General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHealthcare.gov To date, only a few thousands have been able to enroll online
See this link: https://plus.google.com/+AlexanderHoward/posts/RctFNUVwjcZ
I can't verify that all the information is accurate, but it is 100% consistent with everything I have read and heard. This system is still a gigantic clusterf%%k more than a week after its launch.
Secy. Sibelius is all over the media trying to put a happy face on this, but listen closely to her words. She says "we have had millions of hits.". Yeah, every time somebody tries to get on and gets one of those error screens (or no response at all), that is a "hit". A "hit" doesn't not equate to any productive work.
And she says "Hundreds of thousands of people have created accounts." Jon Stewart followed up "You mean they have applied for insurance?" She was very clear that she meant exactly what she said. Lots of accounts have been created, but almost nobody is getting past that point.
I have created three accounts now because the system says that my accounts are invalid. This is so screwed up, it is unreal. And they had over 3 years to prepare for this. I don't want to hear about the "unexpected demand". That is baloney. The demand for this system was easy to predict. You know exactly how many people are uninsured and you can make a good guess at how many window shoppers there would be. And the system doesn't work any better at 4AM when the load would be 90% less.
Basically, it is a complete mess and it isn't getting any better. If there aren't huge improvements in the next couple of weeks, there won't be enough time to get most people enrolled to begin receiving their benefits on January 1. Yes, open enrollment goes on a few months after that, but I bet you don't get any subsidies retroactive to January 1.
The link hints at the real problem. Various pieces are outsources to different companies and none of the pieces are working together. Never could have seen that coming. At a time when Obama's big argument is that "We don't want large government, we want effective government" this isn't very helpful.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)And dismisses this very real problem as some sort of attack on the President.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)is true and not some hysterical over-reaction.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)
The website is troubled by coding problems and flaws in the architecture of the system, according to insurance-industry advisers, technical experts and people close to the development of the marketplace.
Among the technical problems thwarting consumers, according to some of those people, is the system to confirm the identities of enrollees. Troubles in the system are causing crashes as users try to create accounts, the first step before they can apply for coverage.
Experian EXPN.LN -0.35% PLC, an information-services firm, holds a federal subcontract to support that system. The company declined to comment.
Information technology experts who examined the healthcare.gov website at the request of The Wall Street Journal said the site appeared to be built on a sloppy software foundation. Such a hastily constructed website may not have been able to withstand the online demand last week, they said.
And by "hastily constructed", we are talking 3+ years.
BluegrassStateBlues
(881 posts)Kentucky has done an excellent job at implementing everything.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The problem is the Federal exchange that serves 36 states.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)And they did their own.
This isn't strictly related to the feds...
cilla4progress
(24,736 posts)for me yet. Here in WA.
jehop61
(1,735 posts)Then why would you post it ? Come back another time when you CAN verify.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The WSJ link in the original article was dead, which is why I could not verify it.
There is plenty of verification at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304441404579119740283413018.html
such as:
Large insurers have seen enrollment figures totaling in the hundreds each, said Sumit Nijhawan, chief executive of Infogix Inc., a data-integrity firm that works with such insurers as WellPoint Inc., Aetna Inc. and Cigna Corp.
So far, many tens of thousands of people had started the application process but the number of those who were able to create accounts and shop for coverage is likely in the low thousands, according to people with knowledge of the situation and estimates by insurance-industry advisers.
Rstrstx
(1,399 posts)Trying to get an actual account up and running to the point where you can shop for insurance has been frustrating beyond belief. There's always SOME error or one more thing you need to submit or the system is down, etc etc, I'm on a week now and can't get an up and running account, it's stuck in "in progress" mode and has hit a brick wall. They ask you to send proof of your identity, you do and the browser returns an upload error. Change browsers and it works but seems to disappear, there's no acknowledgment they have it and you call and they don't have a clue. They tell you you need a reference number (which they never gave).
It's all very frustrating, like some Republican firms are running the show. I want this to succeed as much as anyone but the website rollout has been a fiasco.
FIX IT!!! This isn't the Bush administration for God's sakes!
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)But what the hell, it makes a sensational headline and puts down Obamacare all at the same time... Sheesh.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)What I couldn't verify was that the blog was accurately quoting the WSJ article because his link was dead. The correct link is
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304441404579119740283413018.html
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)Amazing 
B2G
(9,766 posts)Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)But I'm certain that claiming it is but a few thousand will help someone... Now who would that be?
