A Reminder

Just a little reminder. The backend of Healthcare.gov is still presenting problems. The user-facing part of the site is, apparently, much improved, but, like an iceberg, that’s only a seventh of it.

The user experience may be better but to say that’s it’s working now is at best an exaggeration and at worst a lie. It still has a long way to go.

21 comments… add one

  • michael reynolds

    Dave:

    You say:

    The user experience may be better but to say that’s it’s working now is at best an exaggeration and at worst a lie. It still has a long way to go.

    The report you cite says:

    Our conclusion

    Obama said healthcare.gov is “working great now.” Compared to the site’s functionality in October, that may be a fair assessment.

    But for a website four years in the making, there are still a lot of issues that are making it difficult for states and providers, and that has indirect consequences for consumers. It’s a fraction of the individuals who faced issues last year, but many complicated and critical functions must be built and tested before the site is operating “great” for everyone.

    “Lie” vs. “”Fair assessment.” I don’t think you’ve characterized this fairly.

  • jan

    A friend’s daughter and her live-in boyfriend signed up for CA’s Obamacare. They are young college graduates, working in low-paying jobs who had their HC policies canceled, and obediently cooperated in their detour over to Obamacare. The only problem is that their insurance is still not being recognized. The boyfriend, though, broke some ribs surfing last week and had to seek treatment. So far, the medical facility he sought out is giving him the benefit doubt by extending him treatment without any documentation of medical insurance.

    This is the best that 4 years of planning can produce?

    The reading I’ve done has asserted fixing the front end was the easy part of the system. It’s coordinating the back end — sorting through enrollments, payment and subsidy verifications etc, that is the grinder, and is predicted to take some time to rectify.

    In the meantime, we have supporters acting like blind mice, telling those who question or oppose the PPACA to ‘suck it,’ because all is going smoothly. It reminds me of their infinite belief in CO2 global warming, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

  • jan

    Surprise — Census bureau changing annual survey to obscure effects of Obamacare.

    How quaint — as well as delusional! The formula for making this administration’s policies always look good — whether it’s GDP, UE and now uninsured numbers — is to to simply tweek some variables, re-shuffle the deck and, poof, come up with a positive outcome to throw at people who won’t know the difference. Snake oil remedies are alive and well in the 21st century

  • Compared to the site’s functionality in October, that may be a fair assessment.

    That’s a pretty darned low benchmark to use as a basis of performance, Michael. Where it was in October rather than full functionality.

    Compared to where it needs to be, as I said, it still has a long way to go. At best “working well” is an exaggeration. Which is what I wrote in the post.

  • jan

    Thanks Dave for offing the post duplication. I seriously don’t know how that happened.

  • ...

    jan, I don’t have much faith in the private sector, either. I’ve currently got two healthcare plans through the private sector, one through my wife, and one through my other wife, who is my dead mother. According to Disney I’m an incestuous necrophiliac bigamist who has thus earned retirement medical benefits even though I just turned 46. In fact, I have been getting these benefits since January of 2012. And in additional fact, somehow a lab charged work to the Disney account, who then paid for the procedures.

    All this despite the fact that I haven’t actually PAID for the benefits. (The annual fee is ridiculously low, but I still haven’t paid for it.)

    All this despite the fact that I’ve been trying to get this cancelled for about two years now.

    All this despite the fact that I’ve been told REPEATEDLY that the insurance through Disney has been canceled.

    And yesterday I found out that Disney is STILL carrying my on their books, and that charges that should have been reversed months ago have still been charged to that account. Which is greatly fucking with my need to pay the goddamned bill.

    This from a system that has been up and running for decades.

    So I’m not thinking the private sector is doing much better at the moment than the government, who is failing abjectly.

  • jan

    Ice,

    Well, maybe when anything gets too big, whether it’s a private sector organization like Disney or the government, it also gets too unwieldy to manage well. Nonetheless, I would opt for the private sector complaint department any day over the government’s, in being able to weave around the various departments, with some hope of resolution, someday. In your case I would keep a journal of your dealings with Disney’s incompetence, so they don’t come back and ask for repayment from you when they realize their back log of mistakes.

    In the meantime here is Brit Hume’s succinct, direct take on the future of Obamacare.

    In a town never short of silly arguments, one of the silliest is the debate over whether Republicans will ever be able, or even willing, to repeal Obamacare. The truth is that when and if the GOP is in a position to work its will on health care, the question of repeal vs. replace will be little more than a parliamentary detail.

    That is to say that a massive revision of the nation’s health insurance regulations could take any of several forms. One would be a repeal of Obamacare, all of it lock, stock and barrell, followed by an enactment of a new and different system. Another would be to do it all in a single measure as amendments to the Obamacare law itself. The point is, it doesn’t matter.

    It is certainly true that some parts of the Affordable Care Act would likely be retained in any rewrite. Children’s ability to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26 would likely stay. So would provisions designed to prevent people from being denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions, though Republicans would probably try to achieve that in a different way from Obamacare.

    Finally, it’s unclear how much of Obamacare, as it was passed, will even be in effect by the time Republicans in Congress get a crack at it. After all, the President has gone some distance toward undoing the law himself by simply not enforcing significant parts of it. So it’s not even clear tonight how much will be left to repeal, replace or rewrite.

  • ...

    jan, I’ve been trying to get this corrected for over two years. It apparently isn’t going away.

