GOP Rep.: I got better Boston bombing information from news than classified briefing

Rep. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said he received more details about the Boston Marathon bombing from the news than a classified briefing for lawmakers.

Lankford's comments came during an interview with NBC Oklahoma City affiliate KFOR. The interview was republished by BuzzFeed.

When asked whether he had been receiving classified information on the bombing, the Oklahoma congressman said he often does not receive better information than the public.

"There's a special group that's the Intelligence Committee they get briefings but I was actually in a classified briefing last Wednesday, where it was a closed door, classified, — they reassured us this is top secret information classified for the bombing — I learned more from the news that night than I learned from my briefing with [Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano] earlier that day.

"So the administration is very closed with the Congress as well giving us only trickles of information often times,” Lankford said. “So that's part of our frustration is going back to Homeland Security and demanding we get information that we as representatives of the community deserved to get."

House lawmakers are set to receive a classified briefing on Tuesday on progress in the investigation of the Boston Marathon bombing.

View Comments

View the original article here

Thanks To Factory Farming, Backyard Eggs Are Still A Better Choice Than Store-Bought Ones

Backyard chickens raised for eggs and meat have been linked to an outbreak of salmonella, according to a recent story published by NPR. But though the outbreak was the largest ever to stem from contact with live poultry, it isn’t reason for people to abandon their outdoor flocks out of fear of illness.

The story cited a news brief from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, which reported that between March 1 and September 24 last year, 195 people in 27 different states were infected with strains of salmonella, and 79 percent of them had been in contact with live poultry in the week before they became ill. But the story doesn’t note that the number pales in comparison to salmonella outbreaks linked to factory-farmed eggs and poultry. In one CDC study, the agency estimates there were more than 182,000 cases of egg-caused salmonella in the U.S. — including 70 deaths — in 2000. In 2010, more than 1,900 people contracted salmonella in an outbreak linked to Iowa egg farms that produced more than 2.3 million dozen eggs a week. And just last month, 124 people were sickened with salmonella in an outbreak linked to Foster Farms chicken.

These high numbers of salmonella cases from eggs and poultry are linked to the effects of factory farming. Chickens raised for meat are crammed tightly into warehouses that hold as many as 20,000 chickens, while the chickens raised for eggs live in sheds that can hold 100,000 birds and are often packed in battery cages with five to 10 other birds. Factory farms often contain huge amounts of feces and fecal dust produced by the birds, along with rat droppings and flies, and certain strains of salmonella can pass to the chicken if their food comes in contact with the fecal matter. In order to try to stem off the flow of disease within their flocks, farmers regularly feed the poultry antibiotics, which can lead to antibiotic-resistant strains of salmonella: in 2011, 107 people were sickened and one killed from an antibiotic-resistant strain of salmonella in turkey.

Raising backyard chickens, without the help of antibiotics, provides no risk of developing antibiotic-resistant strains of disease, and is also a way of avoiding the health risks and cruelty associated with factory farms. The practice could decrease the risk of egg-bourne salmonella: one study found cage-free poultry facilities had about 40 percent less risk of harboring salmonella. Eggs from chickens allowed to eat grass and bugs can be healthier too, containing a third less cholesterol, twice as much omega-3 fatty acids and seven times more beta-carotene.

The NPR article states the outbreak from live poultry was traced back to a single hatchery in Ohio, and quotes the CDC in saying the best way to reduce risk of salmonella through live poultry contact is to wash your hands and clean equipment used to raise poultry. There are risks involved with raising animals for food — and backyard chickens are no exception — but in this case, the benefits of home-raised eggs outweigh any the risk of disease.

View the original article here

Boehner: GOP needs better messaging

By Molly K. Hooper - 03/17/13 01:15 PM ET

The highest-ranking elected Republican thinks his party needs to articulate their message more effectively, not clean house of GOP leaders.

Asked if the party had grown “stale and moss covered” – in reference to a remark made by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) at last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) – Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) defended the GOP’s principles. 

“The issue with our party is pretty simple.  There's nothing wrong with the principles of our party,” said Boehner on ABC’s “This Week.”  “But Republicans have not done as an effective job as we should in terms of talking about our principles in terms that average people can appreciate.” 

Last week’s CPAC summit of prominent GOP and conservative activists highlighted many of the divisions in the party, as Republicans look to rebound after the devastating presidential and Senate losses in the 2012 election.

Boehner seized on the issue of “balancing the budget.”

“Balancing the budget, as an example would be good for American families. We've got to do a better job of helping people understand what our principles are in terms that they deal with every day,” Boehner said.

View Comments

View the original article here

Real Medicare Reform: Why Seniors Will Fare Better

[1] Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2012 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds, April 23, 2012, p. 229, Table V.E2, http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/ReportsTrustFunds/Downloads/TR2012.pdf (accessed November 16, 2012).