B2G
(9,766 posts)Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)Everything should be perfect by then. With only millions wanting to sign up and the fed site covering all the repug states that decided not to set up sites... Yes, make it all work perfect right away
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)There is a reason why they won't answer the question. And it isn't because they don't know. When they say that, they are lying. it is absolutely implausible that Secy. Sibelius is not receiving a daily briefing that includes an accounting of how many apps have been received. If she doesn't know that, she should be fired.
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)Let me guess... Impeachment next?
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)If I thought getting rid of Sibelius would help in any way, I'd be in favor of her removal. But the IT behind this is screwed up in every possible way, and one doesn't expect the Secretary to be an IT expert.
And the sad thing is that, with all this outsourcing and the fundamentally horrible design choice to not allow stateless browsing (i.e. doing your research without having to be logged in) this probably isn't fixable in the near term.
I did spell out the elements of a turnaround plan here but frankly I don't think there is anybody involved in this project that is smart enough to carry that off, or else they wouldn't be in this mess:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3784948
At this point, the fastest way to get out of this mess is to "wrapper" the current system with pages that will send people off to do stateless browsing. They ought to be able to create stripped down versions of the website that are not dependent on any login information. With that, you could clone the system as many times as necessary to scale the browsing activity, which is probably > 95% of the total workload. A small team of top notch programmers could have this done within 2 weeks, and if you deployed to an existing server farm like the Amazon cloud, deployment could happen quickly.
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)Of course, they are still trying to wade through all the reporting so the numbers are not hard yet but I'm sure you will still find a way to complain and just keep using your made up numbers.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)And that is despite the NY system having what one might actually consider start-up "glitches". The issue is that the Healthcare.gov site is not having "glitches". It is a fundamentally bad design that can't be fixed by adding a server here and fixing a line of code there.
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts) 
chill_wind
(13,514 posts)I'm sure they would love to be able to. Wouldn't we all?
All the traffic is awesome, but successful enrollment is the ultimate point.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)nobody here wants this process to be the labyrinthine mess it is
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)I'm asking where he got the numbers he is using... And they appear to be made up. I don't think anyone is claiming it is perfect but I don't know it is so bad only a few thousand have been able to sign up.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Frankly I am surprised that ANYBODY has been able to apply, and I have no reason to doubt that the enrollments are numbered in the small thousands so far. Sibelius was all over the media yesterday, and when pressed she would not answer the question of how many people have enrolled. She only talked about "hits" which is completely meaningless, and "account creations" which is meaningless when most users cannot actually log on using the account they created.
Please provide your evidence that the system is actually working well. There is ample evidence that it is big-time screwed up. Give me the evidence you are relying on that shows it is actually working.
Ohio Joe
(21,756 posts)The repug states that decided to not do what they were supposed to and dumped all the traffic on the fed site has some responsibility in here as well. In the end though, I'm not going to decide that means only a few thousand were able to sign up either... Certainly not after only a few days of being open.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)Also, until the system becomes operational, it's not always easy to tell how it's all going to work out. It can (and will) be fixed.
Heather MC
(8,084 posts)I use be a software tester and every single software that went on line had glitches some times we had to take them completely down and rework. because once outside people started using them and it was no longer on the protected bubble of our system
there would be problems. and unfortunately they are problems we could not address until the program went on line.
B2G
(9,766 posts)The system doesn't function. As a software tester, I would think you would know the difference.
Would you have signed off on testing of these systems, given what is being experienced?
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Makes you wonder....
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The key doesn't fit in the lock, and was obviously not tested.
But if you could get a locksmith to overcome that, you find that the battery is of the completely wrong voltage, so it can't crank the engine.
And if you can get a jump-start, it turns out that instead of a drive shaft, they have used duct tape to connect the engine with the wheels, so you can't go faster than 2 MPH without tearing the duct tape loose.
And if you could ever get the thing moving, the engine would indeed knock.
But you wouldn't notice that because the frame disintegrated and the seats are a couple miles behind you on the pavement.
In short, practically nothing works right in this system.
Heather MC
(8,084 posts)they may not have had enough people to test a flood of people. Let's say they had 100 peopke use the system at the same time. but the issues don't present unless they have 1000.
B2G
(9,766 posts)1950? Automated load testing has been around for decades. You don't need actual users to log onto the system to simulate load.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)50 years. If there was ever a system that should have been load-tested, this is it.
