#Login Register


  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
Home 


Buried In the Healthcare.gov Source: "No Expectation of Privacy"
10-15-2013, 06:04 PM #1
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,280 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.
After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually ğkking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

wonder.gif
10-15-2013, 06:08 PM #2
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,607 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
oh man. I didn't think this clusterfuck could get much worse.

damned.gif
10-15-2013, 06:20 PM #3
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,280 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
If you give exceptions to POTUS and congress the law will remain all kinds of fekked up, and will collapse on it's own as young people WILL NOT ENROLL. Jesus, this is simple fact and the goddamn elephant in the living room that Obomba and Kathleen Sebelius have ignored.

İmage

İmage

İmage

wonder.gif
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
10-15-2013, 06:56 PM #4
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
The truth hurts, but the truth will kill this.
10-15-2013, 07:30 PM #5
KILLUMINATI Made Ya Look!!
Posts:4,764 Threads:1,046 Joined:Jun 2012
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.
After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

I had to post this at LoP so you know
10-15-2013, 07:44 PM #6
KILLUMINATI Made Ya Look!!
Posts:4,764 Threads:1,046 Joined:Jun 2012
10-15-2013, 08:26 PM #7
Below Average Genius Member
Posts:1,789 Threads:137 Joined:Apr 2013
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.

After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

The Republican House offered exactly what you've proposed to the Senate in return for accepting the rest of ObamaTax.

Democrat Harry Reid and the Democrat Senate rejected it.

Pray for me. hug.gif
10-15-2013, 09:06 PM #8
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,280 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
(10-15-2013, 07:30 PM)CuckooKill Wrote:  
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.
After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

I had to post this at LoP so you know

Of course, that's fine! cheers.gif The idea is to get the word out.

(10-15-2013, 08:26 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.

After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

The Republican House offered exactly what you've proposed to the Senate in return for accepting the rest of ObamaTax.

Democrat Harry Reid and the Democrat Senate rejected it.

I did not know that. Holy crap, says it all don't it? gaah.gif FFFFFFFFFUUUUUUU!!!!!!!

wonder.gif
10-16-2013, 12:34 AM #9
オタマジャクシ Member
Posts:1,310 Threads:32 Joined:Nov 2012
I've been down on Obamacare when I realized it was only budget neutral with 10 years of revenue and 6 years of expense.

The inferred 1 Trillion in unfunded employer mandates was the icing on the cake.

This is just some icing for writing "Fooled You" on an already frosted cake.

When the government is involved in healthcare even your privates aren't private.
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
10-16-2013, 02:47 AM #10
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
The Law itself is 906 pages long, Ive tried to read it buts its overwhelming. The PDF is available for download. Download it and click on Full reader search and search the word "Secretary"

This Law is nothing but a huge transfer of Power.

The Secretary overrides:

The Patient
The Doctor
The Hospital
The State.

The 'Secretary answers only to the President.

damned.gif

Part time employees currently are 38 hours or less. With this law Part time employees will be 30 hours or less.
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
10-16-2013, 03:13 AM #11
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.
After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

Jay... I thought we have already been through this?

They are no exception/exemptions then anyone else with a large employer. Nothing has changed except that they are now allowed the same contribution from their employer(federal government) as before.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201...obamacare/
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/po...orce-hudak

...or do you not bother reading anything that contradicts your pre-madeup mind? or have become nothing but an anti-obama shill that cares nothing about the facts or truth?
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
10-16-2013, 03:14 AM #12
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE-

(i) REQUIREMENT- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are--

(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or

(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).

(ii) DEFINITIONS- In this section:

(I) MEMBER OF CONGRESS- The term 'Member of Congress' means any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate.

(II) CONGRESSIONAL STAFF- The term 'congressional staff' means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3590/text
10-16-2013, 03:41 AM #13
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,280 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
(10-16-2013, 03:13 AM)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.
After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

Jay... I thought we have already been through this?

They are no exception/exemptions then anyone else with a large employer. Nothing has changed except that they are now allowed the same contribution from their employer(federal government) as before.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201...obamacare/
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/po...orce-hudak

...or do you not bother reading anything that contradicts your pre-madeup mind? or have become nothing but an anti-obama shill that cares nothing about the facts or truth?

Nice thread steering straw man argument however the issue at hand was "no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information?

This was never about my solution to this cluster ğck . An anti-Obama shill? rofl.gif Hardly. It's the "no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" I was pointing out.
Just simple irrefutable fact. I'm not certain about what aspect you fail to get your noggin around partner.

wonder.gif
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
10-16-2013, 03:46 AM #14
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(10-15-2013, 08:26 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.

