncompliant states would not be able to board federally regulated planes or enter federal buildings simply by showing their state driver’s licenses.

Some Missouri senators said they think the effective date will be pushed back to 2015 and that federal officials might not even implement the law.

“They are finding out that this is not the great program that the federal government deemed it was,” said Sen. Chuck Purgason, R-Caulfield.

During Senate debate, some lawmakers argued Real ID was a backdoor attempt to create a national ID card.
JP Continues with OP/ED here:
The Real ID bill is House Bill 361.

Keep up the Good Fight, We are still in the Fight in NC, will give you updates about PA when I get them.

This is a victory for everyone in the US fighting the Real ID.  Mo is a key state and this victory should help to ensure more victories in other states.

Visit Jim Guest's web site

Monday, May 11, 2009

What is 5-11 Doing on Their Anniversary?

The 5-11 Campaign, American's Against Real ID  is contending with the following:
  • globalized identity
  • elitist think-tanks with entitlement issues  
  • governed collusion with corporate sociopathy
  • ego driven electioneers who do nothing and get in the way of progress
  • exhausted embattled legislators
  • national security operatives bullying local government officials
  • otherwise clueless indoctrinated masses
  • bad people thinking they are doing what's right 
  • good people thinking they are doing what's right
  • mirage competition from otherwise allied non-profits seeking achievement claims
  • misinformed reactionaries who believe they have the patent on news formula
  • ego driven bloggers
  • newspeople who don't report the news
  • fatigue
  • age
  • cold feet
  • inexperience 
  • manipulative and untrustworthy political veterans posing as allies
  • flaky volunteers
  • inadequate resources 
  • unfair odds
  • limited time
  • Extension deadline expiry December 31, 2009 

Libertarians Speak Out on Immigration

The Real ID act is simply a band aid placed on a cut that requires numerous stitches. Daniel T. Griswold wrote a piece for the Dallas Morning News in April of 2008 that accurately represents the Libertarian point of View on this issue.

Immigration Law Should Reflect Our Dynamic Labor Market

by Daniel Griswold
Daniel T. Griswold is director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington. :::  Added to on April 28, 2008:::Appeared in The Dallas Morning News on April 27, 2008.

Among its many virtues, America is a nation where laws are generally reasonable, respected and impartially enforced. A glaring exception is immigration.

Today an estimated 12 million people live in the U.S. without authorization, 1.6 million in Texas alone, and that number grows every year. Many Americans understandably want the rule of law restored to a system where law-breaking has become the norm.

The fundamental choice before us is whether we redouble our efforts to enforce existing immigration law, whatever the cost, or whether we change the law to match the reality of a dynamic society and labor market.

Low-skilled immigrants cross the Mexican border illegally or overstay their visas for a simple reason: There are jobs waiting here for them to fill, especially in Texas and other, faster growing states. Each year our economy creates hundreds of thousands of net new jobs — in such sectors as retail, cleaning, food preparation, construction and tourism — that require only short-term, on-the-job training.

At the same time, the supply of Americans who have traditionally filled many of those jobs — those without a high school diploma — continues to shrink. Their numbers have declined by 4.6 million in the past decade, as the typical American worker becomes older and better educated.

Yet our system offers no legal channel for anywhere near a sufficient number of peaceful, hardworking immigrants to legally enter the United States even temporarily to fill this growing gap. The predictable result is illegal immigration.

In response, we can spend billions more to beef up border patrols. We can erect hundreds of miles of ugly fence slicing through private property along the Rio Grande. We can raid more discount stores and chicken-processing plants from coast to coast. We can require all Americans to carry a national ID card and seek approval from a government computer before starting a new job.

Or we can change our immigration law to more closely conform to how millions of normal people actually live.

Crossing an international border to support your family and pursue dreams of a better life is not an inherently criminal act like rape or robbery. If it were, then most of us descend from criminals. As the people of Texas know well, the large majority of illegal immigrants are not bad people. They are people who value family, faith and hard work trying to live within a bad system.

When large numbers of otherwise decent people routinely violate a law, the law itself is probably the problem. To argue that illegal immigration is bad merely because it is illegal avoids the threshold question of whether we should prohibit this kind of immigration in the first place.

We've faced this choice on immigration before. In the early 1950s, federal agents were making a million arrests a year along the Mexican border. In response, Congress ramped up enforcement, but it also dramatically increased the number of visas available through the Bracero guest worker program. As a result, apprehensions at the border dropped 95 percent. By changing the law, we transformed an illegal inflow of workers into a legal flow.