The total incompetence here is really devastating -- so harmful to what we have all been trying to accomplish by way of progress in this country. It really pisses me off that these people screwed this up so badly.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)I asked yesterday:
...if the Koch Brothers are willing to spend billions to kill Obamacare, how hard would it be to payoff a sufficiently senior programmer to produce a system that passes QA, but bombs COMPLETELY on rollout?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023803082
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Until today, I had no idea that Experian was even involved. Why the f%%% do I have to tell Experian anything in order to see what policies are offered in my area?
Skip Intro
(19,768 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)was outsourced to companies whose management is probably very well aligned with the Koch Brothers.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Skinner is going to spank you 
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)saying that my accounts were invalid. It is reasonable to try the account creation process again after a few days, especially when the administration said they were making big improvements over the weekend.
If you will take the time to read the cited material, you will find that hundreds of thousands of others -- if not millions -- have had exactly the same experience -- were able to create an account but could not use it.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)I bet you'll be able to log into all three-
Just FYI 
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)And it isn't a simple database issue, a simple coding issue, a simple network issue, or a simple miscalculation of demand. It is a monumental IT screw-up using an architecture that is faulty to the core.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Last edited Tue Oct 8, 2013, 05:16 PM - Edit history (1)
One of the few real news stories that TV stations inside California have been carrying lately regarding local news has to do with how over 330,000 people in this state are inside the auspices of an agency affected by a monumental screw-up of a computer system that handles the Unemployment Division (EDD) of the state.
For months now, people are not getting their unemployment checks. At least some 39,000 people have been affected. Their misery is a reality - how long would any apartment complex manager allow an individual and their family to stay in their apartment if they haven't the means to afford it, regardless of who is at fault? And why was the company at fault even chosen? It had already shown to provide faulty programming to some other big governmental department.
Jon Stewart has referred to the mess with the VA computers, and how they don't handshake correctly with other governmental agency computers.
Now we have this additional system coming online, and if what you' re saying about it is true, it seems FUBAR. The legislation was enacted in the Spring of 2010. It is now 2013, and this is the best they can do?
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)By all indications, they have been very successful at getting a lot of insurance companies to compete in almost all of the 36 states that healthcare.gov supports. That is a HUGE undertaking. As an IT professional who has been involved in the design and deployment of large-scale systems for nearly 40 years, if you would have asked me where the likely failure would be, I would have said:
The IT part is relatively simple. It is a known database, which is practically read-only. It must serve a large population, but any competent designer would employ an architecture that is both scalable and suitable for parallel processing. Certainly DoS attacks are a risk in any system with such a high profile, so extensive preparations should be made for that, but there are effective counter-measures that any competent IT organization would employ. So I wouldn't say the system is trivial, but certainly not a difficult thing to accomplish in 3-1/2 years or even 18 months, including extensive testing. The area that I considered most vulnerable was in actually getting insurance companies to compete and provide a comprehensive array of plans.
So I would have been 180 degrees wrong on this one.
I am so sorry the IT organization did such a poor job, but I am impressed with all the other work.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)that would be 99.99% in 10 days-
Bet?
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)I don't insist on 99.99%. My definition of "acceptable enough not to destroy the whole ACA program" would be that the vast majority of users can get on whenever they try, can create accounts without incident, can quickly obtain quotes for their situation, and can enter an acceptable application without any extraordinary effort, delay, or error message. I certainly expect a small percentage of users to experience problems, but right now, practically 100% of the users are experiencing problems.
And if in 10 days there are a couple of reliable media sources that have written articles that talk about how the problems have largely been resolved and things are working smoothly, I will consider you the winner of this friendly wager.
And I will make that donation to DU in either case.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)THAT'S a design flaw.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/10/08/3677523/questionable-design-blamed-for.html
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)and should have been addressed with a lightweight read-only site that allows you to pull up the policy information. There is absolutely no reason to force a user to create an account in order to see the data because the data is the same for all citizens (of the same age, state, etc.)
From an IT perspective, there are many different ways such a read-only system could have been constructed -- using very simple architectures that could be implemented in a matter of days -- to partition that workload. After all, the policies do not change until the next open enrollment period. It is absolutely a read-only database -- or should be, anyway. One could easily clone servers by state, by age, by first letter of the last name, etc to scale that up without any strain whatsoever. That would have left a relatively small central system to process something like 10 million enrollments in 45 days -- AFTER the user had done all the heavy browsing to determine what they wanted to buy. That's roughly 10,000 purchases an hour, which is significant, but perfectly manageable using well-known design techniques. LOTS of systems do far more work than that.
