Slashdot Mirror
Gov't Proposes Massive Homeless Tracking System
Chris Hoofnagle writes "The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development is proposing a massive system of tracking for homeless people and others who are served by shelters and care centers. The system will track people by their SSN, and will collect health (HIV, pregnancy) and mental information. Secret Service and national security agents can gain access to the database by just asking for it! EPIC has released a fact sheet on HMIS, and the public can comment on the guidelines until September 22, 2003, but no electronic comments are being accepted."
Fine with me. So long as you also provide the list to Habitat for Humanity
There are a significant portion of the hard-core homeless that will simply stay off-grid, that's why they're homeless in the first place, they decline to participate.
Dead right. And despite the fact we call it paranoia, slashdot paranoia is absolutely nothing compared to real paranoia. I have a paranoid schizophrenic aunt, and for the implication of every program like this, there's a very real chance she'd risk starvation before going to social services agencies.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
You're exactly right, and I think it's worth taking a long, hard look at just *why* our government feels a need to keep tabs on where its citizens are.
The "standard" line of reasoning basically says they want your current address because they need to be able to bill you for their services (income tax).
If, however, you're unemployed and don't have a physical address, you're by definition not a taxable citizen. Therefore, any "tracking" the govt. wants to do to these folks is for their own information-gathering purposes - and doesn't seem necessary to me at all.
As you pointed out, there's also the (very likely) ulterior motive of trying to skew the statistics in their favor, while saving money on paying for care for folks insisting on remaining anonymous.
As for the unemployment rate statistics, they're not really useful as anything more than a relative indicator of economic health. Consider this, though. Even those who turned to the "black or grey market" to scrape out a living are aiding the economy. They're providing goods or services (however questionably legal), and collecting money in exchange for those goods/services. Therefore, they cause others to spend some of their cash, which gives them incentive to keep working to earn more money to replace what was spent. The biggest thing that kills the economy is stagnation. The folks who have money are afraid to spend it, so the folks who don't have it find it very hard to get it.
I fully support a person's right to privacy and their desire to not participate in society, however, getting government handouts and not participating in society are mutually exclusive.
Why not track their benefits? The gov't and private agencies track all of my benefits: SS benefits, income tax, disability insurance, health care status. By tracking the "benefits" the homeless recieve, the gov't will be able to provide better care and make better plans and budgets thereby saving the taxpayer money.
If they really want to live "off the grid" and not participate in society, screw 'em. They shouldn't get any gov't supplied and organized benefits from my taxes.
I've chosen to participate in society and will not support an individual who wants to live outside society, they're on their own.
As to the Secret Service getting the info at their own discretion, I'm against that.
Harry
"Also, this would help hospitals treat patients they have never seen before, as it could assist them in identifying a mentally ill person that needs a specific form of medication."
That applies to everyone, whether they're homeless/mentally handicapped or not. Are you ready to be tagged?
I might end up in a serious car accident some day leaving me unconscious. It would be really helpful if I have some implant so medical personel could find out who I was and see my medical history. That doesn't mean I'm going to volunteer to be tagged and tracked like an animal though.
I also think its a good idea.
Tracking the outpaying of social services, social security, disability, medication etc. Keep an accurate account of the numbers of the homeless and the economic trends that may affect those numbers. Althought without the economic means, how much do the homeless migrate? Even if its not state-to-state I would expect intra and inter city migration patterns would develop given time with this system.
Where is the breech of civil liberties? Where is the invasion of privacy if the Secret Service know a homeless person collected food from this shelter on Monday AND got soup from a different shelter cross town on Wednesday?
Honestly... I don't see the harm. They already track what I do based on my social security number, why should the homeless expect more privacy then I?
Year ago I was homeless for a period of time, due to the fact that I was a teenager, my parents were dead and life is harsh. I fought my way back into society against it's better wishes.
I actually managed to put my first year of college on credit. Then they figured out I was a bum without a job. Later I paid it back, got scholarships and managed to finish. It wasn't easy, but all this sob story has a point and it ain't for sympathy.
I was hanging out in a particular location on a regular basis. I'm walking along and a payphone rings. Being bored and curious, I answer it. It was a bill collector! They had tracked me down to a payphone I frequently passed. Now tell me the government needs a new system, just give the homeless a credit card good for a nice sized bad debt. The bill collectors will track them for the government, no new system needed.
I used to wonder what was so holy about a silent night, now I have a child.
