Medical debt could vanish from credit reports. What to do now

posted in: News | 0

By Lauren Schwahn | NerdWallet

The burden of medical debt may soon become much lighter for millions of Americans.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed a rule Tuesday that aims to remove medical bills from credit reports and prevent credit reporting agencies from sharing medical debt information with lenders. The rule would also forbid lenders from basing their lending decisions on medical information.

The proposal isn’t expected to be finalized until early 2025, and it could face challenges. Here’s what to watch out for and what you can do now to protect your credit.

Why this matters

“Medical bills on credit reports too often are inaccurate and have little to no predictive value when it comes to repaying other loans,” CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said in a press release Tuesday.

New safeguards could prevent medical debt from blocking consumers’ access to loans such as mortgages and could elevate credit scores.

Americans who have medical debt on their credit reports may see a 20-point bump in their credit scores on average, the CFPB says.

Beyond its effects on credit, the rule would provide protections that could impact consumers’ health and safety: It would prevent lenders from taking medical devices, such as wheelchairs, as collateral for loans or repossessing medical devices if a loan isn’t repaid.

How does this proposal differ from recent changes to medical debt reporting?

Currently, paid medical bills don’t appear on credit reports or affect credit scores. In April 2023, unpaid medical bills with a starting balance of less than $500 were removed from reports.

Also, as of July 2022, paid medical collections were erased from credit reports, and they are no longer reported by the three major credit bureaus — Equifax, Experian and TransUnion.

Despite the changes, a CFPB report found that more than 15 million Americans still had medical collections on their credit reports as of June 2023. People living in the South and low-income communities were disproportionately affected.

The new proposal would remove all medical bills from credit reports, including unpaid bills of any amount.

Would this rule apply retroactively?

Yes. If finalized, the rule would remove existing medical collections from credit reports and prevent credit reporting companies from sending medical information to lenders going forward.

Will there be exceptions to the rule?

The CFPB says there will be “very limited circumstances” where medical information could still be used in credit decisions, such as where disability income needs to be taken into account for loan consideration or to determine if someone is eligible for medical forbearance.

What to look out for next

The CFPB is accepting comments on the proposal through Aug. 12. The timeline will become clearer once feedback is addressed, but the rule is expected to be finalized early next year, a CFPB official said on Tuesday’s press call.

The 2024 election could also influence the fate of the proposal as well as similar consumer credit protections. A Biden administration fact sheet issued Tuesday cites a recent budget proposal from the Republican Study Committee that calls for defunding the CFPB.

What you can do now

Use AnnualCreditReport.com to check your credit reports for free. Make sure any medical debt information that appears is accurate and in line with the current reporting rules. Unpaid medical collections with an initial balance under $500 shouldn’t be on your reports and neither should paid collections.

If you spot an issue, dispute the error with the credit bureaus right away. Regardless of whether the CFPB’s proposal is finalized, it won’t forgive medical debt or stop medical debt from going to collections. Make a plan to deal with any medical debt you may have. Review your budget and seek help if needed. Your medical provider may be willing to work out a payment plan to help you better manage the bill.

Lauren Schwahn writes for NerdWallet. Email: lschwahn@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @lauren_schwahn.

New Brighton: 2 women die after house fire

posted in: News | 0

Two women died after a New Brighton house fire, officials said Thursday.

Neighbors called 911 just after 2 a.m. Wednesday to report smoke and flames coming from a home in the 1500 block of 21st Avenue Northwest, according to the New Brighton Department of Public Safety.

New Brighton firefighters pulled Diana Davies, 78, and Maya Davies, 37, from the home. First responders provided care to the women and Allina Health Emergency Medical Service took both to HCMC.

The cause of the fire remains under investigation, though preliminary information indicates it started accidentally, according to New Brighton Fire Marshal Kip LaMotte. The home didn’t have working smoke alarms.

“Smoke alarms save lives — but only if they are properly maintained,” LaMotte said in a statement. “Working smoke alarms give you the critical seconds you need to escape a fire.”

Authorities are reminding people to test smoke alarms monthly and change batteries at least once a year.