This is near total incompetence on the IT front.
B2G
(9,766 posts)that allowed for browsal of plans with limited personal info required with a 'checkout' function that did the heavy lifting.
I got dissed big time.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)If they did, they would realize just how f%%%ed we are right now. There is still time to pull this out, but the foundations are so unbelievably bad that it won't be fixed with some simple overnight fixes. We are really up against a clock. We saw last night that people like Jon Stewart are already pushing hard to delay the enrollment requirement for a year.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Yet I evidently know nothing.
/s
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)What people don't seem to understand that there really is such a thing as an IT professional. There are well-defined disciplines that are used rigorously in the design ad testing of large-scale systems. There are Baccalaureate, Masters, and PhD levels of study in Computer Science and Computer Technology. And there is 50 years of practical knowledge to draw upon.
This isn't the first time anybody had to design a large system. Why they didn't employ people who were up to the task is a real mystery and a real disappointment to me.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)of the issues. For people to expect this to work flawlessly a week in is kind of ignorant of how computers and the net work. I wish I could sugar coat this, but if I needed to sign up, trust me, I would not try in the first month.
B2G
(9,766 posts)it's gonna be a world of hurt come Jan 1 when benefits should be kicking in.
Wounded Bear
(58,660 posts)I hope it gets better. I live in a State that supported this and have their own system up and running (I think). Thankfully, I don't need the exchange yet, as I have finally found a real job that has insurance coverage, that will kick in come Dec.
Oh, I live in a "high tech" state (WA), too.
Seriously, I hope it gets better for you. Please remember that any plan you sign up for will not be valid until Jan, so the delays won't affect that, hopefully.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)So what. My President has managed to do what 43 Presidents before him couldn't. And you're whining in the first WEEK of implementation??
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)I will continue to do so once a day. When the March deadline arrives, if I still haven't been able to sign up, I will REFUSE to pay a penalty. It's really simple.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Which was the whole point of an October rollout.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)But the open enrollment period doesn't end until sometime in March - the 15th? That's when negative consequences to the uninsured kick in.
Mind you, I support ACA 100% in spite of its imperfections. But if my persistent good faith effort to sign up using the online system they promised us fails, that's going to be their problem, not mine.
B2G
(9,766 posts)to have coverage on Jan 1.
Beyond Dec 15, your coverage will kick in after Jan 1 accordingly.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)enrollment period. Not having insurance on Jan 1 isn't a "consequence" for me since I already don't have it.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)B2G
(9,766 posts)with the challenges huge software projects present.
2 months, for the best of systems, is tight.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)I expect November 1 that things will be running much more smoothly than today.
I'm sure they underestimated the amount and variety of user error and they clearly have some less than optimized code and business processes.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Perhaps you could share?
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Than first few days.
B2G
(9,766 posts)No one is releasing any numbers at all. Have you looked at the Facebook page? It's a potpourri of frustration.
I can't get past the security questions.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Jan 1st the the starting date for the policies being purchased from now until Dec 15th.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)And I will have to make some moves to reorganize some assets in order to qualify for the discounts. That will take some time to plan.
They have the whole damn process inside out. At one point I was on the phone with an agent. He asked as if I would make a purchase right on the spot, based on the data he was going to read from his screen. No. That doesn't work. I have to find out what providers are in the networks for each of the policies, as the cheapest coverage in my market is for a hospital network that I want no part of. They killed my mother and they are in the process of draining my father's bank account. I have to make sure the policy I buy doesn't force me to go there.
With all due respect, do you really not consider any of these things when you purchase insurance? Do you not do any due diligence?
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Are you just trying to post snarky comments or do you have a real question in mind?
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)How would even half of these people, (which includes my household,) even get any HC if they get into the system? There is no increase in Clinics, Hospitals, Doctors, Nurses, radiologists, etc.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)To meet demand? I think we can all chill with RW talking points.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)And doctors are not required to accept new patients when they are at capacity ...........
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)There are ways to flex the health care delivery system to account for greater numbers including technology, more use of PA's and other professional staff to get people the help they need.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)And without a serious hit of quality of service. Better get a doctor now while there are still ones taking on more patients
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Yeah, everyone should do what they gotta do.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Headaches and long wait times to be seen
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Is not a RW talking point. It is reality.
