Comments about ‘Website contractors blame Obama administration’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Oct. 24 2013 7:50 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Itsjstmeagain
Merritt Island, Fl

Do you think you should not have bid? You accepted an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) structured contract which gave you a lot of flexability and typically the technical lead on the development. Did you sit and spend too much time counting the money?
I was in the Project Management business for years in DOD, you need to look elsewhere for sympathy. The HHS office may have been overwhelmed by the size of this effort, but you had the ball for structure and operation.
Maybe DARPA should have run the contract for HHS, or get some pros from DOD.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Price for failed Obamacare website: $394 million and counting! Imagine the hyperventilation and outrage from the Democrats if this Obamacare mess had been hatched by the GOP!

JoeCapitalist2
Orem, UT

"As for calls that Sebelius be fired, Daley said that would be like firing the captain of the Titanic "after the ship hit the iceberg."

Rest assured, no one in the Obama administration will be held accountable. Just like the Bengazi, IRS, Fast and Furious, NSA, and other scandals - blame will be deflected toward some "low-level" staffer. They will be reassigned to a different cushy job and keep all their pensions to keep them quiet from pushing blame further up the chain of command. To quote Hillary Clinton: "What difference does it make?"

After all, the Titanic sunk because some guy in the engine room was shoveling coal too fast.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

DN,
Why do you continue to print lies? The GOP voted to defund obamacare and leave the rest of government open – harry and the dems voted to shut down the government.

Repeated the DNC’s party line does NOT make it true!

Obamacare was passed in 2009 or 2010. I guess 3 years is not long enough for dems to get ready for their trainwreck.

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

Classic journalism once again. The story is about who is to blame and finger pointing and has nothing to do with the health insurance problem in the Country. The ACA will rise and fall on the effective (or ineffective) way it deals with the cost of health insurance in the USA and not on the mechanics of implementation. Most States that set up their own exchanges are up and running and enrolling record numbers of people. So What? Likewise the critics of the ACA want to focus only on the politics and the process and ignore the ever growing cost we all pay for the millions of uninsured who get their healthcare from emergency rooms. Will the ACA be less expensive or more expensive than the status quo? That is the story here and the rest is just writers "filling the news hole".

gmlewis
Houston, TX

I do not blame the contractors. The original system specifications were built into the law itself by politicians who are not system designers. Then the politicians changed the specifications, typically at the last minute. The ACA law even stipulates a firm rollout date, unrelated to the changes in requirements. No wonder the product is a jumbled mess!

ute alumni
paradise, UT

This should not be surprizing. when americans are more concerned about recieving freebies from their government as opposed to electing someone of NO accomplishment, NO vision and NO clue. Seems to me americans got just what they deserve.....obama.

Confused
Sandy, UT

Itsjstmeagain,

While what you say is true to a certain extent, I know from personal experience that "leadership" in agencies for the federal government can make doing the programming portion of the process darn near impossible.

It goes back to the old programming adage when the user tells the programmer "I know that is what I told you I want, but it is not 'WHAT' I want".

WRK
Riverton, UT

There is indead someone who needs to be fired for this problem, and it is the person at the top.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

I hope they can get the website up and going right away. It's a sideshow to the entire exercise, which is about delivering health care, not websites.

toosmartforyou
Farmington, UT

Why, I must ask yet again, wasn't this rolled out to 10 States at a time, over 5 months, rather than all at once to the entire country? Then issues could be identified and solved much easier.

Why cannot persons shop for the best rate?

Why are rates higher than existing and much higher than anticipated or promised? (Oh, I just answered the above question.)

m.g. scott
clearfield, UT

I don't really want to help out Obama and this ACA but here is a simple solution. Why not just open the enrollment indefinately? Starting now, let anyone at anytime for any reason sign up when they want for the next 3 years? If this computer mess sorts itself out in the next year or so, many more would probably sign up. What is all this "deadline" stuff about anyway? And, get rid of the IRS fine all together. The administration should realize that forcing people to sign up was one of the big negatives in the first place. After all this ACA was "supposedly" to insure the "uninsured". It shouldn't have involved the rest of us who were already insured and "wanting to keep our plan and doctor". As promised by BO himself. Having government force and fine all Americans is just not American.

toosmartforyou
Farmington, UT

Hutterite, it underscores the federal government's lack of ability to actually deliver health care. (Or should I replace 'federal government' with 'Obama administration?)

Would you trust a doctor to deliver a baby that had trouble treating a cut finger? (Or in this case, a headache....which is what this whole ACA is?)

Nate
Pleasant Grove, UT

They did test before launch, and the test failed. (This under light load -- about 2000 connections. The issue is not "excessive demand.") Apparently, meeting the Oct 1 date was more important to the Obama administration than having a functioning website.

Kathleen Sibelius had told congressional committees for months that the project was on track. She was either lying, or out of touch. Either way, she should be fired.

Think of this: there are a couple of dozen places in the Obamacare law that say, "The secretary shall determine...." That secretary has proven to be either dishonest or inept. Who wants this person in charge of our health care?

And think of this: Obama was making the same statements she was making, so the same characterizations apply to him.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

@ m.g. scott
If ACA is to have any hope of success it must force young, healthy people to buy insurance.
Therefor, they NEED IRS agents and fines to make them buy. If you don't have large numbers of healthy people paying in you will never be able to pay for the Obama-promised features like:
*No lifetime caps
*No denial for preexisting conditions
*Maternity, dental and mental
These features cost lots of money, especially when you sign up large numbers of people who need those feature and subsidize their expensive care.
The next part of the train wreck is the lack of doctors to provide care to millions more who weren't going to the doctor before.
We are seeing the early signs of another entitlement program that government has botched and we cannot afford.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

@lost in DC

"Obamacare was passed in 2009 or 2010. I guess 3 years is not long enough for dems to get ready for their trainwreck."

Obamacare was passed in 2009 or 2010. I guess 3 years is not long enough for repubs to legally and properly remove a judicially-reviewed law they did not like and perhaps propose a solution more to their liking and more to the benefit of the American public.

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Throwing more resources (in this case programmers) at a late deadline does not speed it up, it slows it down.

I understand that she has been reluctant to come to congress and explain what is going on. She is trying to schedule time. I think that perhaps she is delaying because she wants to have some good news when she goes. She is in a world of hurt right now.

donahoe
NSL, UT

There are unstated rules that I remember being pounded into me working as an employee doing federal contracting:
(1) Never blame the customer and
(2) Don't mess up! ...although a different word choice is used.
What #2 meant, in practice, was that your job was to be certain that the system worked by helping the company be fully engaged with your customer, especially if specifications were found inconsistent with success. Is this difficult? You bet it is. Is this difficult process unrewarded? Largely, yes. But this strategic management choice is a fundamental reasons why some contracting firms stick around and others do not. And this unsung management style underpins many of our greatest American achievements.

souptwins
Lindon, UT

Now, isn't this classic. Someone is blaming BO for something. How's that fit for size Mr. Pres.?

The Solution
Dayton, OH

m.g. scott:
I couldn't agree more. Why the arbitrary deadlines? Why penalties for the uninsured? It doesn't make sense if the primary motive was to provide health care to those who couldn't get it before.

Possible Ulterior Motives:
1. Rollout right before next election cycle to increase democrat voter turnout and take over the House
2. Force all to buy insurance, especially healthy young folks who don't want/need it, to help cover costs
3. It was never about helping common citizens, but intended to reward insurance companies, health providers, and lawyers
4. It was never intended to succeed but set up to be so cumbersome that people will not only be ready but demand to have single payer (socialized medicine) systems by the time Hillary Rodham Clinton is president in 2016

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments