by Jackie Gingrich CushmanThursday, August 13, 2009
More than half (53 percent) of U.S. voters oppose President Obama's health-care "reform" plan versus just 42 percent who favor it, according to a poll published Tuesday by Rasmussen Reports. And that support is trending down, falling "five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago," while opposition is up "nine points since late June."
Feelings regarding Obama's health-care plan run more passionately among opponents, with 44 percent strongly opposing, versus just 26 percent strongly in favor. While support breaks down along party lines with more Democrats in support and more Republicans in opposition, nearly two-thirds (62 percent) of unaffiliated voters "oppose the health-care plan, and 51 percent are strongly opposed."
The heat is turning up on the proposal. It's August and hot -- especially in the South, where consecutive 90-degree days provide a steamy reminder of why the South might have been characterized as lazy prior to the invention of air conditioning. Let's just say the heat can make one lethargic, cranky and in need of an ice-cold Coca-Cola.
But instead of enjoying a relaxing summer break, our representatives and senators are returning home from Washington to find raucous town hall meetings held by constituents who are concerned about the proposed health-care changes. Their concerns have been growing, as support has been waning. Possibly this delay in opposition is due to the length of the proposals in the legislative bodies. Slogging through the 1,017 pages of H.R. 3200 took me the better part of a long day.
President Obama had a great point in his town hall meeting in Portsmouth, N.H., where he said Tuesday, "Where we do disagree let's disagree over things that are real."
So, what is real?
The House version introduced by Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., is titled "American's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009." It would create a multitude of government agencies, task forces, inspectors and trust funds.
Here are just a few of those creations: a Health Choices Administration (a new independent agency in the executive branch of the government, headed by a health choices commissioner), a Health Benefits Advisory Committee, a Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund, a special inspector general for the Health Insurance Exchange, a Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research, a Public Health Workforce Corps, a Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and a school-based Health Clinic Program.
While the plan has been titled "Affordable," and marketed as budget-neutral, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), noted in its July 17 letter to the House Ways and Means Committee that its estimated cost is more than $1,000,000,000,000 (that's 1 trillion dollars, or a million, million dollars) over 10 years (2010-2019). According to the CBO, this cost would be offset by savings in Medicare and by increasing "federal revenues by about $583 billion." There is only one way to increase federal revenues -- to increase taxes, which takes money out of your pocket and puts it in the government's coffers.
Instead of focusing on universal access to health care, this bill throws out a large trawl net that sweeps across an enormous area far beyond health-care access to include personal decisions and social structure.
For example, included in H.R. 3200: "The entity shall provide for culturally and linguistically appropriate communication and health services." It refers to ''shared decision making ... a collaborative process between patient and clinician that engages the patient in decision making, provides patients with information about trade-offs among treatment options, and facilitates the incorporation of patient preferences and values into the medical plan."
It notes nurse home-visitation services will be based upon evidence, that such services are effective in areas including, "increasing birth intervals between pregnancies. ... Increasing economic self-sufficiency, employment advancement, school-readiness, and educational achievement, or reducing dependence on public assistance.''
These excerpts show that the result will not simply be universal access, but universal intrusion by government.
I hope our representatives will understand, when they get back to Washington after their summer break, that we believe in health-care "reform," but the current proposal is a bunch of rot.
Right now, President Obama might be happy to share a Coke and a smile with supporters of his plan, but the number of people who fit this description is dwindling faster than ice melts in a glass on a hot Georgia day, and we still have more than half of August left.
Copyright © 2009 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Healthcare fix must encompass litigation reform
by Newt Gingrich
As the president and Congress debate how to fix what’s broken in America’s healthcare system, it is critical that civil justice reform be included in the discussion.
The U.S. civil justice system is the most expensive in the world, about double the average cost of virtually any other industrialized nation. But for all of the money spent, our civil justice system neither effectively compensates injured parties (less than 15 cents of every tort-cost dollar goes to those injured from medical negligence) nor encourages the elimination of medical errors.
Instead of promoting better medical care, America’s civil justice system has given rise to “defensive medicine,” or medical treatment designed only to avoid lawsuits. To protect themselves, physicians routinely order unnecessary and expensive medical procedures and tests that do not contribute to the care or treatment of the patient, but rather add needless costs to the system.
Research indicates that civil justice reforms could significantly reduce defensive medicine, with savings estimated between $100 billion and $178 billion per year. In a recent speech before the American Medical Association, even President Barack Obama called for civil justice reforms to reduce the costly practice of defensive medicine. If one of the most compelling arguments for comprehensive health reform is to improve the quality of care and rein in out-of-control healthcare spending, then the health reform debate must include civil justice reform.
Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), a licensed physician and orthopedic surgeon, has proposed the Health Care OverUse Reform Today Act (HealthCOURT Act), a comprehensive medical liability reform bill intended to reform the process for pursuing medical malpractice cases while decreasing the drive for providers to practice defensive medicine.
One provision of Rep. Price’s bill that will bring about real change is the creation of a litigation “safe harbor” for physicians who agree to embrace clinical best practices as the standard by which they are held accountable. Clinical best practices can be defined as the most effective evidence-based medical care that results in optimum outcomes. Clinical best practices must be recognized as superior care by physicians in a particular medical specialty that promotes continuous improvement and is widely disseminated to healthcare professionals.
Therefore, physicians who fully incorporate clinical best practices into the care and treatment of patients are using nationally recognized standards of superior medical care. This “safe harbor” law would exempt from medical malpractice claims physicians that follow and document best-in-class standards in treating their patients.
Today, many completely unjustified medical malpractice claims are filed because personal injury lawyers know that the cost to defend a case in trial is often higher than the cost to simply settle out of court. This predatory behavior is enabled by law, which often limits the discretion judges should show when deciding whether to dismiss a case.
Under our proposal, a judge, when deciding whether to allow a lawsuit to go forward, would be able to review a patient’s medical record documenting the treatment the patient received and take into account whether that treatment complied with nationally recognized best practices. If so, the judge would be justified in dismissing the case. This reform would stop personal injury lawyers from filing predatory, frivolous malpractice claims.
These best-practice standards will need to be established and clearly delineated so that a judge can review and understand them. Fortunately, most national medical specialty groups have some form of best practices. We believe that physicians — working through their national medical specialty societies — should establish best-practice standards for other physicians. Not federal bureaucrats. Not Medicare or Medicaid bean counters.
Of course, there will always be instances when a physician and patient collaboratively decide to deviate from national best practices. For example, the best-practice treatment of a particular cancer may include radiation, chemotherapy and surgery, but the patient elects not to include chemotherapy treatments. So long as this decision is documented in a medical record, the rules of safe harbor should still apply.
By appropriately creating a safe harbor for physicians who incorporate clinical best practices into the care and treatment of their patients, we would effectively eliminate the need for expensive defensive medical costs. Physicians would instead be able to focus on how to make sick people healthy rather than ordering unnecessary tests, scans and medical procedures undertaken solely for the purpose of avoiding a malpractice claim. The use of clinical best practices will result in fewer cases going to court, less money being wasted, quicker resolution of legitimate malpractice claims, lower medical malpractice insurance rates and better health and healthcare services for patients.
We believe that a safe harbor for physicians who subscribe to clinical best practices is a win-win reform for patients and physicians, and one that should be included in any serious effort to reform our health system.
Gingrich, former House Speaker, is the founder of the Center for Health Transformation, and Oliver is the group’s health justice project director. CHT is a for-profit association whose members include hospitals and health systems, insurers, professional and trade associations, advocacy groups pertaining to diseases, and others.
As the president and Congress debate how to fix what’s broken in America’s healthcare system, it is critical that civil justice reform be included in the discussion.
The U.S. civil justice system is the most expensive in the world, about double the average cost of virtually any other industrialized nation. But for all of the money spent, our civil justice system neither effectively compensates injured parties (less than 15 cents of every tort-cost dollar goes to those injured from medical negligence) nor encourages the elimination of medical errors.
Instead of promoting better medical care, America’s civil justice system has given rise to “defensive medicine,” or medical treatment designed only to avoid lawsuits. To protect themselves, physicians routinely order unnecessary and expensive medical procedures and tests that do not contribute to the care or treatment of the patient, but rather add needless costs to the system.
Research indicates that civil justice reforms could significantly reduce defensive medicine, with savings estimated between $100 billion and $178 billion per year. In a recent speech before the American Medical Association, even President Barack Obama called for civil justice reforms to reduce the costly practice of defensive medicine. If one of the most compelling arguments for comprehensive health reform is to improve the quality of care and rein in out-of-control healthcare spending, then the health reform debate must include civil justice reform.
Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), a licensed physician and orthopedic surgeon, has proposed the Health Care OverUse Reform Today Act (HealthCOURT Act), a comprehensive medical liability reform bill intended to reform the process for pursuing medical malpractice cases while decreasing the drive for providers to practice defensive medicine.
