A 2,700+ page monstrousity of a law that was n-e-v-e-r wanted by the majority of
Americans.What could go wrong?30 million more people to
receive free health care with NO more doctors added.What could go
wrong?Nationalized health care with sign up/enrollment via the
internet?What could go wrong?So, liberals.....are you
still convinced that "nothing can go wrong"?....
Many people voted for political leaders hoping they would increase taxes on
those who work, and be benefited by it. This is mean spirited.What
goes around,--comes around. When Obamacare strikes, I hope they pay like the
rest of us.
Computer programming requires viable end point and with analysts and programmers
and supervisors and especially the insurance companies involved, it is odd that
they don't have their precise programs in-place. Insurance companies would
have known of this debacle and that their whole plan with the President's
ultimate plan is not doable. Social security was robbed by the government years
ago. It was sold on a solid plan of people paying into the system and having the
money they contributed there in their future years. However, it was used to
build social programs that got people enabled to want government to do
everything. Government is not the end all but is there to help
protect the society's safety and welfare. This President hasn't run
anything in his life producing anything. His closest allies haven't done
anything either so it is a good opportunity to see what happens. Other
Presidents may have made mistakes in something but this President has made the
nations of the world despise us for his NSA intrusion into their lives and
countries. People like privacy. The NSA programming was successful. That is
where our CEO put his efforts.
Remember, "just vote for the bill now, read it later?" that got us to
this point. Who signs a binding contract before they read, know what's in
it? Oh yes, our Senate and Representatives did, and our voters did the same, by
voting for and keeping them in office. All the education in the world, without
the wisdom to employ it, causes this foolishness. We yearn for real leadership,
and it seems nowhere to be found, perhaps because the people themselves do not
exercise "the sense they were born with." Perhaps it all starts, and
ends, with you and with me, the most painful realization of all.
@GroverSocialism is found nowhere in Christ's teachings. He
teaches us to care for our brother, not turn him over to some soulless
Once government takes control of health care, --the door to communism has been
Could prices start low, and increase in the next year or two.Liberals are tricky in disguising their intent.How can we be sure,
rate increases aren't going to happen?
Web contractors blame Barack? Barack is the Jedi Master of blame and he will
simply deflect it to some other party...anyone but himself. With Barack - the
buck NEVER stops here. This little man is not a leader and every crisis sadly
shows that the king has no clothes.
The knashing and wailing is funny. You lost two elections. Democrats didn't
start 2 wars they are getting people to take "personal responsibility"
by buying private health insurance. Yes, that was a republican idea, even Romney
says so.Romney said he got the idea from the Heritage Foundation.
To "Grover" just because it came from the Heritage Foundation does not
mean it is a good idea. The other problem is that the idea that the idea for
the mandate that we got is anything like what the Heritage Foundation proposed
has been proven false. The ACA mandate does not reflect the HF, see
"Column: Don't blame Heritage for ObamaCare mandate" in USAToday.
atl134Regardless of the rational, it still is big brother government
finding another way to impose itself into the lives of all citizens.
Haven't we allowed enough of that already?Where will it end? Single
payer, socialized medicine? Is that what you want? Not me. I've lived in
that country and did not like the stories I heard from friends about long waits
and rationing health care the older you get. I'm talking about England by
the way, not Botswanna.rvalens2With Obama, It should be
the "bucks" started here. 7 trillion of them anyway. 7 trillion of
additional spending on top of the yearly 3 trillion plus we spend anyway.
Notice the difference? How could a country spend that kind of money and have
nothing to show for it except tepid economic growth and meek employment numbers?
As they would say in England, I'm gobsmacked.
@Grover - The Republicans of the 90's were moderate and sensible
politicians. Now, the tea party folks that are the cancer of the Republican
party are extremists who will push moderate Americans to continue voting
Democrat, not because they want to or believe in the complete Democrat platform,
but the tea party Republicans are absolutely insane.
