". . . We stand in strong opposition to SF 2047. We believe this bill is against the interests of parents in making a truly informed choice about whether the state of Minnesota shall permanently retain and use their children's personal genetic information . . . "
"The bill title says that this is a marketplace but according to the bill on line 2.21 the marketplace is created as a board ... Just the fact that we keep talking about a marketplace is problematic to our organization because it is actually a state board ... but the really big deal is to understand that it is the largest data sharing system in the history of this country and it will be the largest data sharing system in the history of this state."
CCHF's president testified at a hearing regarding the state of Minnesota being able to take and use $42.5 million without legislative approval to continue the building of the health insurance exchange which was executive ordered by Governor Mark Dayton. CCHF describes what the exchange really is and why they need to stop it.
Sent in: September 26, 2012 - This letter provides a summary of at least 15 reasons our organization supports the repeal of the health insurance exchanges provisions in the PPACA, the defunding of all exchange establishment and IT grants, the end of all funding for state, federal or federally-facilitated exchanges, the end of all funding for the Federal Data Services Hub, and ultimately, the repeal of the entire PPACA.
First of all, to be clear, this is not a marketplace. It’s a government bureaucracy.
Minnesota House Health and Human Services Policy Committee
February 10, 2003
Chair: Representative Lynda Boudreau (R-Faribault)
House File 297 (Author: Rep. Bill Haas (R-Champlin))
Times Testimony on Minnesota Department of Health Rule 4653 House Health and Human Services Policy Committee Chair: Rep. Lynda Boudreau
Health officials kept the average citizen in the dark about their plan. Although the department sent out notices to various individuals and organizations, the department buried the rulemaking process and the proposed rule in its website where even I, who was looking specifically for it, couldn't find it until I searched under the word "encounter," a word most of the public wouldn't know. Second, the department gave the rule a less than descriptive title: Proposed Permanent Rules for Administrative Billing Data. This title does not indicate that a patient-tracking system was being set up. And finally, the department did not distribute a press release on their intentions, inviting the public to comment.