One provision of Rep. Price’s bill that will bring about real change is the creation of a litigation “safe harbor” for physicians who agree to embrace clinical best practices as the standard by which they are held accountable. Clinical best practices can be defined as the most effective evidence-based medical care that results in optimum outcomes. Clinical best practices must be recognized as superior care by physicians in a particular medical specialty that promotes continuous improvement and is widely disseminated to healthcare professionals.
Therefore, physicians who fully incorporate clinical best practices into the care and treatment of patients are using nationally recognized standards of superior medical care. This “safe harbor” law would exempt from medical malpractice claims physicians that follow and document best-in-class standards in treating their patients.
Today, many completely unjustified medical malpractice claims are filed because personal injury lawyers know that the cost to defend a case in trial is often higher than the cost to simply settle out of court. This predatory behavior is enabled by law, which often limits the discretion judges should show when deciding whether to dismiss a case.
Under our proposal, a judge, when deciding whether to allow a lawsuit to go forward, would be able to review a patient’s medical record documenting the treatment the patient received and take into account whether that treatment complied with nationally recognized best practices. If so, the judge would be justified in dismissing the case. This reform would stop personal injury lawyers from filing predatory, frivolous malpractice claims.
These best-practice standards will need to be established and clearly delineated so that a judge can review and understand them. Fortunately, most national medical specialty groups have some form of best practices. We believe that physicians — working through their national medical specialty societies — should establish best-practice standards for other physicians. Not federal bureaucrats. Not Medicare or Medicaid bean counters.
Of course, there will always be instances when a physician and patient collaboratively decide to deviate from national best practices. For example, the best-practice treatment of a particular cancer may include radiation, chemotherapy and surgery, but the patient elects not to include chemotherapy treatments. So long as this decision is documented in a medical record, the rules of safe harbor should still apply.
By appropriately creating a safe harbor for physicians who incorporate clinical best practices into the care and treatment of their patients, we would effectively eliminate the need for expensive defensive medical costs. Physicians would instead be able to focus on how to make sick people healthy rather than ordering unnecessary tests, scans and medical procedures undertaken solely for the purpose of avoiding a malpractice claim. The use of clinical best practices will result in fewer cases going to court, less money being wasted, quicker resolution of legitimate malpractice claims, lower medical malpractice insurance rates and better health and healthcare services for patients.
We believe that a safe harbor for physicians who subscribe to clinical best practices is a win-win reform for patients and physicians, and one that should be included in any serious effort to reform our health system.
Gingrich, former House Speaker, is the founder of the Center for Health Transformation, and Oliver is the group’s health justice project director. CHT is a for-profit association whose members include hospitals and health systems, insurers, professional and trade associations, advocacy groups pertaining to diseases, and others.
Friday, October 3, 2008
McCain's Healthcare Plan Brings REAL REFORM!
by Brian L. Baker
TAKE A LOOK AT THE DETAILS...
With all due respect to recent letters from those opposing John McCain, the idea that a veteran, prisoner of war, and American hero would hurt veterans is a myth that originates from partisan mindsets…not facts. Senator McCain’s policy stand on healthcare will help move us toward true change. Please look at the specifics.
An important part of his plan is to use competition to improve the quality of health insurance with greater variety to match people's needs, lower prices, and portability. Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines.
News reports indicate that McCain aims to reform the tax code to offer more choices beyond employer-based health insurance coverage. While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will receive a direct refundable tax credit - effectively cash - of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits them best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider. Those obtaining innovative insurance that costs less than the credit can deposit the remainder in expanded Health Savings Accounts.
Senator McCain also proposes making your health insurance portable. Americans need insurance that follows them from job to job. They want insurance that is still there if they retire early and does not change if they take a few years off to raise the kids.
Senator McCain understands that those without prior group coverage and those with pre-existing conditions have the most difficulty on the individual market, and we need to make sure they get the high-quality coverage they need. He will challenge the insurance companies and fight to insure that people with pre-existing conditions can find coverage.
As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow - a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP - that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these patients have access to health coverage.
Chronic conditions account for three-quarters of the nation's annual health care bill. McCain’s plan includes prevention, early intervention, healthy habits, new treatment models, new public health infrastructure and the use of information technology to address chronic conditions. Senator McCain’s plan dedicates more federal research to caring and curing chronic disease.
Senator McCain supports letting the states have freedom to address their needs. Missouri should have the flexibility to experiment with alternative forms of access, coordinated payments per episode covered under Medicaid, use of private insurance in Medicaid, alternative insurance policies and different licensing schemes for providers.