After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

The Republican House offered exactly what you've proposed to the Senate in return for accepting the rest of ObamaTax.

Democrat Harry Reid and the Democrat Senate rejected it.

I wonder why?

Senator David Vitter (R-LA) has sought a legislative solution to the OPM regulation, clarifying the law to be consistent with what he sees as a fair bargain. The solution is to extend the provisions forcing Congress and staff onto the Exchanges to the “President, the Vice President, and political appointees” (Vitter Amendment to S. 761).

The Vitter Amendment also removes the employer contribution that the OPM regulation maintains. The Amendment notes, “No Government contribution under section 8906 of title 5, United States Code, shall be provided on behalf of an individual who is a Member of Congress, a congressional staff member, the President, the Vice President, or a political appointees (sic) for coverage under this paragraph.”

Essentially, the Amendment expands the group required to purchase insurance on the Exchanges while removing a key benefit: the employer contribution.


It takes away what members of congress already had... employer contribution. Nothing changed... no new benefits or exemptions/exceptions are being given but the republitards want to take that away as a matter of "principle" when in reality they know damn well what they are doing ...they themselves do not want this amendment but they know the dems will not accept it so they can use this as a point of argument to further discredit Obamacare.

Now please... quit reading all the propganized bullshit lies and do try to stick to the facts.

Truth as always will prevail... even with the massive onslaught of spew coming from the republican party.
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
10-16-2013, 03:48 AM #15
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(10-16-2013, 03:13 AM)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(10-15-2013, 06:04 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  
Quote:The Obamacare website Healthcare.gov has a hidden terms of service that is not shown to people when they sign up. The hidden terms, only viewable if you 'view source' on the site, says that the user has 'no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system.' Sadly, the $634 million dollar website still does not work for most people, so it's hard to confirm – though when it's fixed in two months, we should finally be able to see it.
Read more: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...62489.html#

The Republicans should pass a bill making Obamacare the law for everyone including the president with absolutely no exceptions.
After that, we'd most likely get a healthcare system that actually fekking functions.
The other thing that bugs me is:
"no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or data transiting or stored on this information system" means t-dancing.gif "LMFAO this website is completely illegal."
What if we put that disclaimer on our website? Would you volunteer personal information? 13.gif

Jay... I thought we have already been through this?

They are no exception/exemptions then anyone else with a large employer. Nothing has changed except that they are now allowed the same contribution from their employer(federal government) as before.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201...obamacare/
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/po...orce-hudak

...or do you not bother reading anything that contradicts your pre-madeup mind? or have become nothing but an anti-obama shill that cares nothing about the facts or truth?

The Myth of the “Exemption”

David Vitter is right. Congressional staffers are treated differently under the Affordable Care Act. Unlike all other large employers in the United States, Congress is specifically banned from maintaining its current healthcare plan. Large employers (as defined under ACA as companies that maintain 50 or more full time workers) face a penalty if they remove employees’ health care benefits. Under a provision of ACA, Congressmen and their staffs are required to purchase health care from Exchanges.

This unique treatment is not the cause of ire among opponents of ACA, however. The controversy over the “exemption” comes from a proposed regulation from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in August. The regulation is quite clear. It notes that the Affordable Care Act requires all Members of Congress and staff to purchase health care on the Exchanges, per the amendment to the original law. However, ACA is silent about the employer contribution that Congress and staff currently receive.

Like most employees (public and private), Congressional staff who receive health care from their current plan (Federal Employees Health Benefits Program) pay part of their premium. The remainder is paid by their employer: the U.S. Congress. The employer contribution is a standard part of employer-provided health care plans in the United States—affecting a majority of Americans. OPM does note that Congress failed to remove the provision of law outlining the employer contribution. As a result, current law requires Congress to maintain the employer contribution for “all health benefits plans fitting within the definition set forth in [5 U.S.C.] 8901(6)” (see OPM regulation RIN #3206-AM85).

OPM argues that Congress, in designing the Affordable Care Act had the opportunity to nix the employer contribution, but it did not. OPM, as a result, must issue regulations consistent with the law. ACA in conjunction with current law (5 U.S.C. 8901) defines healthcare coverage for Congress and its staff. The result? Congress must purchase insurance on exchanges (per ACA) and must provide the employer contribution (per 5 U.S.C. 8901).

The irony: Congress is treated as a unique entity, not because it is exempted from the Affordable Care Act, but because it is the only large employer forced onto its Exchanges.



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com