Commissioner says privacy report wrong:
0 Comments | Charleston Daily Mail, Jul 12, 2010 | by JARED HUNT
The Commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Corrections says a report naming West Virginia as one of eight states that give prisoners access to citizens’ private information is wrong.
The March report compiled by the Social Security Administration lists West Virginia, along with Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Tennessee, as a state that runs programs allowing prison inmates to have access to personal data, including Social Security numbers.
Articles written this month in issues of both USA Today and Parade magazines referenced the report. They said that prisoners working data processing jobs – such as data entry, digital imaging or records conversion duties that involve health records, wage statements and government forms – at correctional facilities would be privy to such information in the states named.
“That is absolutely not true and won’t occur,” Division of Corrections Commissioner Jim Rubenstein said. “The West Virginia DOC does not have that, hasn’t had that, and will never have that.”
Rubenstein said the broad questioning the Social Security Administration used in 2006 when originally collecting data for the report led to the misunderstanding.
The question was posed as, “Would there ever be a way an inmate within the Division of Corrections would have access to that kind of info or access to a Social Security number?”
The department had to answer “yes” to that question because there could be instances in which an inmate who obtains private employment through a work release program might be able to view such data, specifically if a private employer were to allow them, Rubenstein said.
“It would depend on if the inmate is out seeking employment and depend on the employer and what they have the inmate doing.”
He noted, however, that few work release inmates get jobs that involve data processing.
“The majority of our inmates work in the fast-food industry and restaurants where we are able to provide help and a steady work force,” Rubenstein said.
“When we responded in 2006 it was asked very broadly and answered very broadly; the articles framed it as if DOC would have inmates at computers,” he said. “If they would have narrowed it down saying, ‘Do you have anything in your facilities where inmates have access to computers and that kind of information,’ the bottom line answer would be no.”
Rubenstein said he contacted the Social Security Administration after the report was issued. The information was corrected, but the news articles quoted the initial data.
The corrections division is drafting a formal policy elaborating on the department’s stance to ban prisoners from having access to private data. Rubenstein said that policy should be finished and in place by August.
“I understand the concerns of citizens and folks,” Rubenstein said, “but I want folks to know that that really isn’t in place with the DOC
data entry jobs