We must make public more information on treatment options and doctor records, and require transparency regarding medical outcomes, quality of care, costs and prices. We must also facilitate the development standards for measuring and recording treatments and outcomes. We must promote greater access through walk-in clinics in retail outlets.
Obama supporters and advisers admit that his plan clearly creates a government-run healthcare system. They believe that more government is the way to solve the issue. Some even admit that socialism is needed to address our healthcare issues. I would ask you to remember, President Thomas Jefferson said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it away!”
I respectfully ask that you consider John McCain for President
TAKE A LOOK AT THE DETAILS...
With all due respect to recent letters from those opposing John McCain, the idea that a veteran, prisoner of war, and American hero would hurt veterans is a myth that originates from partisan mindsets…not facts. Senator McCain’s policy stand on healthcare will help move us toward true change. Please look at the specifics.
An important part of his plan is to use competition to improve the quality of health insurance with greater variety to match people's needs, lower prices, and portability. Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines.
News reports indicate that McCain aims to reform the tax code to offer more choices beyond employer-based health insurance coverage. While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will receive a direct refundable tax credit - effectively cash - of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits them best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider. Those obtaining innovative insurance that costs less than the credit can deposit the remainder in expanded Health Savings Accounts.
Senator McCain also proposes making your health insurance portable. Americans need insurance that follows them from job to job. They want insurance that is still there if they retire early and does not change if they take a few years off to raise the kids.
Senator McCain understands that those without prior group coverage and those with pre-existing conditions have the most difficulty on the individual market, and we need to make sure they get the high-quality coverage they need. He will challenge the insurance companies and fight to insure that people with pre-existing conditions can find coverage.
As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow - a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP - that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these patients have access to health coverage.
Chronic conditions account for three-quarters of the nation's annual health care bill. McCain’s plan includes prevention, early intervention, healthy habits, new treatment models, new public health infrastructure and the use of information technology to address chronic conditions. Senator McCain’s plan dedicates more federal research to caring and curing chronic disease.
Senator McCain supports letting the states have freedom to address their needs. Missouri should have the flexibility to experiment with alternative forms of access, coordinated payments per episode covered under Medicaid, use of private insurance in Medicaid, alternative insurance policies and different licensing schemes for providers.
We must make public more information on treatment options and doctor records, and require transparency regarding medical outcomes, quality of care, costs and prices. We must also facilitate the development standards for measuring and recording treatments and outcomes. We must promote greater access through walk-in clinics in retail outlets.
Obama supporters and advisers admit that his plan clearly creates a government-run healthcare system. They believe that more government is the way to solve the issue. Some even admit that socialism is needed to address our healthcare issues. I would ask you to remember, President Thomas Jefferson said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it away!”
I respectfully ask that you consider John McCain for President
Friday, September 5, 2008
Governor Sarah Palin - Bringing Real Change!
Governor Sarah Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has seen approval ratings of over 80 percent. - She has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy resources.
- She leads a state that matters to every one of us -- Alaska has significant energy resources and she has been a leader in the fight to make America energy independent.
- She has actually used her veto and cut budgetary spending. And she put a stop to the bridge to nowhere that would have cost taxpayers $400 million dollars.
- In Alaska, she challenged a corrupt system and passed a landmark ethics reform bill.
- As the head of Alaska's National Guard and as the mother of a soldier herself, Governor Palin understands what it takes to lead our nation and she understands the importance of supporting our troops.
Her experience in shaking up the status quo is exactly what is needed in Washington.
In choosing Governor Sarah Palin, John McCain put Washington on notice that he is serious about shaking up the status quo.
What we're seeing is a maverick who has shaken up Washington picking as his teammate a maverick governor who has shaken up her own state.
What it's going to take to change Washington is a team of Mavericks who have a record of accomplishment in shaking up the status quo.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Republican Leaders Work to Increase Education Funding 1.2 Billion over 5 Years!
JOPLIN—Gov. Matt Blunt today visited Missouri schools to announce his successful effort to provide $1.2 billion in new funding for Missouri education over the last four years, ensuring teachers and students have the resources they need to succeed and compete in the global economy.
“Education is the most important investment our state makes, and it is my highest priority,” Gov. Blunt said. “Today I am pleased to sign a budget that delivers to Missouri classrooms more than $1.2 billion in new funding to elementary, secondary and higher education over the last four years. I commend the members of the General Assembly who share my commitment to ensuring our children receive the world-class education they need in order to reach their full potential.”
Gov. Blunt today again delivered on his promise to increase funding for education every year he is governor by signing House Bill 2002, which provides a significant increase in state funding to Missouri’s public school system. House Bill 2002 includes:
$121.3 million increase to continue full funding of the foundation formula, bringing total new formula funding under Gov. Blunt’s leadership to $490,193,006 which is a 22.5 percent increase over four years.
“Education is the most important investment our state makes, and it is my highest priority,” Gov. Blunt said. “Today I am pleased to sign a budget that delivers to Missouri classrooms more than $1.2 billion in new funding to elementary, secondary and higher education over the last four years. I commend the members of the General Assembly who share my commitment to ensuring our children receive the world-class education they need in order to reach their full potential.”
Gov. Blunt today again delivered on his promise to increase funding for education every year he is governor by signing House Bill 2002, which provides a significant increase in state funding to Missouri’s public school system. House Bill 2002 includes:
$121.3 million increase to continue full funding of the foundation formula, bringing total new formula funding under Gov. Blunt’s leadership to $490,193,006 which is a 22.5 percent increase over four years.
- $5.5 million increase for the School District Trust fund. Over four years, Gov. Blunt has increased funding for this trust fund by $97.3 million which amounts to a 13.8 percent increase.
- $3.5 million increase for the A+ Schools Program. Gov. Blunt has increased funding for the A+ Schools Program by $12.7 million over four years which more than doubled funding for the program since he was elected governor.
- $2.9 million increase to educate severely disabled children bringing the total amount provided by Gov. Blunt to $21 million.
- $15 million for the Small Schools Program.
- $5.8 million for the Missouri Virtual School Program (MoVIP), including a $600,000 increase.
- $1 million for eMINTS in support of the Missouri Mathematics, Engineering, Technology and Science (METS) Initiative.
- $2.6 million increase for sheltered workshops bring the total amount provided by Gov. Blunt to $5.2 million which equates to a 28 percent increase since the governor was elected.
“Governor Blunt has once again made education the top priority for our state and I am proud to have been able to work with him to greatly increase the level of funding we provide to elementary and secondary public schools as well as our institutions of higher learning. We have made a commitment to the young people of this state and this budget honors that commitment by allocating the funding that will provide them with a better system of education and more opportunities to attend an institution of higher learning,” Rep. Allen Icet said.
The $1.2 billion in total new funding reflects Gov. Blunt’s commitment to education and includes: $652.5 million in increases for elementary and secondary education, $218 million in increases for higher education, and $335.3 million for the Lewis and Clark Discovery Initiative.
Education is Gov. Blunt’s highest public policy and budget priority. Gov. Blunt also has been a champion for higher education in Missouri. When he took office, he immediately put an end to the previous administration’s cuts in higher education. The governor’s support for higher education nearly quadruples funding available for Access Missouri scholarships and provides $105.8 million in new funding for colleges and universities. Additionally, Gov. Blunt’s Lewis and Clark Discovery Initiative is providing $335 million for colleges and universities across the state for important capital improvement projects on campus.
Missouri Improves Funding to Higher Education
JOPLIN—Gov. Matt Blunt today further expanded access to higher education for Missouri students by signing House Bill 2003, which increases funding for Missouri’s two- and four-year colleges and universities and provides a significant increase in scholarship funding. With this budget, as he outlined in his State of the State Address, Gov. Blunt has delivered a total increase of $1.2 billion to support education in Missouri, ensuring teachers and students have the resources they need to succeed and compete in the global economy.
“Access to higher education is essential to the future success of Missouri students,” Gov. Blunt said. “Our significant investment in higher education is an investment in Missouri’s future and enables us to provide students with a world-class education.”
“We increased college scholarships through the A+ and Access Missouri programs as well as increased the budgets for higher education institutions to help make college more affordable,” Sen. Gary Nodler said. “Plus, we have continued our commitment to fully fund a new school funding formula that gives all our children an equal opportunity for a great education.”
House Bill 2003 provides, among other things, the governor’s recommendations for:
“Access to higher education is essential to the future success of Missouri students,” Gov. Blunt said. “Our significant investment in higher education is an investment in Missouri’s future and enables us to provide students with a world-class education.”
“We increased college scholarships through the A+ and Access Missouri programs as well as increased the budgets for higher education institutions to help make college more affordable,” Sen. Gary Nodler said. “Plus, we have continued our commitment to fully fund a new school funding formula that gives all our children an equal opportunity for a great education.”
