[I am not a HIPAA expert, thank goodness. I do not know if Peter or Jim is correct. But I do know enough about regulation to know that HIPAA comes with a real price tag. It is reasonable to ask its supporters to quantify the (ephemeral?) benefits to see if they outweigh the (real) cost. Otherwise why should it stay on the books? --Declan] -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [Politech] Peter Swire's "modest" defense of HIPAA medicalregulatory law [priv] Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 08:56:59 -0400 From: Jim Harper - Privacilla.org <jim.harper@private> To: 'Declan McCullagh' <declan@private> CC: Peter Swire <peter@private> Peter certainly makes the case that the regulatory superstructure has increased thanks to HIPAA. That's true, but it should not be mistaken for privacy itself being increased. He says that a large investment in systems and training makes privacy better. (Perhaps even "empirically" better? I'd like to see those numbers.) HIPAA lawyers tell me that their clients are doing the same things with a lot more regulation and paperwork (or they're chasing after canards, like the volume at which a nurse may call the name of a patient). Spending is not results, though high-spending government officials would like us to think so. Tens of billions of dollars were diverted from providing health care to patients. We should have gotten a *major improvement* in privacy protection and consumer confidence in health care privacy. It hasn't happened because the regulatory approach is a dead-end. If real reform were to allow markets for health care products and services, consumers would get back in the driver's seat. Privacy protection, on the terms consumers demanded, would follow. Jim Harper Editor Privacilla.org _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Apr 21 2004 - 21:55:44 PDT