Witnesses at a House health subcommittee meeting today expressed broad support for the Energy and Commerce Committee’s draft health information technology bill, although questions arose about whether the privacy provisions should be strengthened.
The Bush administration took issue with several aspects of the proposal, including sections that would increase potential liability for health information exchanges and similar organizations if they misused protected health information. The bill would, in effect, extend privacy protections under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 to those organizations.
“While this is one approach to address gaps in the current coverage of HIPAA, the provision would not result in even-handed treatment, as other entities, such as [personal health record] vendors are not encompassed in this solution,” said Dr. Carolyn Clancy, director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, speaking for the Health and Human Services Department.
Clancy also testified against the proposed creation of two new federal advisory committees, one on health IT policy and the other on health IT standards. “The creation of new advisory committees under this bill would significantly interfere with the progress made” in privatizing the American Health Information Community, the current health IT advisory committee.
The AHIC successor organization will be a public/private partnership, she said, adding that “such an entity must be a neutral, independent body that is not controlled by, formed by or required to report to any branch of government.”
Her testimony also questioned the bill’s reliance on a federal rule-making process to make health IT standards official. “Rule-making has the potential to dull progress,” Clancy said.
The hearing began with opening statements from 16 House members, all but one of whom expressed general support for the bill. That one member, Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas), said the Office of the National Coordinator of Health IT has little to show for five years of existence, while the private sector continues to make health IT strides.
Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, ranking Republican on the committee and a co-sponsor of the bill, said he wants to see its privacy provisions strengthened.
“Congress needs to adopt a definition of health privacy,” testified Dr. Deborah Peel, founder and chairwoman of Patient Privacy Rights. She said the bill should give individuals control over the use of their health information.
But Deven McGraw, director of the Health Privacy Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, implicitly took issue with Peel’s views. “The discussion draft breaks the privacy logjam and allows us to move forward,” she said.
And Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) criticized statements on the Patient Privacy Rights Web site and told Peel: “If we can work through this without the harsh rhetoric, we will get a bill that will save lives.”
The American Medical Association applauded the proposal to extend the reach of HIPAA. “Forming a national health information infrastructure without adequate federal privacy protections threatens not only the privacy of patients, but also the viability of such a system,” said Dr. Steven Stack, a member of the AMA Board of Trustees.
He also praised the bill’s provisions for grants and loans to physicians for adoption of health IT.
“I think there’s obviously some areas where we’re going to be changing the draft,” said Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), who said she preferred her own health IT bill but would support this one.
The subcommittee reportedly is aiming to bring a bill up for a vote in July.
Government Health IT presents Liesa Jo Jenkins, executive director of CareSpark, in this recent eSeminar, where she shared her experiences and insight into building a health information exchange that enhances community health, rewards regional collaboration and drives economic progress.