[2] For a description of the Heritage Medicare reform plan, see Robert E. Moffit, “The Second Stage of Medicare Reform: Moving to a Premium Support Program,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2626, November 28, 2011, http://report.heritage.org/bg2626. See also, Robert E. Moffit and Rea S. Hederman Jr., “Medicare Premium Support: The Best Reform Option,” Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 3483, February 2, 2012, http://report.heritage.org/wm3483.

[3] For an overview of the performance of the government’s defined-contribution programs, including cost control, see Robert E. Moffit, “Expanding Choice Through Defined Contributions: Overcoming a Non-Participatory Health Care Economy,” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (Fall 2012), pp. 558–573.

[4] For the best summary of this issue, see Walton J. Francis, Putting Medicare Patients in Charge: Lessons from the FEHBP (Washington, DC: AEI Press, 2009), pp. 111–143.

[5] Under the FEHBP formula, no plan can get a government contribution on behalf of a beneficiary that exceeds 75 percent of the plan’s total premium cost. In other words, by limiting the savings that enrollees can secure, current law undercuts the greater potential of FEHBP to achieve an even better performance in cost control.

[6] Moffit, “Expanding Choice Through Defined Contributions,” p. 565, and Congressional Research Service, The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program: Possible Strategies for Reform, May 24, 1989, p. 255.

[7] Deborah Brunswick, “Health Insurance Costs to Rise Again Next Year,” CNN Money, September 22, 2011.

[8] Jeff Lemieux, Memorandum to the Medicare Commission, The National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, February 17, 1999, http://medicare.commission.gov/medicare/jeff.html (accessed May 15, 2013).

[9] Roger Feldman, Bryan Dowd, and Robert Coulam, “A Competitive Bidding Approach to Medicare Reform,” Preserving Medicare for Future Generations: Market-Based Approaches to Health Care Reform, The Robert Wood Johnson–American Enterprise Series (April 2013), p. 10.

[10] The Heritage Foundation was opposed to adding a universal prescription drug entitlement to Medicare, but has always favored a competitive system of private plans offering seniors drug coverage.

[11] In 2003, there were several Democratic proposals to have the government cap monthly premiums. See “Medicare Overhaul Continues in Congress,” Coalition on Human Needs, June 23, 2003, p. 3.

[12] Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2012 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds, April 23, 2012, p. 231.

[13] Sarah Kliff, “What a 76 Cent Premium Decrease Says About Medicare’s Future,” The Washington Post, August 9, 2011.

[14] News release, “Medicare Prescription Drug Premiums to Remain Steady for Third Straight Year,” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, August 6, 2012, http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/08/20120806b.html (accessed May 15, 2013).

[15] Jonathan D. Ketcham, Claudio Lucarelli, Eugenio J. Miravette, and M. Christopher Roebuck, “Sinking, Swimming, or Learning to Swim in Medicare Part D,” American Economic Review, Vol. 102 (October 2012), pp. 2639–2673. The researchers used data for the years 2006 and 2007.

[16] Ibid., p. 2642.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2004 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds, Table II.C18, http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/ReportsTrustFunds/Downloads/tr2004.pdf (accessed May 15, 2013), and 2012 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds, Table III.D3, http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/ReportsTrustFunds/Downloads/TR2012.pdf (accessed May 15, 2013).

[19] Marsha Gold, Gretchen Jacobson, Anthony Damico, and Tricia Neuman, “Medicare Advantage 2012 Data Spotlight: Enrollment Market Update,” The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Data Spotlight, June 2012, p. 1, http://kff.org/health-costs/report/medicare-advantage-2012-enrollment-market-update/ (accessed May 15, 2013).

[20] In fact, the average bid for all Medicare Advantage plans is 98 percent of the costs of traditional Medicare in the geographic bidding regions, and for HMOs the bids are 95 percent of those traditional Medicare costs. See James C. Capretta, “The Role of Medicare Fee-for-Service in Inefficient Health Care Delivery,” in Preserving Medicare for Future Generations: Market-Based Approaches to Reform, The Robert Wood Johnson- American Enterprise Series, (April 2013), p. 7.

[21] The law does not allow seniors to receive cash rebates for choosing plans that provide coverage below the Medicare benchmark payments.

[22] Most Medicare Advantage plans come under the Medicare payment benchmark, and are thus legally required to rebate 75 percent of the difference to enrollees in richer benefits or lower premiums. The remaining 25 percent is retained as savings to the federal government. See Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, “A Data Book: Health Care Spending and the Medicare Program,” 2012, p. 142.

[23] National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, “Impact of the Commission Premium Support Proposal on Different Types of Beneficiaries,” p. 1., http://medicare.commission.gov/medicare/impact.htm (accessed May 20, 2013).

[24] Letter from Dan Crippen, CBO director, to Senator John Breaux (D–LA), co-chair, National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, February 18, 1999, http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/10xx/doc1092/breaux.pdf (accessed May 13, 2013).

[25] Douglas W. Elmendorf, “CBO’s 2011 Long-Term Budget Outlook,” testimony before the Committee on the Budget, U.S. House of Representatives, June 23, 2011, http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/623elmendorftestimony.pdf (accessed May 13, 2013).

