OK, don't have a fit: Five thoughts on the Obamacare disaster

[cali]

1. So far, the Affordable Care Act's launch has been a failure. Not "troubled." Not "glitchy." A failure. But "so far" only encompasses 14 days. The hard question is whether the launch will still be floundering on day 30, and on day 45.

<snip>

As Sarah Kliff noted, Medicare Part D was, at this point in its launch, also considered a disaster."When online shopping for prescription drug programs launched back in 2005, things went so badly that the federal government didn't even get off the ground until three weeks after its scheduled launch." Today, Medicare Part D is broadly considered a success.

<snip>

2. Are there problems behind the problems? In the weeks leading up to the launch I heard some very ugly things about how the system was performing when transferring data to insurers -- a necessary step if people are actually going to get insurance. I tried hard to pin the rumors down, but I could never quite nail the story, and there was a wall of official denials from the Obama administration. It was just testing, they said. They were fixing the bugs day by day.

According to Bob Laszlewski, those problems aren't resolved. They're just not getting much attention because the health-care law's Web sites aren't working well enough for people to get that far in the process. Laszlewski does a lot of work with the insurance industry, so I'd take this post of his very seriously:

The backroom connection between the insurance companies and the federal government is a disaster. Things are worse behind the curtain than in front of it"

<snip>

5. This isn't about politics. A lot of liberals will be angry over this post. A lot of conservatives will be happy about it. But it's important to see the Affordable Care Act as something more than a pawn in the political wars: It's a real law that real people are desperately, nervously, urgently trying to access. And so far, the Obama administration has failed them.

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/14/five-thoughts-on-the-obamacare-disaster/

[Laelth]

1. ACA will be fine. I am not worried about it at this stage. n/t

-Laelth

[cali]

2. I honestly don't know enough to know if it will be OK or not

what makes me nervous is how heavily dependent on insurance companies, the success of thie ACA is.

[Laelth]

4. My hope, of course, is that the ACA fails.

That, in turn, should usher in a single-payer system.

I tell my Republican friends that they had better hope the ACA succeeds. Either way, the American people win.

-Laelth

[brooklynite]

8. If ACA fails, nothing will replace it....

...because no Democratic President or Congress will want to expend the political capital for something new.

[Laelth]

16. I disagree.

The ACA will remain law, even if it doesn't work well, and the problems with the ACA will force its modification, or, so I suspect.

That said, you may be right. Only time will tell.



-Laelth

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Thanks for repeating the republican New ACA Talking Points Ezra.

A website overwhelmed by hits is not a disaster, it is a success.

[Puzzledtraveller]

6. Predictable.

[cali]

17. what's predictable. do tell.

[Puzzledtraveller]

21. That criticizing the ACA/roll out=pushing republican talking points.

[cali]

22. Yep. certain people call ALL criticism

of the ACA "republican talking points".

You know what else is predictable? That those certain people never do anything beyond braying "Republican talking points" because they can't analyze or apply critical thinking skills to facts presented.

[Puzzledtraveller]

31. I was actually trained on it.

Medicaid caseworker since 2009. Many of my co-workers, who have 10, 20 and even 30 years all have reservations about it.

[Mojorabbit]

92. +100 nt

[Warren Stupidity]

112. No cali, when I wake up and the morning noise is whargarbbling exactly the same noise

you and Ezra are whargarbbling, that is "regurgitating today's republican talking points".

[Zen Democrat]

32. Web sites crashing due to customer overload is common, and indicative of successful marketing.

Only the Republicans would turn that into a talking point that millions of users overwhelming a system, and not a govt. system but a private technical contractor's system, is BAD.

Compare to Apple. The gold i5s I ordered weeks ago and haven't yet received because they didn't correctly anticipate demand and it's considered a bigger success than expected.

So, in fact, criticizing the ACA rollout does = Republican talking points. Own it.

[wercal]

40. I question your premise

Is the website demand really more than anticipated. I understand the goal was to sign up 7 million people by Jan 1. This goal was a projection used by the CBO, in scoring the law, and important in assumptions about risk pools.

A little in the head ciphering yields 75k-80k sign-ups a day. So, after 14 days, we should have a million people signed up.

I really can't find official information anywhere about the number of sign-ups to date...but the rosiest pundit estimate I can find is 100k, split around half and half between state and federal exchanges.

This puts the sign-up pace tremendously behind schedule...and is an indicator that the system was never set up to handle the rate of sign up necessary to meet the CBO goal.