@Uncle Rico "The government would never survive if they competed in the
private sector." - The majority of the big businesses in this country would
not survive without the Government pushing for subsidies and regulations that
protect their interests.
The Government contractors share the bulk of the blame. Who in their right mind
creates a website with over 500 million lines of code? That is absolute
insanity. The predominate operating systems on the market typically run well
under 50 million lines of code...
Ok Red explain this: The individual mandate (making healthy people to sign up)
was the brain child of the Heritage Foundation (Jim DeMint is a liberal?) during
the Clinton Administration. The only reason Obama went with this scheme is he
thought it would bring a few Republicans with a memory on board. Since it did
not and they had the votes they should have gone for national healthcare and not
wasted time trying to get any positive ideas from the Pubs to control healthcare
costs and make it affordable for all. I know...that is a socialist goal (and a
@ ATL134:1. The shopping question was a sequence question. You can't
"shop around" 'til you open a account --- which means you have to
expose your personal ID stuff to a myriad of confirming sources (without
encryption, according to the mode-of-failure reports). The rest of the world
does this at shopping cart checkout time.2. The hugely inflated
costs is a legitimate question that your subsidies response did not answer. To
paraphrase "So what? --somebody else's wallet will cover it". Did
you really mean that? When my own profitable Obamacare compliant policy
costs less than 1/2 (sticker price) and provides better coverage than is offered
by Obamacare --- there is definitely something wrong.
@JSB, I wish I could use more than one "like" for your post. Here is
what I would do, like, like, like, like, like, like, like, etc.You
get the idea. Spot on in my view.
President Obama will go down in history as President Blame. He's got making
excuses down to an art form. The trouble is, blaming and making excuses is not
leading. When Bush wanted to extend the debt ceiling, Obama called it
"unpatriotic." Are the Republicans now "patriotic" for wanting
to put a lid on it or was Obama wrong when he criticized Bush? We are heading
for a crisis of huge proportions unless something is done about it but if the
Republicans try to stop increasing the debt, President Blame will attack the
Republicans--it's his style. And when everything falls apart, he'll
find some Republican to blame. The biggest problem with Romney's campaign
is that he overestimated the intelligence of the average American voter. Oh, how
I wish Romney had been elected. I think that there are more and more democrats
who feel the same way.
If I recall, the ACA would only provide insurance coverage for an additional 30
million people more than already have insurance. If Mountainman's figure
of $394 million in costs is correct, taxpayers could have given each of those 30
million people $10 million dollars each. They'd probably be happy and we
wouldn't have to deal with this mess.The shutdown was a sham of
the Obama administration. Departments in the Pentagon and HUD were mailed
notice weeks in advance of the shutdown to expect delays in funds. The
administration wanted to make it as disruptive as possible to the American
people, spending money to close areas that were not costing anything to remain
open, ie. the veterans memorial, and viewing of Mt. Rushmore from the
roadside.The goal was to put the blame for the shutdown on the
Republican's so that Democrat's could use it in campaigning,
increasing their chances of election. We need people in government that are
concerned for the welfare of the country, and not just getting re-elected. The
game's that they are playing won't continue much longer, the American
people are slowly waking up and getting involved.
Considering past leaks of information from the military, IRS and NSA, how secure
is our confidential information?
"One House Democrat says the president needs to "man up" and fire
somebody..."President Truman had a plaque on his desk that
stated "The buck stops here." The one who should be fired is the man at
the top who pushed this debacle on all of us.
Ok liberals explain this. Several of you have pointed out that to get the
system to work they need young healthy people to sign up. The problem is that
they also included the "slacker" provision that allows the healthy young
people to stay on their parents' insurance. So, how do you expect to get
the young healthy kids to sign up for insurance when they can be covered by
somebody else until they are 26?