[26] A Medicare spending cap is no longer just a policy proposal; it is current law. As a policy matter, a Medicare spending cap has been embraced by the Obama Administration (a key feature of the PPACA) and congressional Republicans. In the case of centrist and conservative proponents of Medicare premium support, however, any such cap would function as a “backstop” to ensure savings that are guaranteed and thus measurable by the Congressional Budget Office. For conservatives and centrists, competition, not global Medicare budgets or price controls, is to be the mechanism to control cost and slow the growth in Medicare spending.

[27] Roger Feldman, Robert Coulam, and Bryan Dowd, “Competitive Bidding Can Help Solve Medicare’s Fiscal Crisis,” American Enterprise Institute Health Policy Outlook, February 2012, http://www.aei.org/files/2012/02/16/-competitive-bidding-can-help-solve-medicares-fiscal-crisis_081704430956.pdf (accessed May 13, 2013).

[28] Ibid.

[29] Zirui Song, David M. Cutler, and Michael E. Chernew, “Potential Effects of Reforming Medicare Into a Competitive Bidding System,” Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 308, No. 5 (August 1, 2012), http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1273025 (accessed April 15, 2013).

[30] James C. Capretta and Yuval Levin, “More Mediscare,” The Weekly Standard, August 20, 2012, http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/more-mediscare_649725.html (accessed May 15, 2013).

[31] National Economic and Domestic Policy Councils, “The President’s Plan to Modernize and Strengthen Medicare for the 21st Century,” detailed description, July 2, 1999, p. 8, http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/New/html/medicare.pdf (accessed April 15, 2013).

[32] For a description of the Medicare Advantage payment system and its flaws, as well as the program’s strengths in delivering high quality care, see Jeet S. Guram and Robert E. Moffit, “The Medicare Advantage Success Story—Looking Beyond the Cost Difference,” The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 366 (March 29, 2012), pp. 1177–1179, http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056NEJMp1114019?viewType=Print&viewClass=Print (accessed May 15, 2013).

[33] The Center for American Progress Health Policy Team, “The Senior Protection Plan,” November 2012, p. 6, http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SeniorProtectionPlan-3.pdf (accessed April 15, 2013). It is unclear whether a senior could choose a plan that bids above or below the benchmark under CAP’s proposal.

[34] Office of Management and Budget, “A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America’s Promise,” February 2009, p. 28, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-BUD/pdf/BUDGET-2010-BUD.pdf (accessed April 15, 2013).

[35] Obama for America, “Promises,” television ad, August 25, 2012, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b9XkVonSIxk (accessed May 13, 2013).

[36] For a more detailed discussion of this controversy, see Rea S. Hederman Jr., “Why Medicare Premium Support Would Not Cost Future Beneficiaries $6,400 More,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 3745, September 28, 2012, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/why-medicare-premium-support-would-not-cost-future-beneficiaries-$6400-more.

[37] Glenn Kessler, “Health Care’s $6,400 Question—Fast Fact Check,” The Washington Post, September 4, 2012, http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/health-cares-6400-question--fast-fact-check/2012/09/04/086b1046-f6d9-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_video.html (accessed October 19, 2012).

[38] Gretchen Jacobsin, Tricia Neuman, Anthony Damico, “Transforming Medicare into a Premium Support System: Implications for Beneficiary Premiums,” Kaiser Family Foundation, October 2012, http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/8373.pdf (accessed October 23, 2012).

[39] Joseph R. Antos, “The Problem with Kaiser’s Premium Support Study? Seniors are Smarter than That—and So Are Health Plans,” AEIdeas blog, October 15, 2012, http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/10/the-problem-with-kaisers-study-on-premium-support-seniors-are-smarter-than-that-and-so-are-health-plans/ (accessed May 15, 2013).

[40] Ketcham et al., “Sinking, Swimming, or Learning to Swim in Medicare Part D,” p. 2642.

[41] News release, “Feds Health Benefits Changes Save Taxpayers and Employees Nearly $2 billion,” U.S. Office of Personnel Management, October 17, 1983.

[42] U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Compensation Report: U.S. Civil Service Retirement System, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Program, Pay Programs, fiscal year 1983, p. 2, http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uiug.30112105073313#page/n2/mode/1up (accessed January 18, 2013).

[43] News release, “Feds Health Benefits Changes Save Taxpayers and Employees Nearly $2 billion.”

[44] U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Compensation Report: U.S. Civil Service Retirement System, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Program, Pay Programs, p. 55.

[45] Determined using a Consumer Price Index calculator: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

[46] For a comparative description of the leading Medicare premium support proposals, see Robert E. Moffit, “Saving the American Dream: Comparing Medicare Reform Plans,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2675, April 4, 2012, http://report.heritage.org/bg2675.