Not just some of them, but actually the overwhelming majority. The support forums I run for cognitive disabilities have a number of people that were locked up in mental hospitals by idiots that misdiagnosed them as mentally ill -- and the one thing they *all* agree on is that the hospitals are full of cruel/unusual punishments. They also all said that they would rather be homeless (though most aren't) or dead before sent back to such places. The tales they've told about how they were treated literally make "One Flew Over A Coocoo's Nest" look like Disneyland. On top of that, there's a great deal of misinformation *within* the psychiatric industry. Common "treatments" for some things involve nothing more than physically punishing the person for showing any signs that she/he is different, and rewarding showing no sign of discomfort when exposed to physically painful stimuli. Ironically the aversives inevitably give rise to genuine mental illness in the form of severe depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. I agree, there should be a structured, *humane* safety net available -- one not based on forcing everybody into a one-size-fits all mold of blind obedience. Right now there's a sick duality: either you get almost no help at all, or you're basically abused. Also, a common problem for people with treatable mental illnesses (bipolar, schizophrenia,etc) is that they are stuck on various forms of financial assistance because they can't afford the medications. If they could afford the drugs, they could work, but because they can't afford them, they can't work.
You were young, healthy, relatively well educated, and in an upturn economy. How many of those characteristics apply to the average homeless person?
And that's ignoring the problems of mental health. Which are not minor by any means. E.g., I would personally estimate that many (not most, nor even close to most, but many) suffer from depression. I know that some suffer from advanced schizophrenia. etc.
Another group of them need, more than anything, a safe place to call a permanent address. (It might be only a lock-box.) Access to some safe place to store a change or two of clothes. Access to a shower and a washer/dryer. The basic minimum that one needs to hold down a job. Or to get one.
Other groups need other things. Few of them really need to be tracked. That's for somebody else's benefit. You have to really *trust* the government before you would feel that something like that was for your own benefit. And strangely enough, I don't think I know anybody who trusts the government that much. I've been employed by the govt. for 30 years, and I don't trust it that much.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) was signed into law on August 21, 1996. This law includes important new protections for millions of working Americans and their families who have preexisting medical conditions or might suffer discrimination in health coverage based on a factor that relates to an individual's health. HIPAA's provisions amend Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) as well as the Internal Revenue Code and the Public Health Service Act and place requirements on employer-sponsored group health plans, insurance companies and health maintenance organizations (HMOs). HIPAA includes changes that:
limit exclusions for preexisting conditions;
prohibit discrimination against employees and dependents based on their health status;
guarantee renewability and availability of health coverage to certain employers and individuals; and
protect many workers who lose health coverage by providing better access to individual health insurance coverage.
Here are some useful links:
HHS - Office for Civil Rights - HIPAA
What is HIPAA?
HIPAA.ORG
HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
The dissemination of medical information without the explicit permission of subject. I don't have a problem with tracking information about how social services are used; that's expected of any service to maintain reliability. However providing medical information to law enforcement violates even the most basic principles of the doctor/patient privilege.
I work with a non-profit organization that provides services for the homeless. We are currently deciding on which HMIS database system to implement for the entire state. And from what I know of the HMIS requirements I can tell you that this arcticle is wildly misrepresenting the facts, and coming to conclusions that just aren't there.
First of all, the HMIS database isn't meant to track the homeless at all. The government believes that the number people being reported is double the number of homeless that there actually are. So the reason for the databases existance is to get a more accurate count of the number of homeless and to track statistical information.
Each persons is given a unique identifier that is associated with their information. They are not tracked by SSN. Every 6 months (I believe thats the time frame) a report is sent to HUD that contains the statistical information. There is no way to identify a specific person by looking at this information. HUDs guidelines are very strict on the matters of the persons privacy.
Also, there is no central database. The state of Utah actually has 3 different sections that would be required to run their own databases. However, we have decided to run the system as a state.
A person can refuse to give the information or not allow it to be shared with HUD. They can't be denied services if they do so. The majority of these databases are also encrypted to help ensure privacy.
The suggestion that the Secret Service would have easy access to this information was an assumption on the part of the author of the arcticle. Even if they did have access to it, they wouldn't be able to track the information back to a specific person so it would be rather pointless.
This could be a great tool for those organizations dedicated to helping the homeless. It will help point out locations and programs that need the most money.
-- Remember, we're not happy until you're not happy. -- Local FAA Inspector --
I really believe that many folks take advantage of the system due to low accountability and the fallacy that substance abuse is entirely a medical problem.
And if these people fail your accountability test, what then?
Even if substance abuse is not a medical problem, how do we handle those who clearly have a problem?
What about the people who choose to not participate at all? Many people do not hold steady jobs, but do not collect benefits either. Often these are the people who are the most discriminated against, as in "they must be getting over somehow?"
And how do you determine who is "taking advantage" of the system?
Are the people who make lots of dough from government handouts, white collar crime, and profiteering from unecessary wars that were fought to defend us from non-existant Weopons of Mass Destruction (Cheney, Carlucci, others) that they advised the president about not "scamming the system" to a greater degree than the homeless?
How can we claim that universal healthcare is unaffordable when our government not only promisses such healthcare to the Iraqis but also gives foriegn aid in the amount of $2.8 Billion to Israel, which also offers universal health care to its citizens?
Do you think that your father in law really has paid less than $7,000.00 in his whole life as you claim? The maximum benefit for SSI is capped at $558.00 in most states. Or maybe you are talking about the retirement benefit, which is based on how much Social Security tax that you paid during the years that you worked.
Read, L