No its not anybody's talking points, and its beyond silly to keep saying that. It was doomed to fail from the start, if barely meeting 10% of the sign-up goal pace is considered an overwhelming bombardment of the system.

[Scuba]

7. Bingo.

[Puzzledtraveller]

11. Separation of Corporation and State in your signature.

Would you say that describes the ACA?

[Scuba]

13. Hardly.

But then I'm an advocate of Medicare for All, including dental, optical and hearing aids.

[Puzzledtraveller]

14. Absolutely

From the time you are born, until you die I say.

[cali]

10. got any actual analysis that refutes what Klein points out

and yes, I think considering facts is vitally important instead of just going with confirmation bias and what we want to be true.

It's not nearly as simple as your claim that " A website overwhelmed by hits is not a disaster, it is a success."

It's only a success if it's more functional than not. From everything that I've read, that is not true to date. I hope that it will be, but right now it isn't.

[Warren Stupidity]

44. I can't refute rumors.

In the weeks leading up to the launch I heard some very ugly things about how the system was performing when transferring data to insurers.

I'm sorry you don't seem to recognize utter bullshit like that.

[tjwash]

52. Someone stating their opinion as fact on a host called "wonkblog" does not deserve a refute

It's like watching some random talking head on fox-news. Just a waste of time, and you end up sitting there thinking "who the fuck was THAT guy?"

[beerandjesus]

77. Ezra Klein is one of the most astute thinkers we've got right now

He's not some random Fox News guy. This isn't his best column ever, frankly, but he often presents things from a perspective you don't hear everywhere else--to the benefit of the general discourse.

Do your homework before assuming if you don't recognize the name, he must be another Hannity-wannabe.

[cvoogt]

20. hits aren't the problem

The bugs are the problem. For example, I got to a point in the process where I was supposed to print off some PDF form, except the link provided by the site gave a 404 error, because the link contained unintentional apostrophes AND was created as a relative rather than root-relative URL. Being a web developer myself, I knew enough to remove those and strip off the entire path except the PDF's file name .... but most people would just give up.

[BlueCaliDem]

38. Yep. But if you're desperate to make the president's signature bill appear like a failure

you'd turn that around and call the website being overwhelmed by hits a disaster. That's the current Republican meme on the PPACA.

[grantcart]

74. It's important to have a hobby.

[NoOneMan]

103. Yes, Ezra Klein. One of the biggest Obamacare cheerleaders

And from what I understand, the technical glitches go far, far beyond the servers experiencing high load.

Though a website in itself is not a health care system.

[Puzzledtraveller]

5. Well, we are labeled things for criticizing

and then we are asked to provide personal information and income in order to back-up any claims we make that do not make the ACA out to be the best thing since sliced bread.

[Fumesucker]

9. I suspect the responses to this thread will be boringly predictable

They eventually will iron out all or at least most the glitches and bugs in the online system, it might even take a total redesign from some of the discussions I've seen.

As far as the ACA itself goes, who the H E double toothpicks has a clue?

My personal opinion based on nothing more than paying moderate attention to politics in the USA for the last thirty years or so is that the ACA will come nowhere near providing universal access to health care in America, there's just too many Golden Bulls to be gored if it did so.

[cali]

12. I don't have a clue. I'll freely admit that. but I'll be double damned

if I pretend that everything is going swimmingly with the roll out.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

15. the roll-out is only part one of what could be a HUGE backlash

the other part comes in the first year of ACA coverage. so many people are focused on the great rates that the Bronze and Silver plans offer that they put aside the very large deductibles. If people get bitten by this (and I suspect many will) there will be a realization that the plans don't really offer affordable health care... you can bet your sweet patootie that republicans and many segments of the mainstream media are salivating for those stories.

sP

[Fumesucker]

23. Better to go bankrupt for ten grand than a million

For a lot of us there really is no practical difference between the two figures, either one is unreachable in the foreseeable future.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

29. "a lot of us"???

hell, 95% of us!

the bronze plans are really just disaster plans... silver plans are a little better... but the deductibles start getting BIG when you talk about a family of five.

sP

[kenny blankenship]

55. I'd much prefer to go BK on the larger number-

since I'd feel I'd got my money's worth.

[kenny blankenship]

67. This place seems to be attracting more strident humorless pet rocks.

And I thought we had them all already.