View the original article here

For health data, big isn't better

For health data, big isn't better - The Hill's Congress Blog @import "/plugins/content/jw_disqus/tmpl/css/template.css"; li.item435,li.item437,li.item439,li.item441,li.item443,li.item497,li.item499,li.item501,li.item503,li.item605,li.item689,li.item691,li.item693,li.item695,li.item697,li.item683,li.item685{display: none;} var _comscore = _comscore || []; _comscore.push({ c1: "2", c2: "10314615" }); (function() { var s = document.createElement("script"), el = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.async = true; s.src = (document.location.protocol == "https:" ? "https://sb" : "http://b") + ".scorecardresearch.com/beacon.js"; el.parentNode.insertBefore(s, el); })(); function getURLParameter(name) { return decodeURI( (RegExp(name + '=' + '(.+?)(&|$)').exec(location.search)||[,null])[1] );}(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=369058349794205"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); if (getURLParameter("set_fb_var") == '1') { jQuery.cookie('set_fb_var', 'true', { expires: 7, path: '/' }); return true; } if (!jQuery.cookie('set_fb_var') && d.referrer.match(/facebook.com/i)) { window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({ appId : '340094652706297', status: true, xfbml: true, cookie: true, oauth: true }); }; }}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));if((navigator.userAgent.match(/iPhone/i)) || (navigator.userAgent.match(/iPod/i))) {document.write('');}if(navigator.userAgent.match(/iPad/i)) {document.write('');}if(navigator.userAgent.match(/Android/i)) {document.write('');} Follow!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Advanced Search Options » Home/NewsSenateHouseAdministrationCampaignPollsBusiness & LobbyingSunday Talk ShowsCampaignBusiness & LobbyingK Street InsidersLobbying ContractsLobbying HiresLobbying RevenueOpinionColumnistsEditorialsLettersOp-EdWeyants WorldCapital LivingCover StoriesFood & DrinkNew Member of the Week20 QuestionsMy 5 Min. W/ObamaAnnouncementsMeet the LawmakerJobsVideoGossip: In The Know Briefing RoomRegWatchHillicon ValleyE2-WireFloor ActionOn The MoneyHealthwatchTransportationDEFCON HillGlobal AffairsCongressBallot BoxIn The KnowPunditsTwitter Room HomeSenateHouseAdministrationCampaignPollsBusiness & LobbyingSunday Talk ShowsBlogsBriefing RoomRegWatchHillicon ValleyE2-WireFloor ActionOn The MoneyHealthwatchTransportationDEFCON HillGlobal AffairsCongressBallot BoxIn The KnowPunditsTwitter RoomOpinionA.B. StoddardBrent BudowskyLanny DavisDavid HillCheri JacobusMark MellmanDick MorrisMarkos Moulitsas (Kos)Robin BronkEditorialsLettersOp-EdsJuan WilliamsJudd GreggChristian HeinzeKaren FinneyJohn FeeheryCapital LivingCover StoriesFood & DrinkAnnouncementsNew Member of the WeekMy 5 Min. W/ObamaAll Capital LivingVideoHillTubeEventsVideoClassifiedsJobsClassifiedsResourcesMobile SiteiPhoneAndroidiPadLawmaker RatingsWhite PapersOrder ReprintsLast 6 IssuesOutside LinksRSS FeedsContact UsAdvertiseReach UsSubmitting LettersSubmitting Op-edsSubscriptions   For health data, big isn't betterBy Deven McGraw, director, Health Privacy Project, Center for Democracy and Technology-02/27/13 05:15 PM ET Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");

Information technology is helping to transform the way healthcare is delivered and managed, just as it has transformed so much of our daily lives. But making use of sensitive personal data carries risks, and every step must be taken to ensure that individuals’ most intimate information is protected against security breaches and misuse.
 
That’s why we are concerned about the Obama administration’s proposal to have the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) create a new, central database of health insurance claims as part of its management of multi-state insurance plans under the new healthcare reform law.

Under the law, the multi-state plans are to supplement state-based insurance plans, with the goal of ensuring there is true competition in all markets. OPM, which currently administers the Federal Employees’ Health Benefits Program, will be the administrator of the multi-state plans.
 
In proposing rules for running these plans, the administration has said it intends to give OPM the same level of access to claims payment and enrollment data that the agency currently has over health claims for federal employees. Yet these are records of people who aren’t federal employees at all.  This capability to collect and store individuals’ health data in a centralized, government-run warehouse is unnecessary, and it creates needless privacy and security risks.
 
Right now, this information is collected by individual, private insurance companies as a routine function of administering benefits.  Ironically, keeping data at the source also helps safeguard it.  Unnecessarily duplicating sensitive data and storing it in one location increases the risk and severity of data breaches.  In essence, this central database would create a big, delicious target for hackers and other miscreants—who have to work much harder to access the information if it is stored in multiple locations. What’s more, the cost of creating and securing the database would be borne by federal taxpayers, instead of insurance companies that now pay this expense. 
 
It is critical that this information be available to OPM for analytics purposes described in the rule for exchange plans. But this can be done without introducing the risks of centralization.  The administration should instead use a distributed approach to accessing and analyzing this critical data. The data needed for analysis would be collected and stored by the private insurance companies; no personal data would be transmitted to the government.
Here’s how it would work: Multi-state insurance plans would provide OPM with access to the data in a secure environment, such as an edge server or cloud storage. The insurers would format the information in ways that OPM deems necessary, and the government would still be able to meet its analytic needs. Alternatively, the government could write appropriate code and share this with the insurance plans, which would then have to analyze the data in-house and provide the results to the government.
 
