Actually - they removed the language, but did they repudiate
the language? That means they removed the language but:
A) What about the folks that actually agreed to the language prior
to the government removing the language?
B) Did the government remove the language while leaving the intent intact?
BucsBullsBolts - here's how this is a problem: if George Bush had asked for this information in order to allow a dealership to receive a rebate - would you have given it to that
If you work from home and used your wifes computer to process the rebate - you illegally surrendered her
rights and allowed the government to invade her privacy...Now, you wanna see something really scary?Feds Get Real Time Access to Patient Bank Accounts Under Obamacare
"...It's not long before the reader encounters just how far-reaching and invasive this bill really is. On page 57, under section 163, there is something that would give the government power to reach into benefits recipients' bank accounts. It is called "Administrative Simplification," and Subsection 1173A of this measure, "Standardize Electronic Transactions" has a provision (a)(2)(B) that ensures that this new governmental power