[lostincalifornia]

68. I like the pet rock analogy /nt

[ProdigalJunkMail]

69. and i agree there are some good things about it...

but i think people are in for sticker-shock when they get that bill or SOB from the Dr. stating that this is under your deductible and you still have to pay it.

sP

[duffyduff]

70. If you don't go for gold or platinum, you will be screwed

because you won't be able to use health care without going into monstrous debt thanks to high deductibles. It's a win-win for insurance companies because they stand to make a ton of money on people who are suckers to go for especially the bronze plans that are basically worthless.

If you do go for gold or platinum, you will be screwed anyway because the monthly premiums will be unaffordable, subsidy or no. Silver and bronze are not cheap, either, and they are inferior to large company plans.

And if your financial situation changes for the better, will you be forced to pay back the subsidies?

Expanding Medicaid is perhaps the most onerous if you are past 55 because the government will then have the right to seize your estate when you die for everything that has been paid for on your behalf, including those monthly payments. You might not even be able to use it anyway if doctors won't see you.

ACA is nothing more or less than corporate welfare.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

107. I agree with the first part of your post

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

53. Aren't you glad...

that people 80 years ago didn't judge Social Security based on the for 10 days of the system? Eight decades have given us a modicum of perspective.

Why don't we hold off on judging the ACA for, say, eight weeks?

[JoePhilly]

18. The trouble with the web site will be

an historical footnote.

It's a shinny object for the media. And in a year, no one will remember it.

[BenzoDia]

19. Yep exactly.

[cali]

24. that's not the only point- or fact- in the article.

[JoePhilly]

26. Yea, it is pretty much.

That, and how the GOP blew the chance to make the web launch issue a bigger one.

The launch issue is already losing what little steam it had.

I think my prediction that a year from now no one will be talking about it was generous. It will probably be dropped sooner than that.

[brush]

25. Servers overwhelmed, computer glitches . . .

since when can't those things be solved?

DON'T PANIC! The ACA is the law and c'mon, the repugs have enough ammo without us bashing it.

What other major government program roll out went off without a hitch? NONE!

[left is right]

27. didn’t i just recently read that the launch

of some long-awaited online video game was also considered a big failure—frustrating gamers because of poor access and inadequate servers.
I am asking because I am not a gamer so i just barely pay attention to that stuff

[Veilex]

76. As a gamer...

The answer is a resounding yes. In fact, there is no such thing as a smooth opening day for Online multi-player games (MMOs).

[SomethingFishy]

79. No online game has been launched without some issues..

some have a lot of issues.. However it usually only takes a few days to resolve them.

[B2G]

81. And this isn't a game.

[SomethingFishy]

83. Exactly.

I haven't even bothered to go sign up. Been without insurance for years thanks to pre-existing. I figure if I waited a month they might have things under control by then..

[Veilex]

124. Where in my post did you see claim it was a game?

The undertakings for handling an MMO are similar in scope to handling large quantities of people. In every MMO to date there has been issues... so expecting something of similar scope to lack issues is foolhardy. Moreover, they cant just shut it down once its started or the republicans will pounce on that and parade it around as evidence that the ACA is a failure.

[Veilex]

123. True...

but they also dont start with millions within the first few days... and that was realy my point.

[pnwmom]

28. Paul Krugman doesn't think it's been a disaster.

https://www.politicususa.com/2013/10/13/paul-krugman-demolishes-republican-fantasy-2014-obamacare.html

KRUGMAN: I want to say something about that for a moment. The ObamaCare thing will also be long past. They messed up the software for the federal version of it. But we have the exchanges working just fine in many states, which means it’s fixable and it will be fixed.

California has a perfectly well functioning exchange, which is running itself. If you can do it for 30 million people, you can do it for 300 million.

So, Obama — that will be — Obamacare will be working fine…


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/04/opinion/krugman-reform-turns-real.html

SNIP

But Obamacare isn’t up for a popular referendum, or a revote of any kind. It’s the law, and it’s going into effect. Its future will depend on how it works over the next few years, not the next few weeks.

To illustrate the point, consider Medicare Part D, the drug benefit, which went into effect in 2006. It had what was widely considered a disastrous start, with seniors unclear on their benefits, pharmacies often refusing to honor valid claims, computer problems, and more. In the end, however, the program delivered lasting benefits, and woe unto any politician proposing that it be rolled back.

So the glitches of October won’t matter in the long run. But why are they actually encouraging? Because they appear, for the most part, to be the result of the sheer volume of traffic, which has been much heavier than expected. . . .