Related Articles

Crime & Public Safety |


Clergy abuse victim group says 5 credibly accused priests are missing from Twin Cities archdiocese public list

Crime & Public Safety |


Minneapolis police officer killed while responding to a shooting call is remembered as a hero

Crime & Public Safety |


Body of missing Hopkins boy found in Minnehaha Creek

Crime & Public Safety |


Three Minnesotans killed in crash while attending family reunion in Kansas

Crime & Public Safety |


Soucheray: A tough job to do when too many in the political class are against you

Hollywood’s A-listers are lining up behind Joe Biden. Will their support matter in November?

posted in: News | 0

By WILL WEISSERT (Associated Press)

WASHINGTON (AP) — When Robert De Niro showed up outside a Manhattan courthouse to decry Donald Trump as his New York hush money trial was winding down, it sparked a life-imitates-art screaming match with a nearby group of the former president’s supporters.

“You are gangsters!” De Niro, who starred in “Goodfellas” and won an Oscar for “The Godfather Part II,” shouted at the Trump backers, who responded with obscenities.

There are plenty more Hollywood storylines still to come in the 2024 campaign: Celebrities are increasingly lending their star power to President Joe Biden, hoping to energize their fans to vote for him in November and to entice donors to pony up for his reelection effort.

On Saturday, A-listers George Clooney and Julia Roberts will team up with former President Barack Obama at a Biden fundraiser in Los Angeles, where the three will be interviewed by late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel. Roberts and Kimmel have already begun soliciting donations via text for Biden, who is skipping a weekend peace conference on Ukraine being held in Switzerland to attend the event.

Director Steven Spielberg is involved in storytelling efforts for the Democratic National Convention in August. Lenny Kravitz, Barbra Streisand and James Taylor have all performed for Biden donors.

Others who’ve sent fundraising emails, organized events or otherwise lent their support include Connie Britton of “The White Lotus” fame, singer-songwriter Carole King, “Bridgerton” creator Shonda Rhimes, singer Christina Aguilera, “The Equalizer” actress Queen Latifah and “Star Wars” actor Mark Hamill, who turned up in the White House briefing room last month to personally praise the president.

And, in another instance blurring lines between real life and make-believe, during a fundraiser at the home of veteran actor Michael Douglas, Biden, the actual president, congratulated the star of the 1996 hit “The American President” on his fictional administration’s success.

Ballot box star power?

For all the celebrity supporters, though, there’s little expectation they can determine votes. Rather, they are seen as having the ability to inject excitement that helps energize supporters.

Lexi Underwood, whose credits include the streaming series “Little Fires Everywhere,” calls acting a “contact sport” that allows her to interact with the public and makes her determined to use her influence responsibly. She has participated in a recent virtual ”Students for Biden” event and traveled to Nevada to appear at campaign events focused on women’s health issues.

“I’m very fortunate to have certain eyes on me,” said Underwood, 20. “I feel really responsible to make sure that what I put out there, either people are being informed on things that they weren’t previously informed on, or that I’m motivating them to get out there and vote.”

Biden’s campaign says its chief focus is finding authentic and trusted messengers who can promote the president’s policy achievements and raise the alarm about GOP “extremism,” and that means deploying everyday supporters as well as famous ones. It has produced ads featuring a Pennsylvania union worker, a Black entrepreneur in Detroit and women adversely affected by strict abortion limits in Texas.

Fai Nelson, a human resources worker who attended a recent Vice President Kamala Harris event in Prince George’s County, Maryland, said celebrity voices can make a difference “if they can touch the audience.”

“It’s whether the message is relevant,” said Nelson, 42.

Lessons from last time

During the pandemic-era campaign of 2020, Biden’s campaign featured celebrities in scores of virtual events that showed the importance of staying flexible so that stars can present themselves in the most authentic ways.

Adrienne Elrod, who served as Biden’s 2020 director of surrogate strategy and operations, said famous Biden supporters often “will come forward with their own ideas” on how to help the campaign and what issues they’d like to focus on.

“We’ll oftentimes have ideas for them as well,” she said. “That’s why there’s always a very productive working relationship when we’re engaging these folks.”

De Niro has taken on an increasingly prominent role in Biden’s campaign. Before his confrontation with the Trump supporters, the actor held a press conference calling the former president a “clown.” He’s also attended Biden fundraisers and narrated a campaign ad accusing Trump of having “snapped” after he lost the 2020 election.

Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for the former president’s campaign, said, “The only people in America who support Joe Biden’s failing campaign are elitist Hollywood celebrities,” adding that Trump “speaks for the forgotten men and women of this country.”

Trump has his own list of celebrity endorsers, which includes musicians Kid Rock and Ted Nugent, UFC CEO Dana White, media personality Caitlyn Jenner and actors Dennis Quaid and Jon Voight, as well as comedian Roseanne Barr.

Related Articles

National Politics |


Downplaying AI’s existential risks is a fatal error, some say

National Politics |


Police group to push for new gun laws as crime hangs over campaign

National Politics |


At Nixon Library, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. advocates for scaling back America’s military presence

National Politics |


Trump returns to Capitol Hill and whips up Republican lawmakers in first meeting since Jan. 6 attack

National Politics |


Biden plan to brand Trump a felon is hobbled by son’s conviction

Elrod said other stars are anxious to follow De Niro’s lead for Biden but are waiting “until the moment can truly be maximized” before they get involved. She pointed to 2020, when Bruce Springsteen narrated a Biden ad featuring his song “My Hometown” just before the election.

“I think you’ll see more moments like this, when we’re using those voices strategically and effectively at the time that makes the most sense for us on the campaign,” said Elrod, who is a Biden campaign spokesperson this cycle.

David Schmid, an English professor at the University of Buffalo who studies popular culture, said celebrities can influence fans’ aspirations and what they consume. But their influence “over peoples’ voting habits has been really exaggerated,” he said.

That’s the case for Alex Dillion, a rising sophomore at American University in Washington who also attended the Harris event in Maryland. Asked which famous person might influence him politically, Dillion offered, “Maybe Obama.”

Taylor Swift Effect?

Schmid said one celebrity with outsized political influence might be Taylor Swift, who sent shockwaves even through the NFL last season. She endorsed Biden in 2020 and is being openly courted by the campaign this time on social media, and even in a press release that saluted her latest album.

Her touch isn’t a guarantee of victory, though. In 2018, Swift endorsed two Democratic candidates in Tennessee who lost. And Schmid said that even someone as famous as Swift “knows things are polarizing and they don’t want to take major risks” on candidates and contentious issues.

For all the Biden team’s work with celebrities, the president still tries to cultivate the image of someone in tune with ordinary people.

During a campaign swing through Saginaw, Michigan, the president visited a public golf course and met with community activist Coleman Hurley III and his son.

“The celebrities that have everything they want and they need, they may possibly be out of touch,” the older Hurley said later in a phone interview.

As for ordinary Americans, Hurley added, Biden needs to be able to “relate and see where they live … and then have a conversation about some of the different struggles or issues that we, or other Americans, face.”

Downplaying AI’s existential risks is a fatal error, some say

posted in: Politics | 0

Gopal Ratnam | (TNS) CQ-Roll Call

WASHINGTON — A handful of lawmakers say they plan to press the issue of the threat to humans posed by generative artificial intelligence after a recent bipartisan Senate report largely sidestepped the matter.

“There’s been no action taken yet, no regulatory action taken yet, at least here in the United States, that would restrict the types of actions that could lead to existential, or health, or other serious consequences,” Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said in an interview. “And that’s something we’d like to see happen.”

Romney joined Sens. Jack Reed, D-R.I., Jerry Moran, R-Kan., and Angus King, I-Maine, in April to propose a framework that would establish federal oversight of so-called frontier AI models to guard against biological, chemical, cyber and nuclear threats.

Frontier AI models include ChatGPT by OpenAI, Claude 3 by Anthropic PBC and Gemini Ultra by Google LLC, which are capable of generating human-like responses when prompted, based on training with vast quantities of data.

The lawmakers said in a document explaining their proposal that it calls for a federal agency or coordinating body that would enforce new safeguards, “which would apply to only the very largest and most advanced models.”

“Such safeguards would be reevaluated on a recurring basis to anticipate evolving threat landscapes and technology,” they said.

AI systems’ potential threats were highlighted by a group of scientists, tech industry executives and academics in a May 2023 open letter advising that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.” The signatories included top executives from OpenAI, Microsoft Corp., Google, Anthropic and others.