Obama is in a world of hurt right now and its not going to get better. After
the website is fixed and people are able to sign up for insurance, we will all
begin to painfully realize how expensive this is going to be. Premium increases
as well as hidden taxes will all be hitting our pocketbooks and bank
accounts.The state of our economy will continue to pitter along as
employment numbers largely reflect part-time work opportunities as employers
won't want to hire full-timers.I agree with a previous
post...watch for politicians to next call for a single payer system as a
replacement for Obamacare. We are quickly moving down the road of struggling
countries like Greece.
@Uncle Rico"The government would never survive if they competed in the
private sector."Then why were insurance companies so adamant
that there not be a "medicare buy-in" or other "public option"
in the Obamacare exchanges? They saw the non-profit entity as a threat to their
@m.g.scott"The administration should realize that forcing people to
sign up was one of the big negatives in the first place."Here's the reason Romney and Obama had mandates (Obama initially opposed
the idea). The problem with banning companies from dropping people for
pre-existing conditions is that you add a lot of sick people to the insurance
rolls. On its' own that means the cost of health insurance premiums
increase. So you need to balance it by putting a lot of younger healthier people
on there too. So it's there for cost control, and... as Romney explained
repeatedly before the 08 election, there are a lot of people who get sick, go to
the hospital, get treated (because at some point we determined that was basic
human decency), default on their medical bills, and leave all those costs for
the rest of us. It's estimated that the average family was paying around
1000 dollars a year just to cover that kind of cost for the uninsured. The
mandate prevents what Romney termed "free-riders".
@toosmartforyou"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?"Roughly 20 or so states have their own systems in
place, as far as I can tell at least most of them have been running smoothly.
The federal one applies only to the states that rejected the idea of setting one
up themselves. "Why cannot persons shop for the best
rate?"The healthcare exchange quite literally lets people shop
around and see the different rates."Why are rates higher than
existing and much higher than anticipated or promised?"Because
you didn't factor in the subsidies.
I finally figured out why Obama never accepts any responsibility for his
failures. Its a religious thing for him: Thou shalt have no other god before the
government! To critique or demand accountably from the government is therefore
like dissing their god to Obama and liberals.
@lost in DC"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."That's wrong. Reid and the
Dems voted to pass an amended continuing resolution, one Boehner never allowed a
house vote on. In fact, Republicans even changed the rules to guarantee shutdown
since the rules used to be that anyone in the House could initiate a process to
bring up a Senate bill for a vote but Republicans changed it so only House
majority leadership could, thereby guaranteeing a lack of vote on the Senate
bill which probably would've passed then seeing as that's basically
what passed a few weeks later.
The government would never survive if they competed in the private sector.
We really needed to have figured out Social Security and Medicaid funding before
starting this mess. With record numbers hitting retirement age we're
setting ourselves up for funding disasters already, now we've also got to
figure out universal healthcare... We're sunk in about 20 years from all
Say No To BOI agree that the only way for this ACA to succeed is to
have millions sign up. However, what I think we all see coming is another
"tax" being put on our payroll to support the ACA, like we do with
medicare, social security ect. The naive idea the Democrats had that this
would and could be supported by just the young, uninsured, and healthy was as
dumb of an idea as liberal thinking is capable of. And that's saying
something. Bottom line, I think the ACA is a bad program, and will ultimately
end up in all working Americans being billed, and the non working will get their
free health care. What's the difference from what has been going on
anyway? The only part of ACA that I think needs to be followed thru with is the
pre-existing condition. That however could have been legislated as a seperate
program althgether without this 2600 page monstrosity of a bill being passed.
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 House2. Force all to buy
insurance, especially healthy young folks who don't want/need it, to help
cover costs3. It was never about helping common citizens, but intended to
reward insurance companies, health providers, and lawyers4. 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
Now, isn't this classic. Someone is blaming BO for something. How's
that fit for size Mr. Pres.?
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.
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.
@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.
@ m.g. scottIf 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 mentalThese 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.
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.
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?)
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.
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.)
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.
There is indead someone who needs to be fired for this problem, and it is the
person at the top.
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".
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
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!
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".
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.
"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.
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!
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.