[BelgianMadCow]

30. Here's a criticism I haven't seen discussed on DU: narrowing coverage

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/obamacare-narrow-networks-how-they-affect-doctor-specialties.html

Lambert here. Most coverage of ObamaCare (ACA) policies available through the Exchanges, especially Democratic-friendly coverage, has focused on the price of policies, rather than their value. This post focuses on value, and shows why the distinction between “in-network” and “out-of-network” coverage is important. At least in the case tested here, insurance companies are shown to “narrow” their networks, and hence the coverage available to their policyholders, to exclude specialties like oncology, cardiology, internal medicine, and neurology.

I thought the full analysis was interesting, but was also wondering whether the selections made are representative. But something to be aware of, I thought. I just didn't want to post it as an OP, I have no bone in the ACA fight and the way DU GD has behaved towards criticism is rather intimidating.

NC also had a piece about the technical problems. As usual, it's very well sourced (including the decision to involve Experian, that was instructive). http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/obamacare-rollout-what-the-log-in-problems-tell-us-about-more-serious-and-harder-problems-to-come.html

[5] Redundant data electronically and on paper. Experian can’t reconcile the data itself, so it asks johm to send paper verification:

The exchange now insists that my identity be verified by either mailing copies or faxing certain paper documents–driver’s license, passport, deed to the house, etc. I am, again, essentially locked out.

Never mind that this is an onerous requirement, a Kafka-esque bureaucratic requirement. Because look what happens: We now have three copies of johm’s account data running around. We’ve (1) got the data johm entered on the Exchange, stored there — and for two accounts, only one of which (but which?) is valid — and (2) the copy of the data that Experian received amd stored, which may be corrupt, and may also have been changed by the Experian operator, and (3) the paper version of the data. What the system needs to do is get all three of those in synch and keep them that way. What are the odds?

Let’s also remember that all these levels of #FAIL are for what should be the simplest process of all: Logging in to get an account. We haven’t even gotten to eligibility calculation and plan selection yet. Those are more complicated.

And, oh yeah: Why in the name of The God(dess)(e)(s) Of Your Choice, If Any, did the administration make it a requirement to set up an account before comparing plans?** Buying health insurance on the exchanges was supposed to be like buying a flat screen TV, said Obama; but does Best Buy force you to set up an account before searching their home electronics section? Or Amazon? They’d be daft if they did, because they want you making a decision to purchase; customer identity can be captured at the point of sale. And the Federal Exchanges should to the same thing for the same reason.***

Of course, single payer is rugged, robust, proven, and none of this nonsense would be happen. I just can’t imagine why the Democrats when for HeritageCare RomneyCare ObamaCare instead.

[Sgent]

113. While somewhat true

most insurance companies that have multiple networks have narrowed networks for years for individual plans -- employer plans are the ones that get broader networks.

[Zen Democrat]

33. Are you aware that the problems seem to be in the states who aren't accepting Medicaid funds?

In other words, people in states with Republican governors are having the biggest problems. Things are smooth in Kentucky ... they have a Democratic governor. The Blue States are generally humming along, while Texas and Florida are a mess. And I understand why.

[Adrahil]

34. Apparently these folks haven't seen very many large tech rollouts.

I have.... and been on both sides of them. I can count on one hand and have fingers left over the ones that went smoothly. The constant pressure between budget and capacity pretty much always ends with the budget weenies forcing less capacity than the engineers would really like. And it's clear to me the contractors underbid the web development effort.

[trumad]

35. I've been involved with hundreds...

Over the last 30 years. Has there ever been a perfect turn key---fuck no.

Oh well--- idiots abound in this country.

[CTyankee]

39. IIRC, the space program had, in its earliest days, some very public disasters...

Rockets that didn't get off the ground or exploded or otherwise went kerfluey with lots of cameras on them so the disasters were widely seen by the public. Lots of naysayers there, also. I wonder if people know about that history and have no clue as to why they have cell phones and the internet now...

[B2G]

42. So have I and none have been 'perfect', but

thank god none of them have been close to as disasterous as this.

[trumad]

58. Disasters drummed up by the right wing

[B2G]

62. Head in sand

Hope you enjoy the view down there.

[trumad]

78. better than head in a bubble.

[Veilex]

82. I agree with you...

up until the "idiots" comment... ignorant, perhaps.
But, true or not, calling them an idiot is just an insult.

[Myrina]

41. ... to that point, though ...

.... if you're planning the biggest rollout in the history of history, and you know your legacy is riding on it (to some extent) and that it's EXTREMELY high profile, you throw a shitload of load-testers at it, you regression test the hell out of it, and you comb and recomb for any and every possible glitch you can find at every point of the process before you flip the switch.

Seems this team didn't do that, and that worries me, as an IT Project Manager.

I worked for an insurance company that would "Roll it out now, fix it later" and is frustrated the hell out of our customers and line-workers who had to deal with all the bs as we tried to figure out and correct Day 2 (and 3 and 4) production issues.

[Adrahil]

50. You missed my point.... those things cost money.

They cost quite a lot of money, and with the Repugs hawking every little thing, you think something like a budget overrun doesn't noticed?

Don't get me wrong.... it's not the right way to do it. But it happens all over the industry. In a couple months, no one will really remember this beyond being an amusing anecdote.

[B2G]

63. Haven't they spent like 600 million so far?

From a 93 million initial budget?

[Veilex]

84. Wait wait wait... hold on a sec...

So, have you personally ever dealt with millions of people worth of traffic to a server in a day one scenario?
I'd wager the answer is no. And if you've had anything close, you would be more sympathetic to whats going on, as opposed to critical.
I use the parallel of computer games... exceedingly few games get out the door without having some form of issue. The more features and people added to the server mix, the more problems abound... at times exponentially.

The reality of all this is no amount of testing would catch everything that is/was wrong with the system... there's a point where you need input from your users. Add to that equation the fact that republicans have been doing everything they can to obstruct and slow down everything dealing with the ACA, to include testing that system.

This isn't just an IT issue, there are finances, delay tactics, obstructive procedural methods and politics in general involved here....that makes programmatic issues alone seem like a nice walk on a sunny day.

[solarhydrocan]

36. Does Max Baucus have a new job yet

if not perhaps Karen Ignani can help

[ProSense]

37. Steve Benen mentions Klein's piece, but

makes a few interesting observations, including the fact that support for the law has increased.

ACA repeal crusade over, 'delusional folks' notwithstanding
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023847911

[Waiting For Everyman]

43. I assume that the shutdown is responsible

for at least some part of the problem with the website. Why would we think that most of the government being shut down would have no part to play in launching a new government program and website? Are we really expected to believe that it has no effect at all? I highly doubt that. Yet all the commentary I have seen about this completely ignores it as a contributing factor.

According, I am so far ignoring the said commentary as hot air. I'm sure that there are problems with the system apart from the shutdown, and I'm just as sure they'll eventually be fixed. But I won't be expecting a lot until a while after all of the government is back on the job. It's only common sense.

So as to any political advantage for the Republicans spoken of in the article, in my book the Republicans have now made themselves responsible for the problems with the ACA rollout too. As the saying in retail goes... they broke it, so they own it.

I'm not at all sure that the rollout would've gone this badly had there been no shutdown. Maybe. But then again, maybe not. In any case, it no longer matters because the Repubs did what they did. To me, it's a non-story now, just like Benghazi and all the others they beat to death before it. Granted, I'm sure everybody won't see it my way but I'll bet a lot of people do.

[magical thyme]

46. A couple decades ago at Digital Equipment, we were forced to convert to MS Outlook,

which had been designed for small work groups and was supposedly scaleable to any sized organization, from our robust, top notch "All-In-1" email system.

Imagine a company of 125,000+ employees with email addresses composed of their first names

Outlook was so piss-poor nonfunctional at the time, I was reduced to 2 months of "sneakernet," driving floppy disks all around New England to my internal clients and the printers, before I finally had useable email.

I came from a high tech company that actually believed in debugging it's products before releasing them. We long ago lost to companies like Microsoft that sell you one thing and deliver a very, very buggy, nonworking, phenomenally buggy, essentially untested pile of spaghetti-ware different thing.

I don't blame ACA for the difficult start. I blame privitising everything. They outsourced to the cheapest flim-flammer out there. (not surprisingly right-wing when you think about it.) They got the cheapest, flimsiest response the vendor could pass off on them.

Why am I not surprised?

[Puzzledtraveller]

60. Exactly

We underwent the same thing here. Additionally we are in the process of implementing a new application system for SNAP and Medicaid and a e-file system. It is like a Frankenstein monster made up of disparate parts that were never intended to work together. We have talked about this here and all we can think of us budget restraints and maybe a bit of redtap limiting the cabinet on who they can go with.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

47. Just for the sake of clarity...

This is a disaster...