If this were a matter of tens of thousands of people being added tot he existing system, I'd agree it is a right wing talking point
But 7,100,000 people means the HC situation in California is going to require a whole new infusion of new personnel.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Things catch up.....which could be years. The doctors will be fine as they can refuse new patients but hospital care is going to ve difficult and dangerous..as the more busy it gets the more risks of mistakes.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)and go to PCPs and clinics more. The total workload should be LESS, not more, but I agree with the point that dislocation is a real issue. Are there enough PCPs?
I know in my area, there are many PCPs who are accepting new patients. I just had to make such a change a few months ago when my PCP decided to go to the concierge model -- if I would kindly pay him another $2600 a year just for the privilege of being his patient. I declined. But in screening for new docs, I had no trouble finding a dozen or more who were accepting new patients. It may be a different situation elsewhere, of course.
Blue_Roses
(12,894 posts)Just read about this the other day. I believe it was on NBC ( will do a search for it). Anyway, it discussed this very thing--the need for more doctors, nurses, med techs, etc. The healthcare industry will be a big boom for jobs in the near future, although, there is always a job waiting for nurses.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Now somebody will jump on me for wasting the President's time with my little gripe.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Oldtimer inside joke....
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,501 posts)
.
displacedtexan
(15,696 posts)You rock!
dionysus
(26,467 posts) Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)No one doubts there have been glitches in the IT portion of this. This has been covered well in media.
But to say only thousands have enrolled due to snafus? No. Most people, once they read up see the policies don't kick in until Jan 1. So from a practical perspective, once they've set up account and shopped around, there is no need to execute the transaction and enroll.
I would certainly wait myself if I was doing it so I could wait for pricing to really be firm, ensure glitches around transmission of data to insurance companies have been hammered out. Lot's of reasons to wait and no real gain to doing it this week.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)This entire concept seems to be completely lost on you. I don't know how to explain it any more simply. The system is not functional.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)I moved last month, but the federal government knows where I am, in that the Postal Service has my address and so does the Social Security Administration. The state government knows my address because my drivers license info was updated weeks ago. The city knows my address because they send me utility bills. All three levels of government know where I am located, but, because some corporation does NOT know my address, they are allowed to prevent me from applying for a government program, and "call back another day" is the only solution?
I called the healhcare.gov help line Monday night and was told to wait until mid-week then try again online. Have been an enthusiastic supporter of the ACA, stand to save $5500/yr. without a subsidy, so am very sorry to see such a mess just at the time when ACA needs public support.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)first time I hit the Experian wall, three days ago, the option to upload proof of one's identity was nonfunctional because it insisted that a very small file exceeded their 10 megabyte limit. This time it took my driver's license scan and said I'll be notified by email when my ID is confirmed.
Small improvement, but at least moving in the right direction from total frustration-- and no more instructions to call Experian.
Response to BlueStreak (Original post)
lostincalifornia This message was self-deleted by its author.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Probably not half that many. You just cannot get through the system.
Now if you include California, New York, Kentucky and other states that did their own, there may be 100,000 or even 500,000 apps in by now. But on Healthcare.gov, no. That system is as close to dead ans any system can be without just turning off the power.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)I think my household will be one household that simply pays the penalty in 2014. (which if I remember correctly is not all that much during the FY 2014.) .)
Our thinking on the matter: Maybe by October 2014 it will be possible to know which of the three Calif. exchange insurance providers in my region actually works, if any.
MFM008
(19,814 posts)to enroll my son on the WA state. Completed the application, then the site wont take it. Ill have to call.
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)So I'm not surprised that they weren't all ready.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)How many people have to visit the Medicare site to enroll each year? About 1-2 million?
How many people did Healthcare.gov need to enroll this year? There is a target audience of about 20 million, about half of which will be served by state-run systems.
So Healthcare.gov has to enroll about 10 million, give or take?
Yeah, who possibly could have foreseen the need to create a scalable system and to test for performance at that level? Well, they only had 3-1/2 years to think of that. (sarcasm)
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)And the state run site only asks a few questions about age, location, prescription drugs and then lists the policies with prices and companies you might be interested in. At that point you are on your own to contact the companies, apply for insurance, and deal direct.
Apparently the rules re eligibility, and various parameters that are used to calculate premium and subsidies, are much more complex on healthcare.gov. Also, the ability to purchase through the site makes it much more complicated.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)and simply showed how no advanced queuing theory is required. Simple calculations on the back of a napkin are sufficient to see that the load would be an order of magnitude more than Medicare.gov.