Government agencies already are using these types of approaches with success.  For example, the Food and Drug Administration is using a distributed approach to monitor the safety of products the agency regulates.  And the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) decided last year to use this approach for data needed to support other aspects of the new health reform law.
 
In the era of “big data,” and the opportunities it can provide for ground-breaking analysis, there’s always a temptation to create a big, new database. But that doesn’t mean there is a need for one.
 
To the contrary, individual privacy and data security are not well served when large repositories of data and copies of identifiable personal information are created unnecessarily.  This is especially true when the same information already is available on existing systems, and can be securely and appropriately accessed for analysis.
 
Using a decentralized approach to data storage makes everyone’s health records more secure and costs taxpayers less. These are two goals the Obama administration shares --and should honor-- by abandoning its proposal for an unneeded central database.

McGraw is the director, Health Privacy Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology.

Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=369058349794205"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); View Comments Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/285353-for-health-data-big-isnt-betterThe contents of this site are © 2013 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc. The Hill Archives: Senate | House | Administration | Campaign | Business & Lobbying | Capital Living | OpinionView News by Subject:
Defense & Homeland Security | Energy & Environment | Healthcare | Finance & Economy | Technology | Foreign Policy | Labor | Transportation & InfrastructureGO TO THE HILL HOME » More Videos »

Congress Blog
Most Popular StoriesMost ViewedPresident chooses tax tour over sequester solutionsThe Voting Rights Act: A continued march toward progressThe pro-rule of law argument against a 'drone court'Making immigration reform work for childrenKeeping our commitment to our veteransEmailedUS must bring STEM education up to par with overseas competitorsCampaign to Fix the Debt - a cause that enduresKerry goes to AnkaraMaking immigration reform work for childrenImmigration reform not to be rushed DiscussedMaking immigration reform work for childrenImmigration reform: Substance above rhetoric - Doing what is rightImmigration reform not to be rushed In your heart, you know Hagel is wrong for Pentagon jobProposed SHIELD law is nothing but a gift to infringersBlog Home »Most Viewed RSS Feed »  More Healthcare HeadlinesPharmacists want more drug benefit oversightA clinically meaningful approach to evaluating repeat medical imagingCBO's wake-up callMore Healthcare Headlines » Healthcare News RSS feed »  Congress Blog Topics Campaign » Cardoza's Corner » Civil Rights » Economy & Budget » Education » Energy & Environment » Foreign Policy » Healthcare » Homeland Security » Judicial » Labor » Lawmaker News » Politics » Presidential Campaign » Religious Rights » Technology » The Administration »Briefing RoomWoodward claims White House threatened himSupreme Court justices hint at striking Voting Rights Act provisionMichelle Obama praises lower childhood obesity rates in first stop of Let's Move! tour
More Briefing Room »Congress BlogAn amendment to put our fiscal house in orderFor health data, big isn't betterSequestration's impact on national defense
More Congress Blog »Pundits Blog5-year-olds victims of identity theftHas Speaker Boehner opened the door or is he just being cute?Why Sarah Palin? Why Ted Cruz?: 'Nationalists' and 'Federalists'
More Pundits Blog »Twitter RoomRubio, Netanyahu poke fun at water bottle gaffeRep. Polis discusses pot, drug laws on RedditHouse Republican caucus launches Spanish-language Twitter feed
More Twitter Room »Hillicon ValleyOVERNIGHT TECH: House to consider email privacy billRepublicans blast 'wasteful' Internet stimulus programHollywood to launch media education campaign after Newtown criticism
More Hillicon Valley »E2-Wire (Energy)Sen. Murkowski maintains hold threat for Interior nomineeOVERNIGHT ENERGY: European climate chief, nuke waste officials in focusAide distances White House from Keystone pipeline decision
More E2-Wire (Energy) »Ballot BoxBloomberg, buoyed by primary win, eager for 2014 fight vs. NRA on gunsSteve King in no rush on Senate decisionPoll: Roberts, though unknown, well-poised for reelection
More Ballot Box »On The MoneyKey House conservatives say they can support measure to fund governmentKennedy in line for US envoy to JapanStudy: Wealth gap between white, black families growing
More On The Money »HealthwatchOVERNIGHT HEALTH: Four in 10 say health law covers the undocumentedHealth groups urge Supreme Court to axe DOMAAdvocate says FDA mission 'at risk' from lack of funds
More Healthwatch »Floor ActionMcConnell introduces GOP alternative to sequester cutsSenate passes bill to strengthen emergency preparednessHouse Dem: LaPierre has 'lost all sense of reality' on gun control
More Floor Action »TransportationAirline lobby: Air travel should not be 'political football'PolitiFact rates sequester air travel delay warnings 'mostly true'TSA chief: Sequester would impact airport security most during summer
More Transportation »DEFCON HillOVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Sequestration creeps closer DOD intelligence chiefs sounds alarm on sequester Boehner to suspend military flights for congressional trips
More DEFCON Hill »Global AffairsSen. Rubio: Time to provide ammunition to Syrian oppositionDem prepares bill to arm Syrian oppositionWhite House denies Brennan played major role in Benghazi talking points
More Global Affairs »In The KnowYoungest House member: It feels good to get cardedWrestler challenges 'The Barack' to get in the ringRosa Parks statue dedicated at Capitol
More In The Know »RegWatchChamber study claims to debunk EPA figures on job-creating regulationsReport: Obama falling short on executive appointmentsTemporary visa program for illegal immigrants begins
More RegWatch » Blogs News FeedCongress Blog RollCapital GamesDaily KosDCCCDNCDrudge ReportDSCCJudicial WatchNRCCNRSCPolitical AnimalRNCThe ChamberPostThe CornerThe Huffington PostThe NoteThe Plank COLUMNISTSLanny DavisObama’s path for Mideast Dick MorrisSequester: A secret planMore Columnists »