This is a disaster...



This is a disaster...



Millions of people getting health insurance is not a disaster

[Veilex]

85. K&R

[progressoid]

48. Medicare Part D is broadly considered a success?

It's certainly been succe$$ful for insurers and drug suppliers.

[Jim Lane]

49. A sincere question for the IT people who are downplaying the problems.

I understand the basic idea that, if you have initial problems because of a heavy response, that's indicative of popularity and can be considered a good thing.

It seems important, though, that it's "initial" problems that shouldn't prompt hysteria. There's presumably some point at which you have to stop basking in the evident popularity of the site and begin to be concerned that there are still glitches and problems.

On October 1, I didn't even try to log on. I figured I'd wait until the initial tidal wave had subsided and the bugs had been worked out, so that the site was up and running smoothly. Give it a couple weeks, I figured.

We're now a couple weeks on and I haven't seen any glowing reports of how the initial problems have been overcome.

At what point does the persistence of such glitches stop being an indication of success and start being an indication of failure?

I don't feel a sense of panic yet; the insurance that people are trying to buy wouldn't kick in until January 1 anyway. Still, although panic seems premature, I confess to a mounting unease. Is that much, at least, appropriate, now that we're two weeks in?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

51. Most federal IT workers are furloughed...

Major fixes to the system won't occur until they're back on the job.

[B2G]

66. That is just not true

We have been told they are working around the clock to fix it.

If the people needed to do that were furloughed, they would just pull the plug until they were back. That, obviously, hasn't happened.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

72. Been told by whom? (nt)

[B2G]

75. By Obama, Sebelius, Carney, to name a few. nt

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

89. Health & Human Services has responsibility for www.healthcare.gov

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has operational responsibility for the site.

76% of CMMS employees are on furlough. So while they're working around the clock, there's a damned sight fewer people doing the work.

[B2G]

90. This was outsourced

The developers and testers haven't been furloughed.

And you can damn well bet any fed employees involved have been deemed 'essential'.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

91. Because contractors are FAMOUS for their willingness to work without being paid...

[hedgehog]

94. Do you think it possible that some Republicans are using the shut-down

as a back door way to screw up the ACA?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

96. I don't think it's intentional...

The coincidence of the opening of the exchanges and the end of the federal fiscal year were known a long time ago. I think it's probably just a fortuitous accident for them.

[hedgehog]

97. I was thinking more along the lines of serendipity -

not that they planned it, but that the fact that the web sites need work is another incentive to keep the shut down going.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

99. Yes. Something like that (nt)

[Psephos]

101. umm, they've already *been* paid

They have a huge incentive to fix this right now. It's called "Never Work for USG Again."

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

108. Umm, and you know this how?

Ten years a government contractor, and I've never once -- not once -- been paid in advance.

Never work for the USG again? You're new to the world of federal contracting. There's really no such thing as accountability.

[Psephos]

109. Facepalm.

You think a politically-connected major corp. is going to work three years with no cashflow until delivery? okaaaayyy

http://www.digitaltrends.com/opinion/obamacare-healthcare-gov-website-cost/

The real culprit is probably the Byzantine procurement process.

http://blog.dobt.co/post/63381111778/the-healthcare-gov-fiasco

And no, I'm not "new to the world of federal contracting." Quite the contrary, sad to say.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

115. This is not a copy of their contract...

This is a pack of pissy IT professionals, each of whom is CONVINCED they could have done it better (surprise, surprise).

Without the terms and conditions of their contract in hand, you have no friggin' clue who has paid what to whom. Which is what leads me to believe that you don't know jack shit about federal contracting.

[Psephos]

117. yet you *didn't* post the contract, the source of your expertise?

lol

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

118. Yeah...

I'd love to continue this, but I have some adults to talk to...

[Psephos]

125. I accept your concession. n/t

[Veilex]

86. "they would just pull the plug until they were back"

I disagree with you on this point. Doing so would be blood in the water for the republican sharks looking for a meal. Keeping the sites up and running isn't just about getting people health-care, its also a political imperative at this point.

[B2G]

88. Point was the IT folks trying to fix this aren't furloughed.

So this really can't be blamed on the shutdown.

[B2G]

65. It's already an indication of failure

And I assure you there is a tremendous amount of panic behind the scenes.

