Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
Sun May 12, 2013, 05:47 PM May 2013

ObamaCare Rollout: Feds to Use “Consumer Reporting Agencies” to Determine Eligibility

It looks like young Ezra (and, to be fair, everybody else) missed a major policy change in Obama’s shift to the new, shorter (for individuals*), final version of the basic application for ObamaCare.** As it turns out, the issue (or at least one of the issues; gawd knows what other time bombs are buried in the thing) wasn’t only the length and complexity of the form, though that was and is bad enough; the issue is the actual content of the form. Here’s what I’m talking about. It’s right in plain sight. I’m using a screen dump of the new, shorter, finalized form from Ezra’s article:

Figure 1.



Here are the key passages as text for Figure 1:

I’m signing this application under penalty of perjury, which means I’ve provided true answers to all the questions on this form to the best of my knowledge. I know that I may be subject to penalties under federal law if I intentionally provide false or untrue information. …

We need this information to check your eligibility for help paying for health coverage if you choose to apply. We’ll check your answers using information in our electronic databases and databases from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Social Security, the Department of Homeland Security, and/or a consumer reporting agency. If the information doesn’t match, we may ask you to send us proof.

Yes, Equifax (a “consumer reporting agency”) could be affecting your eligibility for ObamaCare (a Federal program). Now, this is a major policy change, or perhaps a policy determination. Here’s the equivalent language in the draft 26-page “Single Streamlined Application.” As you can see, the language had not then been finalized.



Here are the key passages as text for Figure 2:

As part of the Privacy step, an individual also provides agreement and consent for their information to be used and retrieved from data sources. They also agree that they have permission from all other persons they may list on the application for their information to be used and retrieved as part of the application process for verifying the household’s information in order to make eligibility determinations. The specific components of the consent language are still under review across the federal agencies, but the essence of the language will address the basic agreement to the retrieval and use of their household’s data for verifying information and making eligibility determinations and will include language that agreement is provided under penalty of perjury and understanding of potential prosecution for false information (similar to when a person signs and submits the application).

ObamaCare Rollout: Feds to Use “Consumer Reporting Agencies” to Determine Eligibility Despite Penalty for Perjury

By lambert strether of Corrente. Originally published at Corrente.

Read More on this at:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/05/obamacare-rollout-feds-to-use-consumer-reporting-agencies-to-determine-eligibility-despite-penalty-for-perjury.html

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
14. It's hard to know...but does seem that something should be done to correct this..
Sun May 12, 2013, 07:30 PM
May 2013

SS# and checking with IRS should be all they need..to see if one qualifies. Why bring in the other groups?

Autumn

(45,049 posts)
4. OFFS. It took me a year, a whole fucking year to get
Sun May 12, 2013, 05:58 PM
May 2013

a bill that wasn't mine, off my credit report from Equifax. Christ on a crutch, what fucking moron make these decisions.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
8. Had same experience...and there has been much reporting on people who
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:25 PM
May 2013

those Credit Ratings Agencies mixed up names and put stuff out there that was just a late water bill or activating credit cards they never used...and other peculiar things that stay on their record which they aren't even aware of until they try to buy a car a house or apply for some kind of job that requires a Credit Report from these "for Profit" agencies.

It's really hard to get it off your record unless you have unlimited time to collect all the records and go after them...and even then it's a daunting task. You aren't even aware that there's some thing on your "record" from even 5,6,7 years ago...until you are in a position to need a new credit card, buy car, appliance or anything that needs you to have credit.

You've been through it and so have many other DU'ers, who aren't "credit risks" but had some doofus put something there that they never notified you about or even bothered to find out the circumstances.

Autumn

(45,049 posts)
16. I can't see why they would need to include a private corporation,
Sun May 12, 2013, 08:36 PM
May 2013

well known for their fuck ups to verify your income when they have SS and the IRS.

OKNancy

(41,832 posts)
5. The article, the premise and the author all pretty much debunked in the previous thread
Sun May 12, 2013, 05:58 PM
May 2013

about this here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022832340

PS : it's a bullshit article

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
6. OKNancy...I think that Obama Administration in trying to make the "form shorter"
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:18 PM
May 2013

got some bad advice on how to do this. And, it's better to "nip this in the bud" and allow the Administration to see push back (now that Credit Agencies are put in there) so that he can change this. It will hurt many people who have some stupid thing (like paying water bill late because of a dispute when they were a graduate student) come up on their record which showed up on their credit report, or millions of us who have had some weird thing from years before show up on our Credit Report from these "For Profit Agencies" that we had to spend much time documenting and dealing with them to get it off.

I wouldn't dismiss this so casually.

OKNancy

(41,832 posts)
7. I answered you in the other thread
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:21 PM
May 2013

but I'll give you a short version. THEY ARE NOT using it to disqualify you. It's for making sure of your identity and/or income.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
9. Maybe if you could take time to Google: "Credit Ratings Agencies, Consumer Problems" then
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:27 PM
May 2013

you could understand. I won't do the work for you...but, there have been horrendous experiences with the "For Profit Credit Ratings Agencies" and DU'ers have posted about it for years here on DU.

OKNancy

(41,832 posts)
11. I understand plenty
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:33 PM
May 2013

I have read your posts since I've been here ( 2001) Don't talk down to me.
Now I'll stop before I get my first hidden post.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
13. Who is talking down here to you...and what does reading my posts here since 2001
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:47 PM
May 2013

have to do with anything that would get a post of yours "hidden" to me?

Is this a "Shoot the Messenger" for some unknown reason post of you to me?

Go to the link and read it all and the comments there. I took the time to do that...I hope you and others will, also.

This is certainly not a "Freeper or Questionable Website" that this is from. So, please don't try to infer that.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
12. Your SS#/Tax Filing Information is all the Government should need. Why bring in
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:38 PM
May 2013

"Credit Ratings Agencies" which so many Consumers have had problems trying to correct either mix ups, false reports, misidentified reports.

How is this not something that shouldn't be addressed before it causes harm to the AFA and getting folks who need it signed up?

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
10. No,
Sun May 12, 2013, 06:31 PM
May 2013

"I think that Obama Administration in trying to make the "form shorter" got some bad advice on how to do this. And, it's better to 'nip this in the bud' and allow the Administration to see push back (now that Credit Agencies are put in there) so that he can change this."

...that's not what happened. The language is not new.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2832671
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2833269
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2832983

It's amazing that people are spreading false/misleading information about the health care law at this stage. That's expected of Republicans (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022833749).

Obama: ‘Don’t Be Bamboozled’ By ‘Misinformation’ About Obamacare
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-on-obamacare-dont-be-bamboozled

Kentucky Will Expand Medicaid Under Obamacare, Cutting Its Uninsured Population By More Than Half
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022824456

Obamacare Is Already Forcing Private Insurers To Lower Their Premiums
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022825372


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»ObamaCare Rollout: Feds t...