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.

Home/NewsNews by SubjectBlogsBusiness & LobbyingOpinionCapital LivingSpecial ReportsJobsVideo Home | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Contact | Advertise | RSS | Subscriptions

The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006 | 202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

The contents of this site are © 2013 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.

View the original article here

US must do better in preparing professionals to help fight cyber attacks

By James Gabberty, professor of information systems, Pace University, New York City - 02/15/13 04:00 PM ET

While dozens of U.S. banks are in the midst of reviewing their information security policies after falling victim to recent successful network intrusions resulting from cyber-attacks, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and even Twitter have joined the ranks of other high-value companies to have been targeted by hackers, most notably from China and Iran. It should come as no surprise to anyone following U.S. Internet vulnerabilities that China has been named as principal culprit behind a massive, sustained cyber-espionage campaign that threatens the nation’s economic competitiveness, according to a report released today by The National Intelligence Estimate.

While U.S. officials debate over what new measures, if any, to put in place to protect our economic interests, firms - both public and private – should consider what they can do to thwart these attacks from re-occurring, or to at least minimize the collective threat they pose to American business.

The plain and simple truth of the matter is that qualified information security practitioners are few and in high demand, especially as current and planned regulatory initiatives such as Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank further constraining their availability.

Even from the perspective of the U.S. military, information security workers represent much more than basic levers of economic growth - they are a crucial component of the nascent effort to defend the nation’s information assets and our digital infrastructure. And we are losing the battle.

Given the mutual dependency of our economic and military infrastructure on the continuous availability and flow of confidential and high integrity data, one solution to solving the perpetual network probes and vulnerability scanning challenging U.S. companies is to retrain IT workers in the short term until long-term measures are put in place to protect our information infrastructure. But how can this be accomplished? After all, it takes years of technical training to produce computer and network programmers that can assist in combatting attacks from abroad. This may be true, but it is not the only way to protect U.S. economic interests.

One proven method is to train current IT workers by the thousands with the right mix of technical and managerial know-how that can be achieved in months, not years. Fortunately, the kind of training that these workers need already exists and is available through specialized training and professional credentialing agencies that specialize in information security, strategy and governance. 

While the majority of network breaches are caused by social engineering – that is, leveraging the end user as an attack vector though which unauthorized access is gained to sensitive computing assets such as communication and database servers – some other protective measures are available now and should be implemented immediately to effectively curb future exploits that can threaten even the most protected computer enclaves.

Although social engineering points to a failure at the top of the organization to link information security with corporate strategy (as well as a lack of end user training that could effectuate a first line of defense against would-be attackers), more frequent reviews of corporate strategies needs to be done, with special attention paid to ensuring that the firm’s information security strategies are aligned with business strategies.

Furthermore, sensible sharing of current attack vectors used by untrustworthy state actors from abroad against our economic assets, as witnessed by our intelligence community, needs to take place. All too often, many U.S. businesses are simply unaware as to how to best keep their firms from falling victim to common methods used by foreign actors to steal sensitive intellectual property. Less than one year ago, for example, Dupont scientist Tse Chao pleaded guilty in federal court to stealing the color white, or more specifically, the secret recipe for the firm’s Titanium Dioxide that is used to make products white, as in paint, toothpaste, and even Oreo cookie filling! You can be sure that Dupont has revised its security strategy, but what are other firms, especially those that have not yet been victimized, doing to forestall becoming victims themselves?

Infected USB drives, for example, sprinkled in corporate parking lots and commuter trains floors is a common attack methodology used by adversaries to gain access to computer networks with miniscule effort, since the workers themselves are culpable of spotting them, picking them up, and inserting them into their computers when they arrive at work. How many of us have ‘gotten the memo’ about this simple attack technique? If nothing else, security awareness training for all computer users both inside and outside the firm is absolutely necessary and can help stop nefarious activities from succeeding.