This is not going to end well in the foreseeable future.

[ieoeja]

114. Judging by Social Security, I would say the problems won't be going away anytime soon.

I tried creating an account with Social Security a couple years ago. I gave up. It had the same f'ing Experian verification. And that verification is hinky.

So this is not new. If it hasn't been fixed in two years, it probably won't get fixed anytime soon either.

On the other hand, the Experien crap is getting a lot more attention right now. So maybe that will spur them to fix it. The one argument I privitizers always ignore rather than trying to spin is, "are you seriously trying to tell us that companies usually do a whiz-bang job once they have that government contract in hand? Because in the real world they just suck up the taxpayer's money while doing as little work as possible."


Of course, all of this does point to the fact that this is not because of the ACA. This problem existed in other venues before the ACA was ever proposed.

[L0oniX]

54. I have yet to receive any official government notification of compulsory enrollment.

...and ...what happens to those who are at or below poverty level that live in those 26 states that have denied Fed funding for Medicaid expansion? Yea! Well I am sure ACA will work out fine for those who have the money. For those who don't have an internet connected computer they will have to wait for that official notification with a prepaid postage return envelope I guess. How they are going to select an insurance option is a wild guess.

[humbled_opinion]

56. TOTALLY CONFUSED

After reading this thread, I hear both optimistic and pessimistic tones toward the ACA itself as well as the predictable website issues. If I am not mistaken the entire ACA will collapse if the young workers 20-40 age group fail to sign up/pay for their plans as required. You would think someone would have already put the burden on employers to retain the healthcare coverage premiums from each paycheck i.e. like Medicare is now. Additionally, is anyone getting a raise to help them pay? Yes I understand their is tax incentives to this in form of tax credits for lower income groups but in the end you are still forking over some money each month, my fear is many just won't pay for it unless it is retained from their checks i.e. tax system.

Who is going to make that group pay? A fear of some penalty that really amounts to much less than the plans coverage plus copays/deductibles... that won't work.... Just like the big corporations are going to cut hours to dump people into exchanges that they will still have to pay for and then the corp pays some miniscule fine instead of the cost of the plans....

The incentives in this plan are just not there.... Young people are not going to fork over income that they just don't have to pay for a program that in their mind they just don't need at this point in their life....

and there is a coming effort on the right to force a populist tax reform that sets a standard fair tax rate..... If that ever happened the subsidies in the ACA would fail to produce a cost savings for lower income people.

Wrap all that around a continuing effort by one political party to destroy the ACA and I start to lean toward the pessimistic side of the issue.

[lostincalifornia]

57. Fuck the washington post. This is just repuke regurgitation.

[heaven05]

59. I really don't

understand why you along with many others on this site hate Obama so much. Yes he's human. Yes he has made mistakes, I feel because of advisers steering him wrong. The man IS trying to give something in the way of healthcare to millions of people. I just can't understand your hate of ACA because the POTUS could not get single payer. I just don't understand your hate when you've said nothing of confederate flag waving IN FRONT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, with all the negative implications associated with purpose and deed.

[solarhydrocan]

120. It's not about "hating Obama". Obama was against Obamacare when he was running

I like Obama. I supported him over Hillary ONLY because of his opposition to mandates. He changed his mind, not me.

I will not be called a hater for opposing that which Obama himself opposed. And doing so indicates a lack of memory.

[heaven05]

121. yeah, yeah on mind change, everyone does it.

my beef is that I feel he's the last 'decent' POTUS we will see for a while. As a student of late European/german history, I feel like I;m in the Weimar Republic, 1920-33, watching the rise of some obscure faction backed by corporatist/MIC as it were and growing to full fledged leadership, creating a fascist dictatorship with a total crackdown by a militarized police/security force acting in concert with corporatist's/fascist. Rules of the state to be posted later. We can knock B.O. all we want, he is the result of our system of governance.

[Veilex]

73. Have you ever played a massively multi-player Online game (MMO)?

World of Warcraft, is arguably the most popular MMO ever. At its peak, it had over 13 million subscribers world wide. Thats an enormous server load. Blizzard, the makers of WoW, ramped up over time from just over 200,000 players to peak subscriber base, allowing them to accommodate online traffic flow. On the game's first day, though, the game designed to accommodate 2-3 million people was having problems. There is not an MMO in the history of modern MMOs that has had a smooth start day. The ACA is no different in that respect. The ACA, however, did not have the benefit of a gradual ramp up. It had millions of people instantly interested and trying to get more information on its servers.