House Bill 2003 provides, among other things, the governor’s recommendations for:
- $43 million increase for Missouri’s public two- and four-year higher education institutions. Gov. Blunt has increased funding over the last four years for two- and four-year institutions by $105.8 million which is a significant 12.4 percent increase.
- $23.7 million increase for the Access Missouri Financial Assistance Program, allowing additional students access to higher education, bringing total funding to $95.8 million. Gov. Blunt has nearly quadrupled funding for needs-based scholarships since he became governor by providing an additional $71 million for students.
- $437,640 increase for the Missouri Telehealth Network, which enhances access to medical care to people in underserved areas.
- $1.6 million in total funding for the Missouri State Historical Society which includes a $100,000 increase. Over the last four years Gov. Blunt has increased funding for the
- Missouri State Historical Society by $696,960 which equates to a more than 75 percent increase.
House Bill 2003 confirms what Gov. Blunt said to lawmakers in his State of the State Address, “By passing my budget, you will ensure, once again, that Missouri teachers and students have the resources they need to succeed. And when passed, we will have achieved a remarkable feat. By having the vision to look ahead and the fortitude to keep our commitments to the people of Missouri, we will have increased our total investment in education by $1.2 billion.”
The $1.2 billion in total new funding reflects Gov. Blunt’s commitment to education and includes: $652.5 million for Elementary and Secondary Education, $218 million for Higher Education and $335.3 million for the Lewis and Clark Discovery Initiative.
Governor Blunt Works to Stop Identity Theft
LEBANON – Gov. Matt Blunt today signed legislation allowing Missourians who are concerned they have been the victim of identity theft to request a security freeze on their credit reports.
“This legislation provides for more consumer protection for Missourians,” Gov. Blunt said. “Identity theft and fraud is an increasing problem and an increasing concern for Missourians. The legislation I am enacting increases penalties for these con artists and greatly enhances the ability of victims to protect themselves and their credit.”
House Bill 1384, sponsored by Rep. Stanley Cox, allows Missourians to request a security freeze on their credit reports including victims of identity theft or anyone who believes they may have been victimized. The legislation also allows victims of identify theft to file and receive a copy of a police report on the incident. The bill also states any person who manufactures or possesses multiple fictitious or forged means of identification with the intent to distribute to others for the purpose of committing a crime will be guilty of a class C felony.
“Identity theft is a threat to all consumers and it is imperative that we give Missourians the tools they need to minimize the damage from this devastating crime. This is the most significant piece of consumer protection legislation passed this session and I thank Governor Blunt for his support on the issue and for signing it into law,” Rep. Cox said.
The governor recently signed Senate Bill 999, sponsored by Sen. Delbert Scott, allows the attorney general to bring an action for unlawful merchandising practices when the name of a financial institution is deceptively used in Internet scams, mailings, and on mortgages among other things. Under current state law only the financial institution whose name is used can take action.
“Con artists who prey on Missourians have resorted to the tactic of using reputable financial institutions’ names in order to scam consumers,” Sen. Scott said. “This new law will allow us to better protect consumers by cracking down on these deceptive practices.”
“This legislation provides for more consumer protection for Missourians,” Gov. Blunt said. “Identity theft and fraud is an increasing problem and an increasing concern for Missourians. The legislation I am enacting increases penalties for these con artists and greatly enhances the ability of victims to protect themselves and their credit.”
House Bill 1384, sponsored by Rep. Stanley Cox, allows Missourians to request a security freeze on their credit reports including victims of identity theft or anyone who believes they may have been victimized. The legislation also allows victims of identify theft to file and receive a copy of a police report on the incident. The bill also states any person who manufactures or possesses multiple fictitious or forged means of identification with the intent to distribute to others for the purpose of committing a crime will be guilty of a class C felony.
“Identity theft is a threat to all consumers and it is imperative that we give Missourians the tools they need to minimize the damage from this devastating crime. This is the most significant piece of consumer protection legislation passed this session and I thank Governor Blunt for his support on the issue and for signing it into law,” Rep. Cox said.
The governor recently signed Senate Bill 999, sponsored by Sen. Delbert Scott, allows the attorney general to bring an action for unlawful merchandising practices when the name of a financial institution is deceptively used in Internet scams, mailings, and on mortgages among other things. Under current state law only the financial institution whose name is used can take action.
“Con artists who prey on Missourians have resorted to the tactic of using reputable financial institutions’ names in order to scam consumers,” Sen. Scott said. “This new law will allow us to better protect consumers by cracking down on these deceptive practices.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