Computer worms and scripted malware, on the other hand, don’t necessarily involve human interaction and often rely on that leveraging previously reconnoitered network servers that are misconfigured or run outdated operating systems, or even unstable software that is vulnerable to getting inside corporate networks. Locating IP addresses (the addressing scheme the Internet uses to relay information) of misconfigured devices is a trivial task, since one can simply search online search to learn how to perform ‘penetration testing’ , and since most laptop and tablet users don’t know how to configure their devices and user accounts properly before plugging into the Internet, it becomes even easier to hack into systems. Perhaps more worrisome is the trend of smartphones that connect to corporate servers; these devices have paltry security features and are increasingly being used as a gateway to internal networks by hackers. Phone hacking, as famous Hollywood types have become aware, is commonplace. [hint: turn off Bluetooth unless you are using it!]

The path to train the kind of IT worker that is urgently needed today is not found in traditional academic degree programs, but instead is found in the professional credentialing agencies that specialize in identifying and developing solutions against the kinds of attacks we are witnessing daily. Of course, the traditional academic programs of study are necessary to provide deeper insight into the IT function, but the quicker path to securing America’s national economic interests is through professional information security training and credentialing associations.

Although there are literally hundreds of information security certification programs available, several in particular provide the kind of critical training that can transform interested students into ‘cyber warriors’ to stave off most of the attacks coming out of Asia. A good idea is to spend some time reviewing which certifications are in high demand (easily obtained through trade magazines) and determining which for-profit agencies offer the biggest return on training dollar. The overall objective here, of course, is to bring about a highly skilled IT workforce that possessed, for example, a thorough understanding of proper incident handling techniques so when breaches do occur, they can quickly be identified, contained, and eradicated, not to mention the payoff that firms acquire when reviewing recent unsuccessful hacking attempts and adjusting the firm’s overall security strategy. 

Furthermore, insight into common attack methods, malware analysis capabilities, network defense-in-depth techniques, and sound information security governance and policy frameworks that can boost the defensive postures of all firms and is also a necessary component of responding to the threats from network-based attacks. We simply cannot wait for a reversal in declining enrollment trends in the computing sciences to turn the tide against IT-leveraged international corporate espionage and should be doing everything we possibly can to keep our secrets protected.

While no one doubts that corporate information security policy starts at the top, the NIEs report makes it abundantly clear that current information security policies are proving ineffective. Too much trust is placed on lower-level technicians to ward off attacks on the firm. To stay ahead of so-called ‘script kiddies’ trying to hack into a company’s network is one thing, to keep away nation states hell bent on gaining access is another. This fact, coupled with the relatively miniscule amount of proven cyber warriors available today ultimately limits the ability of most firms to simply keep up with the ever-morphing catalog of millions of computer worms and viruses that grow by the thousands each day, hence the call for more certified IT security practitioners.

To protect against the potential devastation that the nefarious activities by hackers everywhere pose to all of us, it is vital stay in lockstep with the protocols being used by the most sophisticated malware purposefully designed to evade the most cleverly configured intrusion prevention & intrusion detection systems currently used throughout U.S. companies, but we are falling short. The ugly truth is that the bad guys, whoever they are, are outperforming our ability to defend our vital infrastructure and this is one race that our society cannot afford to lose.

The threats that loom over our digital infrastructure will undoubtedly multiply, causing risk to increase to untenable levels, the levels that are often associated with calamitous security breaches. So, at least for the foreseeable future, professional certifications will help to stem the tide of ever-mounting encroachment attempts, at least until academia eventually figures out a way to speed up its sometimes outmoded approach to teaching practical ways to stay abreast of a changing technological landscape.

Gabberty is a professor of information systems at Pace University in New York City and teaches graduate-level courses in systems analysis & design, telecommunications and information security. He is an alumnus of MIT and NYU’s Polytechnic Institute and has served as an expert witness in telecommunication and information security at the federal and state levels.

View Comments

View the original article here

How House Democrats Plan To Use Local Power To Stop Gun Violence – And How To Do It Better

On Thursday afternoon, the House Democratic Gun Violence Prevention Task Force released a framework document laying out fifteen proposals for gun violence prevention legislation. It’s a good document, reaching beyond the mainstay proposals like an assault weapon bans to less heralded, but equally important issues like restrictions on the federal government’s ability to help state and local police track local guns. But the most unique proposals in the framework are also some of the ones most in need of improvement: its recommendations for supporting local efforts against gun violence.

Other recent gun violence proposals (like those from President Obama and Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]) have focused primarily on increased direct federal legislation. The Task Force proposal also contains significant federal proposals, but amps up the focus on how the federal government can support innovative state and local initiatives to reduce gun violence. It’s a smart approach — NRA-sponsored legislation limits both local ability to regulate guns and efforts to research their effects, but what evidence we have suggests state and local efforts really can make a dent in gun violence. A study of 54 cities, for example, found that ones with tighter and better enforced gun laws substantially reduced the diversion of guns to criminals.