So, calling the Affordable Care Act a failure when around for only encompasses 14 days is silly to say the least. If anything, the fact that Millions crashed the bogged down servers, is a victory. It is a victory because it shows how many people truly want health care. Its a victory because demand was so high, that an unexpected amount of people all tried to log in at the same time (and have been persistently trying since) causing the issues we're seeing now.

I'm sure there are ways it would be improved... there could have been a staggered enrolement... and probably should be. But, this has never been done before... so calling it a failure is a little silly.

[bvar22]

100. This is no longer "the first day".

[font size=3]This is Day 14[/font], and we still can't get beyond the glitch.

[spanone]

80. deep doo doo

[MineralMan]

87. Carrying water IS honest labor...

[Sunlei]

93. odd the bugs. before opening day the site was very searchable. what are the bugs does anyone know?

Is the problem overloaded servers?

Perhaps they should move pre registration to another server.

Only allow logged on registered verified accounts to the actual ACA website?

[Demo_Chris]

95. We rightly criticize Bush for his terrible handling of Katrina...

After all, we argue, he had a week to get ready, and once the disaster unfolded it took days and days for even half-measures to begin. And while we waited and the White House dicked around, people were dying.

And while it is apples and oranges the point remains. The task here with Obamacare is not the high-speed emergency rescue of a million people in a submerged city, it's four YEARS to build a WEBSITE that actually fucking works. So in that respect the analogy and the questions raised are reasonable.

And I still stand by what I have said all along: Obamacare might be swell for some, but the mandates are everything that our party claims to be against, and once the GOP stops acting like shreiking drooling lunatics those mandates are going to hammer us. We're the party that just slapped the poor with a bill they cannot afford to pay, for healthcare they will never see and cannot afford to use -- all to benefit the affluent at their expense. Just as the Social Conservative Bible-bators are obliterating the GOP, Third-Way Democrats are wrecking our brand.

Our loyalty should properly belong to our principles and our people.

[Warren Stupidity]

98. Yes because web site issues and people fucking drowning for days is exactly the same thing.

[Psephos]

102. So you think there's no harm when people who could be covered aren't?

Wasn't that kinda the whole idea behind ACA? To get healthcare to people who need it, so they don't suffer or die?

[Warren Stupidity]

105. I think there was MORE HARM before ACA so ACA is REDUCING HARM EVEN IF NOT PERFECT.

'kay?

[Psephos]

110. Not perfect?

That's what I call extreme generosity.

[Warren Stupidity]

111. That's what I call tens of thousands of people getting subsidized access to healthcare.

But please do join in with today's republican talking point that the ACA is a total failure.

[Psephos]

116. you are contributing to its failure by providing cover

Criticism is the corrective. Human behavior 101.

It's a fucked-up mess, and its incompetent design and execution are cheating the very people it's supposed to help.

Those are the people I care about, not the douchebags responsible for the trouble.

It'll get fixed, sooner or later. Just like the Marine's Osprey aircraft. All it takes is tens of billions and several years.

[Cleita]

104. Caught about five minutes of Rush this morning on the car radio

on my way to the store this morning. Of course the failure of Obamacare is all the fault of the libruls according to his fat lying mouth. This the TRUTH he said. I would have liked to point out that the plan was a Republican plan to begin with. Libruls wanted Medicare for all, a plan that has proved to be successful. Don't know how he would spin that factoid if I had bothered to confront him.

[Warren Stupidity]

106. And "democrats" are lining up, mindlessly or not, to join in the Greek Chorus.

We never fucking learn.

[Lifelong Dem]

119. I don't see a need for concern over a slow start up

A slow start is not even going to be a passing thought a year from now.

When the election comes around next November I doubt the Republicans will be running on a slow start up a year ago.

[mstinamotorcity2]

122. The only failure is it wasn't Medicare for ALL.

This Law is in its early stages. the parts that were implemented were parts of the law itself which allowed insurance companies just to comply. Like accepting people with pre-existing conditions. They just had to do it. but to actually enroll thirty million people might take a little while to get together. As people are accessing and completing the process, The White House should be doing damage control. by showing the individuals who now have successfully signed up through the process. And make sure they're IT peeps are working day and night to correct the problem to handle the overload. They could possibly cut down traffic by assigning days of the week to the last two digits of your social security number. Works for everything else.