SHHH! ... Today's secret Senate Finance Committee hearing on health care

No prying public eyes.  No media.  No Congressional Record.

That's the reality of today's "closed" Senate Finance Committee hearing.  The secret meeting is not even noticed on the committee website.

According to the rules committee, closed committee sessions are very rare except for discussions of national security.  See the rule below -- there does not appear to be any basis for today's private hearing, other than that the committee members don't want you to know what they're saying.

Why do we care about what the Senate Finance Committee is talking about behind those locked doors?  Well, the discussion today is about whether every American will be required to buy health insurance policies with no oversight of what insurers can charge.  Wouldn't you like to know what they're saying about what you'll be required to buy? What if I told you that the plan would require you to show proof of health insurance on your tax return or face hefty tax penalties?

In a letter sent today to Senator Baucus, chair of the Finance Committee, I wrote:

"Americans should not be locked out of any discussion about health care reform, particularly one that will consider whether everyone should be required to buy health insurance policies without any limits on what insurers can charge.  Mandatory purchases of private insurance policies without offering a public alternative to the private market is nothing other than a bailout for HMOs—whose greed, waste and indifference to our health have created the current mess."

Standing Rules of the Senate - RULE XXVI - Committee Procedure

5. (b) Each meeting of a committee, or any subcommittee thereof, including meetings to conduct hearings, shall be open to the public, except that a meeting or series of meetings by a committee or a subcommittee thereof on the same subject for a period of no more than fourteen calendar days may be closed to the public on a motion made and seconded to go into closed session to discuss only whether the matters enumerated in clauses (1) through (6) would require the meeting to be closed, followed immediately by a record vote in open session by a majority of the members of the committee or subcommittee when it is determined that the matters to be discussed or the testimony to be taken at such meeting or meetings

  (1) will disclose matters necessary to be kept secret in the interests of national defense or the confidential conduct of the foreign relations of the United States;

  (2) will relate solely to matters of committee staff personnel or internal staff management or procedure;

  (3) will tend to charge an individual with crime or misconduct, to disgrace or injure the professional standing of an individual, or otherwise to expose an individual to public contempt or obloquy, or will represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of the privacy of an individual;

  (4) will disclose the identity of any informer or law enforcement agent or will disclose any information relating to the investigation or prosecution of a criminal offense that is required to be kept secret in the interests of effective law enforcement;

  (5) will disclose information relating to the trade secrets of financial or commercial information pertaining specifically to a given person if

    (A) an Act of Congress requires the information to be kept confidential by Government officers and employees; or

    (B) the information has been obtained by the Government on a confidential basis, other than through an application by such person for a specific Government financial or other benefit, and is required to be kept secret in order to prevent undue injury to the competitive position of such person; or

  (6) may divulge matters required to be kept confidential under other provisions of law or Government regulations. 

Rate This Article:

Comments:

Post A Comment

You are not logged in, please do so at the top of the page.

Recent Posts in Protecting Patients:

Blue Cross's taste of what's to come if health reform fails

Those of us who have health insurance--or think we have health insurance--can get complacent about whether the nation needs that big, complicated health reform legislation. But just try getting sick. Is your insurance even real? If it is, can you afford it after the latest round of price hikes? Is your deductible so big that paying it will mean financial ruin? Check out these stories and think about what the White House and Congress, by wimping out again on health reform, will condemn all of us to...

Read More »

Dateline NBC on why being insured isn't same as being covered

Here's the full link to last night's excellent Dateline NBC "Critical Condition," which followed insured patients as they were turned down by their health insurers for critical care.

Read More »

Reform or no reform, insurers will weasel on "out of network" loopholes

The Washington Post today has an eye-opening story today on how a family ended up in crushing debt at an "in-network" hospital apparently jammed with out-of-network doctors. Tens of thousands of dollars later, their little boy's rare and deadly heart defect is at least semi-fixed, but the family finances are in ruins. It's a problem that won't be fixed by reforms that rely on the private insurance industry. But it's also a problem that Congress can partly cure, with or without bigger reforms.

Read More »

MLK and the Massachusetts Senate Disaster

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said little about health care, though the one fragment that is quoted leaves no doubt about where he stood: “Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and the most inhumane.” The quote is hard to confirm, but health care proponents losing ground to a fear campaign need King's power to stoke determination in the service of hope.

Read More »

Patient protections are California's to lose

California has been a leader in patients rights, largely in response to abuses  by HMOs that, for instance, tried to eject new mothers and babies from the hospital a few hours after giving birth, and attempted to require "drive-by mastectomies."  The federal health reform bill could weaken or do away with all that, including a right to HIV/AIDS testing. Rep. Jackie Speier of San Mateo is leading a tough fight to preserve such rights, and so is Consumer Watchdog.

Read More »

View All Next »

Forward This Page To A Friend

Excerpts From Jamie Court's Dateline Interview Covering Health Insurer Hell

Heath Insurers Coercing Employees Into Political Action?