The Task Force’s approach to local enforcement involves highlighting smart local initiatives and supporting them. For example:

1. Comprehensive, public health youth gun violence initiatives. The Task Force rejects “tough on crime” approaches to youth violence that involve the mass incarceration of kids in favor of “comprehensive, evidence-based prevention and intervention programs directed toward at-risk youth” created by “representatives from local law enforcement, schools, court services, social services, health and mental health services, businesses, and other community organizations.” This appears to be a reference to the “public health” gun violence reduction approach enacted in, among other places, Boston and Minneapolis, which has saved hundreds of lives that might have been claimed by gunfire.

2. Criminal firearm disposal. “Over time, gun owners may lose their eligibility to possess a weapon under state or federal law, often because of criminal activity or mental health issues. Innovative programs designed to facilitate the disposal of firearms held by prohibited persons can prevent gun violence,” the Task Force notes. It goes on to suggest that “the federal government should encourage states to create and utilize programs that allow local law enforcement to assist gun owners who do not have the legal capacity to own them, in the sale or transfer of their illegal firearms.”

3. Community-level gun reduction. The Task Force recommends that “Congress should take measures to encourage state and local governments to use federal funds” to support “various strategies to better engage local communities in removing illegal or unused guns from their neighborhoods, such as illegal gun tip hotlines and voluntary gun buyback programs administered by municipalities or local law enforcement.” This sort of clarity (it even goes on to name specific federal funds that could be used for this purpose) could improve the Task Force’s other suggestions for local law enforcement.

Unfortunately, not all of these proposals for improved local gun action are accompanied by proposals for how the federal government can actually accomplish those ends ends. While the second of the above suggestions does, neither the first nor the third clarifies how, exactly, it plans to use federal law to encourage states, cities, and counties to adopt the outlined approach. Expressing support in the abstract is nice, but absent some kind of federal program providing financial or some other sort of assistance to locales, it’s won’t do very much.

Lack of concrete action for its local support plans isn’t the only problem in the recommendations — for example, its section on “increased prosecutions of persons who violate federal firearms law” focuses more on gun purchasers rather than the real problem, crooked gun dealers willing to sell to criminals. But overall, the proposals are excellent steps in the right direction.

View the original article here

Rep. Van Hollen: Better than '50-50 chance' of deal before midnight

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) estimates there's a better than even chance that Congress will find a "fiscal cliff" agreement just ahead of the midnight deadline on Monday.

"I think there is some good news. I mean the conversations continued late into the night. I think now there's a better than 50-50 chance that we will avoid the fiscal cliff by midnight tonight," Van Hollen, the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Monday morning on CNN's "Starting Point."

But the window for legislators to prevent the looming spending cuts and tax-rate increases is closing fast.

On Sunday, the parties raced to finalize a deal, as Republicans dropped a demand to reduce Social Security benefits and Democrats showed flexibility on tax rates. But both sides are still split on the estate tax and how to pay for offsetting the sequester.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Vice President Biden continued negotiations late into the night, according to the senator’s office.

Like Van Hollen, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) made a similar prediction on Sunday saying that chances are "a little higher" than 50-50 that legislators would reach a deal. 

View Comments

View the original article here

Schumer: Better than even odds Congress reaches fiscal deal

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) suggested that odds are better than even that legislators will come to a last-minute agreement to prevent "fiscal cliff" spending cuts and tax rate increases.

Schumer, speaking Sunday on ABC's "This Week," said that while legislators have not yet announced a compromise, a deal could still come just before the year-end deadline. 

"I've been a legislator for 37 years, and I've watched how these things work. On these big, big agreements, they almost always happen at the last minute," Schumer said. "Neither side likes to give up its position.  They eyeball each other until the very end.  But then, each side, realizing that the alternative is worse, comes to an agreement.  So while an agreement is hardly a certainty, I certainly wouldn't rule it out at this last minute.

Schumer said the odds seemed "a little higher" than 50-50. 

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), also a guest Sunday on This Week, said he didn't disagree with Schumer's assessment.

"I also would say that the way you opened the program does not under- or overstate the consequences," Kyl said. "If we are not able to reach an agreement, it will be dire.  And that's from everybody, from the Congressional Budget Office, which is nonpartisan, as you know, to the Fed chairman, probably at least another million jobs lost, an unemployment rate over 9 percent, and putting us back into recession.  So responsible people on both sides of the aisle do need to try to come together, and there is a significant effort underway right now."

Schumer and Kyl's comments come as Senate leaders continued negotiations this weekend on a deal to avoid the tax rate increases and spending cuts taking effect in January. Reports suggested that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) were focusing on a plan to prevent rising taxes on most families.

Schumer said that one reason for optimism is that both Democrats and Republicans want to extend the Bush-era tax rates for income up to $250,000 a year. Republicans, though want to raise the rates for income-earners above that cut-off, while President Obama and Democrats insist that the wealthy pay more in taxes.

"Nobody wants to raise taxes on people below $250,000," Schumer said. "And that will be the impetus and why both of us have some degree of optimism that we can avoid this fiscal cliff in the next 24 hours."

View Comments

View the original article here