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., who holds a computer science degree and was one of the signatories of that letter, said he remains concerned about the existential risks.

He said that he and Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., sought to address one aspect in the fiscal 2025 defense policy bill advanced by the House Armed Services Committee last month. The provision would require a human to be in the loop on any decision involving the launch of a nuclear weapon, to prevent autonomous AI systems from causing World War III.

Lieu, co-chair of the bipartisan House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence, said in an interview that he and others have tried to address further risks. But he and his colleagues are still trying to grasp the depths of these perils, such as AI spitting out instructions to build a better chemical or a biological weapon.

“That is an issue we’re looking at now,” Lieu said. “How you want to prevent that is a whole different sort of issue that can get very complicated, so we’re still gathering data and trying to explore.”

There are several proposals to control and supervise advanced AI systems, though none have been fast-tracked in Congress.

In August 2023, Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Josh Hawley, R-Mo., proposed a licensing regime for advanced AI models that would be managed by a federal agency. Companies developing such AI models would be required to register with the agency, which would have authority to audit the models and issue licenses.

Policymaking pace

Experts studying technology and policy say that Congress and federal agencies should act before tech companies turn out AI systems with even more advanced capabilities.

“Policymakers should begin to put in place today a regulatory framework to prepare for this future,” when highly capable systems are widely available around the world, Paul Scharre, executive vice president at the Center for a New American Security, wrote in a recent report. “Building an anticipatory regulatory framework is essential because of the disconnect in speeds between AI progress and the policymaking process, the difficulty in predicting the capabilities of new AI systems for specific tasks, and the speed with which AI models proliferate today, absent regulation.

“Waiting to regulate frontier AI systems until concrete harms materialize will almost certainly result in regulation being too late,” said Scharre, a former Pentagon official who helped prepare the Defense Department’s policies on the use of autonomous weapons systems.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., who led a monthslong effort of briefings with dozens of tech industry executives, civil society groups and experts, last month issued a bipartisan policy road map on AI legislation.

The road map and associated material mentioned existential risks just once — it noted some participants in one briefing were “quite concerned about the possibilities for AI systems to cause severe harm,” while others were more optimistic.

The report directed various congressional committees to address legislation on AI through their normal legislative processes.

One reason the risks may be downplayed is that some in the tech industry say fears of existential risks from AI are overblown.

IBM, for example, has urged lawmakers to stay away from licensing and federal oversight for advanced AI systems.

Chris Padilla, IBM’s vice president for government and regulatory affairs, last week recounted for reporters the stance of Chief Privacy and Trust Officer Christina Montgomery, who told participants at a Schumer briefing that she didn’t think AI is an existential risk to humanity and that the U.S. doesn’t need a government licensing regime.

IBM has advocated an open-source approach, which would allow experts and developers around the world to see how AI models are designed and built and what data is ingested by them, Padilla said.

A large community of AI developers peering into algorithms that power the AI systems can potentially identify dangers and threats better than a single company scrutinizing its own product, Padilla said. That approach differs widely, however, from OpenAI and Microsoft, which uses OpenAI’s models, that are advocating proprietary AI systems that are not subject to public scrutiny.

Padilla and Daniela Combe, vice president for emerging technologies at IBM, compared the company’s open-source approach to the widespread use of Linux operating system that runs on IBM’s mainframe computers. Microsoft declined to comment on the idea.

Instead of licensing and regulatory oversight of AI models, the government should hold developers and users of AI systems legally liable for harms they cause, Padilla said. “The main way that our CEO suggested this happen is through legal liability, basically, through the courts,” he said.

Padilla spoke to reporters before as many as 100 IBM executives traveled last week to Washington to meet with lawmakers on AI legislation. IBM and its subsidiaries spent $5.6 million lobbying Congress last year on a variety of issues that included AI, according to data from OpenSecrets.org.

The issue isn’t likely to be resolved soon, as Padilla and others say legislation this year is doubtful.

At least one key lawmaker agreed. Asked whether his AI proposal is likely to turn into legislation and pass this year, Romney said it may not.

“It’s unlikely this year because we move as slow as molasses,” he said. “Particularly in an election year.”

___

©2024 CQ-Roll Call, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Visit cqrollcall.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.