[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3918-3919]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          PRIVACY PROTECTIONS

  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to draw to the attention of our 
colleagues in the Senate and also to the American people the 
unfortunate decision by this administration to recommend that we alter 
and change some enormously important privacy protections. These 
protections were recommended by the previous administration--by 
President Clinton--and were scheduled to go into effect about a year 
from now. These protections to ensure the privacy of medical records. I 
will speak on the substance of the issue in a moment.
  What I find equally distressing is that we are seeing a series of 
actions taken by the administration--this is just the latest example--
where the administration seems to be opting in favor of the companies 
and corporations at the expense of individuals. In this case, the 
administration is acting at the expense of the medical privacy of our 
fellow citizens.
  We have recently seen the administration effectively undermine the 
very sensible and responsible ergonomics recommendations to try to 
protect people in the workplace. This affects 800,000 workers--
primarily women--in our society. Those workers are risking their health 
without protections. In this case, we saw the administration siding 
with the companies and corporations at the expense of workers.
  We have seen it most recently in the Enron situation. We have seen 
individuals who are the major players in the corporations walking away 
with millions and millions of dollars, and the workers seeing their 
life's savings eliminated. And just this week, we tried to put in 
protections for workers in the future. The administration opposed those 
particular recommendations.
  In an entirely different area, we see where the administration has 
come down on the side of the major health corporations at the expense 
of individuals on the powerful issue of medical privacy and medical 
records. The most sensitive information that individuals have is in 
their medical records.
  We have seen over the period of this last year and a half a 
considerable amount of dialog and discussion, and a number of hearings. 
We had recommendations in place, which were to go into effect about a 
year from now. These were announced by the previous administration in 
response to a requirement put into law in what we call the HIPAA 
legislation--the Kassebaum-Kennedy legislation that dealt with health 
insurance portability and accountability.
  We put in that legislation a requirement on the administration to 
come forward with medical records protections.
  But announced yesterday and today was the decision by the 
administration to recommend that we wipe away the most important 
protections that individuals have; that is, their ability to say, no, I 
will not share the information that is in my medical records.

[[Page 3919]]

  In the existing proposed regulations, an individual could say, all 
right, the hospital or the doctor could share it with the insurance 
company, but that is all they could share it with.
  It permitted individuals to say that some information is so sensitive 
that they do not want to share it with the insurance company. They 
could pay for a doctor's visit out of pocket rather than sending the 
information to their insurer--which could very well come back, as it so 
often does, to their employer.
  We have not passed legislation that will prohibit discrimination 
against individuals in the workplace--even genetic discrimination.
  This is the most sensitive information. We had the promulgation of 
rules and regulations under the administration that were to go into 
effect next year. It is surrounding information which is of the most 
sensitive nature.
  The American people give a high priority to privacy. They do not want 
to have their own private lives infringed on by individuals or by any 
governmental agencies. They hold their medical information in the 
highest order of priority.
  For the administration to side with the medical corporate world in 
being willing to share that kind of sensitive information which 
individuals do not want shared, I think, is an infringement on the 
rights to privacy for Americans that this country will not and should 
not tolerate.
  In our committee, we will have hearings on this administration's 
proposal as soon as we return from the April recess. We will introduce 
legislation to ensure the protection of privacy for the American 
public.
  I see my friend from Connecticut, Senator Dodd, who has worked on 
this issue. Our colleague from Vermont, Senator Leahy, has been a 
leader on this issue. It has not been a partisan issue. It has been 
bipartisan in nature. But it is an issue of high importance and 
consequence.
  Privacy is an enormously important value for our fellow citizens. To 
try at the stroke of a pen to say that your medical records are not 
going to be protected is a violation of the most important and basic 
privacy rights of an individual. It is wrong. It is basically a 
surrender to major corporate interests. We have seen that too often in 
recent times.
  We want an administration that is going to represent the best in 
terms of protecting our individual rights and our individual liberties, 
and not always be serving the large medical corporate interests. The 
administration's decision has been recommended, suggested, and 
supported by those interests.
  It is wrong. We are going to do everything we possibly can to prevent 
it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. DODD. Madam President, I commend my colleague from Massachusetts. 
I had no idea he was coming over to the floor to address an issue which 
he has spent a great deal of time on over the years. I found myself 
outraged when I awoke this morning and saw the headline in our local 
newspaper, ``Medical Privacy Changes Proposed.''
  I do not have any long prepared speech to give, but I associate 
myself with the remarks of my friend and colleague from Massachusetts. 
We have worked hard over the years to try to see to it that people's 
privacy is protected.
  We know today, as a result of technology, the gathering of 
information, consumers want the right to know, but they also want the 
right to say no when it comes to having access to some of the most 
private and personal information.
  We would not tolerate allowing someone to break into your home and 
rifle through your closets and to find out, without any justification, 
the most personal details of your life or your family's life. Yet what 
the administration is doing here, in a sense, is going to allow people 
to do just that when it comes to the most personal and private 
information about you and your family--your medical history--and the 
damage that can be done to people with that kind of access.
  So I am terribly disappointed this morning to hear that the 
administration is going to be rolling back regulations that are 
designed to protect people. They are doing so, they claim, in the name 
of ensuring more rapid care. Well, I say shame on them. Shame on them 
for pitting care against your right to protect you and your family from 
people knowing your personal and private information.
  That is not what this is all about, wanting to protect you and 
getting you better care. We know people want access to this 
information. We know why they want access to the information. That is 
why people are so concerned. This is not about liberals or 
conservatives, Democrats and Republicans. This is about the fact that 
we, as Americans, feel deeply and strongly about our right to have 
private information kept private.
  There is a growing fear in our society of technology being used not 
only to improve our lives, as it is in so many ways, but to make it 
easier for people to rifle through our medicine cabinets, peer into our 
checkbooks, and be able to track us on Internet activities. It worries 
Americans that this is becoming far too prevalent.
  What we need to have is our Government standing up for individual 
citizens who cannot hire lawyers, who do not have the resources to go 
out and pay for people to bring lawsuits when this kind of information 
is abused or misused. We need to stand with them and say: Look, if you 
want to have this information, you have to get the patient's and the 
family's permission. In many cases, of course, families are going to 
give that permission, but you have to ask for it, and you have to get 
their permission to do so. The idea that you could bypass them and just 
decide you are going to have access to that information, without 
securing the patient's approval in order to have access to that 
information, I think is just downright wrong.
  I am heartened to know that the chairman of the Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions Committee is going to take steps, certainly through 
a hearing process, but, as well, to put the administration on notice 
that this rule change they are about to establish is not going to occur 
without significant opposition.
  I tried to call Senator Shelby in his office today. I cochaired the 
caucus, if you will, on privacy along with my colleague from Alabama, 
Senator Shelby. I think he may have already gone back to his home State 
of Alabama. He may have left last evening. He was not here this 
morning. But I wanted to invite him to join me in this Chamber, as he 
has on so many other occasions when it comes to these privacy issues, 
to stand up to say that we are going to insist that people have the 
right to say no.
  I cannot speak for him here, but I am confident that when the Senator 
from Alabama is heard on this issue, his voice and his words will not 
be significantly different than what I have said here already and that, 
in a bipartisan way, we will be standing up, very strongly, in seeing 
to it that this proposed rule change is not going to just fly through 
here without significant opposition.

                          ____________________