The Obamacare Website Violates Federal Privacy Laws, Web Designer In Charge Declares She Was Only Following Orders, Whose Orders? She Doesn't Know

From IB Times: 

U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, made the claim based on a report in the conservative publication the Weekly Standard. He was speaking during a hearing run by the House Energy and Commerce committee Thursday titled "PPACA Implementation Failures: Didn't Know or Didn't Disclose?"

Barton said part of the source code in the program that runs the Obamacare website reads that users should have “no reasonable expectation of privacy about communication or data stored on the system.” The Texas Republican claimed that line of source code, which cannot be viewed by a user on HealthCare.gov., violates the health care privacy law commonly known asHIPAA, or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

“How in the world can't his website be HIPAA-compliant when HIPAA is designed to protect the patient’s privacy?” Barton asked Cheryl Campbell ofCGI Federal, one of the prime contractors on the HealthCare.gov website.

Campbell said it was the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services that made the decision to put that source code into the program. She admitted that CGI Federal was aware of that phrase being in the source code, but she did not directly answer Barton’s question.

“You know it’s not HIPAA-compliant; admit it,” Barton said. “You’re under oath. Your company is the company that put this together. We’re telling every American … that you sign up for this or even attempt to, you have no expectation of privacy. That is a direct contradiction of HIPAA and you know it.”

Unfortunately, Joe Barton does not understand his terminology, which in the end, weakened the point of his line of questioning.

IT IS NOT THE SOURCE CODE WHICH STATES THERE IS NO REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.

INSTEAD, IT IS THE TERMS OF SERVICE, as we reported on HERE and HERE and HERE at Infidel Bloggers Alliance.

But, while that may mitigate and weaken Barton's point, it certainly does not mean he was wrong. And, I thank him for bringing it up.

When Barton questioned Cheryl Campbell about whether she was aware that users of the Obamacare website "have no reasonable expectation of privacy", she said she was aware, but that it was not her decision. 

When Barton asked her if this was a violation of the HIPAA law on the privacy of one's medical records, Campbell said that this was not a decision which was under her jurisdiction, claiming she was only a contractor, and did not get involved in legalities.

Then Barton asked her, "Are you an American citizen?" She said, "Yes." And, this is when he said, "You know it's not HIPAA-compliant, admit it." 

She still would not take any responsibility for having built a website whose governing rules are a violation of Federal privacy laws. 

When Barton asked Campbell in whose hands the responsibility lay, she said, "IT IS A BODY OF PEOPLE."  

I heard this testimony on the radio yesterday. It reminded me of the War Crimes trials of Nazi leaders after WWII, where one leader after another declared, in the face of evidence of their crimes, "I WAS ONLY FOLLOWING ORDERS."

And while that is bad enough, quite frankly, this testimony from Cheryl Campbell also reminded me of the Soviet Union.

We are being led by a government of unelected bureaucrats who are not responsible to anyone for the policies they carry through, and do not know from whence the policies emanate.

As Vaclav Havel wrote:

“...[Socialism] touches people at every step, but it does so with its ideological gloves on. 

This is why life in the system is so thoroughly permeated with hypocrisy and lies: government by bureaucracy is called popular government; the working class is enslaved in the name of the work ing class; the complete degradation of the individual is presented as his ultimate liberation; depriving people of information is called making it available; the use of power to manipulate is called the public control of power, and the arbitrary abuse of power is called observing the legal code; the repression of culture is called its development; the expansion of imperial influence is presented as support for the oppressed ...