For those workers already in the United States illegally, we can avoid "amnesty" and still offer a pathway out of the underground economy. Newly legalized workers can be assessed fines and back taxes and serve probation befitting the misdemeanor they've committed. They can be required to take their place at the back of the line should they eventually apply for permanent residency.

The fatal flaw of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act was not that it offered legal status to workers already here but that it made no provision for future workers to enter legally.

Immigration is not the only area of American life where a misguided law has collided with reality. In the 1920s and '30s, Prohibition turned millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans into lawbreakers and spawned an underworld of moon-shining, boot-legging and related criminal activity. (Sound familiar?) We eventually made the right choice to tax and regulate alcohol rather than prohibit it.

In the 19th century, America's frontier was settled largely by illegal squatters. In his influential book on property rights, The Mystery of Capital, economist Hernando de Soto describes how these so-called extralegals began to farm, mine and otherwise improve land to which they did not have strict legal title. After failed attempts by the authorities to destroy their cabins and evict them, federal and state officials finally recognized reality, changed the laws, declared amnesty and issued legal documents conferring title to the land the settlers had improved.

As Mr. de Soto wisely concluded: "The law must be compatible with how people actually arrange their lives." That must be a guiding principle when Congress returns to the important task of fixing our immigration laws.

Maine Seeks to Repeal Real ID Redux

TX House Committee Decides Against Immigration Decison

Texas anti-border fence legislation lives. 
Anti-Real ID Act legislation dies.

AUSTIN - Very few bills ushered into Texas' State Affairs Committee this session on the premises of immigration cleared the sieve last week.  An unfortunate latecomer was a Texas resolution to comprehensively push back against Real ID regulations. It died in committee behind a massive bottleneck of other imperiled legislations late last week.   Immigrations groups on both sides of the aisle saw their hard work lose traction and move toward history.
"Several of the proposals are similar to ones that were introduced in the last session, which failed to make it out of committee because they were considered unconstitutional."  
Some groups blame Committee Chair Burt Solomons, others blame House Speaker Strauss for deliberately overwhelming State Affairs case loads to override and failure of hundreds of pieces of legislation following immigration hearings last month. According to Texas Insider,  the causes range from  constituent pressures, previous counsel agreements and even lack of constitutionality. 
"To date Solomons and his committee have taken no action on any bill relating to illegal immigration."  -Texas Insider
To Live and Die by Real ID Regulations

Not all immigration related bills fielded through State Affairs died last week. Legislation authored by Rep. Eddie Lucio III,  opposing expansion 
of the border wall fence was one of the few fortunate resolutions to make it out of the State Affairs Committee after grazing the immigration debate. Adrienne Evans, of Big Bend Coalition , remarked that the lack of ability to get any immigration bills whatsoever out of the State Affairs Committee "stands out this session."

HCR 50, a resolution to uphold the 10th Amendment, heard amongst many controversial immigration bills made it out of State Affairs and is now headed for a House floor vote.   A germaine win on the 10th Amendment could address federal regulations in the Real ID Act affecting Texas.

As an aside note: Scott Nicol of NoBorderWall returned last week from Washington D.C. to support AZ Rep. Raul Grijalva's move to do away with expanded border wall regulations in the Real ID Act.

For more information on No Border Wall & Grijalva's legislation visit:

TX State Lawmakers Seek Finish Line

State lawmakers go down to wire on bill

Texas legislators will have to answer a myriad of questions during the next 22 days.

Which state programs are most worthy of taxpayer dollars? Should they cap college tuition? How will they regulate the insurance industry? Can college students legally carry guns on campus?

As usual, these issues and many others remain unresolved as lawmakers enter the final three weeks of their 140-day legislative session.

The House and Senate will rush to pass legislation in the next few weeks.

Lawmakers will zip through some bills with little debate, committees will meet hurriedly around their chairmen's desks, and legislative lawyers will work around the clock to find the precise language that legislators want in their bills.

But many bills will die in the lower chamber beginning this week, as key deadlines kick in for managing the last-minute logjam of legislation.

For example, bills that haven't been approved by a committee by today will die there unless lawmakers can attach them to related measures that still have life.

Just 51 bills — of more than 7,000 filed — have reached Gov. Rick Perry's desk for signature by Thursday, so lawmakers have miles to go on just about every major issue.

So far, the story of the session has been more than $10 billion in federal stimulus legislation that lawmakers used to patch holes in the state budget, avoiding severe cuts even as state revenues are projected to fall.

"It could have been a bloodbath," said Harvey Kronberg, who publishes the Quorom Report, an online Capitol newsletter.

Some things simply won't get done, either by design or because of a lack of time. And others will be vetoed by the governor.

But until then, legislators harbor hope their priorities will become law.