This is like saying that "Nobody could have anticipated that Osama bin Laden would order plans to fly into buildings." Yeah, actually they could. It was int eh Presidential Daily Briefing.
spanone
(135,838 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)you would see that I explained that comment in simple English. I meant I could not verify the blog citations because the blogger had an invalid link to the WSJ site. And then I subsequently posted a working link to that WSJ article which validate everything the blogger wrote. And then you will find numerous articles from other reliable sources on this thread, all confirming essentially the same set of facts -- that the system is as good as non-functional at the moment.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)what the hell is wrong with people? Aggression can't change the facts.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)the pro-ACA side is walking right into a roundhouse punch. This system is not going to be fixed quickly. The administration needs to change the way they talk about it before them completely lose control of the "let's delay a year" argument.
legcramp
(288 posts)is when the vast majority of big companies have the annual open enrollment for their health insurance plans.
If the blame is being laid on so many people trying to access the system it's only going to get worse as people try to compare to their new rates and coverage from their plans, if they have any left.
theCHARLOTTEan
(15 posts)Tip #1, I hope this link will help some of you. This website has the spreadsheet information for the Federal and Partnership insurance exchanges. Simply click on your state and select county, family size, individual particulars, smoking Y/N, income, and type plan; click calculate. In Tennessee 90+ plans. Your results may vary. No big brother looking over your shoulder just the data. Biggest weakness hear is lack of details about individual plans. Blue Cross has minimal info on most plans. So use this info to contact actual insurance company for info. In Tennessee website at BCBST near useless, unless you are already a paying policy holder. See Tip #3 if you are not a policy holder for the company you are interested in. Hope you will have better luck in other states.
Tip #2, Create your account on the marketplace, if you can, then call 1-800-318-2596 and ask for a paper application. I know sounds hopelessly low tech. Took one call, 2-3 minutes, zero hold time at 2 pm on last Friday. Should take 5 days or so to arrive, if you can get on the website before then great, if not backup plan in place. I was told they would contact you by email upon receipt of application.
Tip #3; Forget all of the above, contact a health insurance broker or agent. The exchanges I looked at have many plans but only 3 or 4 providers. Each agent should be more than happy to help as I believe the company gets the entire years subsidy the first month of enrollment should you qualify. Okay you can use tip #1 to help here.
Question; Why are the insurance providers not advertising that they can help you decide what policy is best for you? Over the next 10 years the premiums and subsidies are in the trillions, don't you want to be the first provider for these new customers?
Again first time posting.
Long time amused and confused reader.
theCHARLOTTEan
Go TITANS
steve2470
(37,457 posts)according to the data on that site, I can pay the same I am now and get a BETTER policy with lower out of pocket expenses.
theCHARLOTTEan
(15 posts)I will save about $200 a month on a Gold plan.Still have to check on a few things so I will talk to an agent tomorrow.
The $6300 max out of pocket in the Bronze plans concern me for lower income or those living paycheck to paycheck. I believe this will not end bankruptcy due to medical expenses until some uniform Medicaid standard is set for the entire population. That's why I hope to get the Gold plan, lowest total cost to get to out of pocket limit.
I don't think I can start a discussion yet.
Post #2
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Actually, I will do it for you. Thanks again.
eta: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023813118
Thread inspired by you and giving YOU credit.
theCHARLOTTEan
(15 posts)Now to dreamland, where those that attempt to rule, not govern are served, spit-roasted, solar roasted of course.
Dreams of things to come.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)gopiscrap
(23,761 posts)chill_wind
(13,514 posts)October 08, 2013
IT experts: HealthCare.gov is still a mess
Experts see issues in front and back ends of problem-plagued health care portal; fixes are likely in government hands
http://www.infoworld.com/t/e-government/it-experts-healthcaregov-still-mess-228409?source=footer
(two pages).
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)To be fair, that probably includes all the staff needed to actually process the apps and the staff to work with insurance companies building the database. This is not a very complicated system as IT developments go. It basically is a simple look-up on a static database and a discount calculator that is not terribly complicated. The coding shouldn't have required more than a $5-10 million dollars. I have built much more complex systems for half that amount.
The infrastructure (including call center) would be much more expensive due to the large number of clients to serve. But still, it is hard to see how they could blow through a billion bucks.
Response to BlueStreak (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
gopiscrap
(23,761 posts)
rainbow4321
(9,974 posts)I created an account on day one and I've never gotten past,the blank auth/userprofile page.
Is it because i am using my iPad or is it the site??
Really pissing me off
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)once you finally get past the first step, a dozen similar hurdles lie ahead.