  • TastyBits

    In the case of government, you have a chance. You can always contact one of your representatives. In the case of a business, you need more lawyers than they have.

    If Disney decides you owe them thousands of dollars for their mistake, you will owe them thousands of dollars for their mistake, and there will not be a damn thing you can do about it.

    You can either lube up, or you could go to one of your representatives.

  • steve

    ” It reminds me of their infinite belief in CO2 global warming, despite all the evidence to the contrary.”

    What evidence is that? I have yet to see any. I have asked the physics major son to forward me any if he finds any. None so far. Mind you, he actually reads the papers.

    Steve

  • steve

    On the business side, it is much easier to deal with most problems with Medicare. By and large, they are pretty rare. In all of the years I have been in charge of billing, all of our big problems have come with private insurance. I am having to threaten to sue one company right now. That said, when we have finally gotten a response, some have been pretty positive or helpful. It is a very mixed bag. (This is actually kind of odd since private vendors actually handle Medicare contracts. What I think this means is that Medicare has more consistent rules with fewer changes. )

    Steve

  • I think that something to keep in mind is that measurements are facts but projections are opinions. Interpolated or extrapolated data are opinions, too.

    Now, some of these opinions may be well-founded. Some not so much.

  • ...

    If Disney decides you owe them thousands of dollars for their mistake

    THAT will not be the case. So far the only thing billed to them has been some lab work. And frankly, they won’t have a leg to stand on. As it is I’m considering calling some attorneys to see if any of them want to take a tilt at the mouse. I am really REALLY tired of dealing with their mistakes.

  • TastyBits

    @Icepick

    If Disney wants to fight you over it, they will just drag it out until you run out of lawyer and other fees. They may not, but they can. It is the second part that causes me problems.

  • ...

    Disney has nothing to fight over. They’re the ones insisting that I have insurance, even though I am not qualified for it, haven’t paid for it, and have tried to get it canceled.

    It’s a real fuck up. For this to have happened I needed to work for Disney and my mother needed to be a retiree. They already have a number on file for me, and I had used that number from 2003 until 2008. So all the doctors and labs and such that I see HAVE that number. And now it is active again. Somehow the doctor’s office or the lab used the old insurance number back in January (even though they had been using the new one for years), and thus I am screwed. If I had never worked for Disney in the first place this couldn’t happen, as no one would have an ID number for me that was valid with Disney.

    The Hell of it is that I keep finding out about this because I am trying to pay my bills and in doing so I keep finding out about the problem. I’m dreading calling the benefit center again, because it will take two hours, at the end of it they will tell me it is settled, and in a month I will find out that it isn’t. I have a vague idea of where the retiree office is at Disney, and I’m considering showing up with daughter in tow and causing a stink in person. Technically there isn’t a PLACE to go for this problem, just a call center to phone. I don’t know, I’m just tired of getting fucked by those guys.

  • TastyBits


    Technically there isn’t a PLACE to go for this problem, just a call center to phone. I don’t know, I’m just tired of getting fucked by those guys.

    Have you ever read Kafka?

  • Guarneri

    “I think that something to keep in mind is that measurements are facts but projections are opinions. Interpolated or extrapolated data are opinions, too.”

    And if the measurements are imprecise, downright faulty or inconsistently sampled…………well.

  • jan

    “What evidence is that? I have yet to see any. I have asked the physics major son to forward me any if he finds any. None so far. Mind you, he actually reads the papers.”

    Steve,

    There are many dissenting professional opinions regarding the science claiming CO2 causes global warming. In fact there is even an opposing NIPCC (Nongovernmental Institute of Climate Change) refuting the “evidence” from the IPCC, whose doctrines are religiously held to be ‘settled science,’ and, without question, followed by warmists enthusiasts .

    Here is a paper written 4 years ago having over a thousand international scientists on board debunking the so-called consensus global warming premises. Why differing opinions are so infrequently cited by the mainstream media may be because they are deliberately excluded from the global warming discourse — much like the news of the day, regarding what has been described as “phony scandals” by this administration. It makes one wonder why some of the better investigative reporters are leaving the MSM, such as Sheryl Akkisson, Michael Isikoff, and Lisa Myers. Could it be that they are tired of their MSM bosses telling them what is acceptable to pursue and write about, and what is not — all according to perimeters set by the WH.

    More articles skeptical of CO2 being the AGW culprit, as presented by global warming activists/believers, are: here, here, here, and here.

  • Zachriel

    Dave Schuler: The user-facing part of the site is, apparently, much improved, but, like an iceberg, that’s only a seventh of it.

    A tenth. The density of ice is about 920 kg/m³, while the density of seawater is about 1025 kg/m³. That would seem to mean Obamacare is worse than you thought!

    Steve: What evidence is that? I have yet to see any.

    jan: There are many dissenting professional opinions regarding the science claiming CO2 causes global warming.

    You forgot the evidence (though this is probably not the right thread for that discussion).

  • That would seem to mean Obamacare is worse than you thought!

    My observations were directed at Healthcare.gov rather than the PPACA. My primary complaint about the PPACA is that it’s a distraction from the more important chore of reducing healthcare costs. It sucks the air out of the room and will do so for the foreseeable future.

  • jan

    You forgot the evidence (though this is probably not the right thread for that discussion).

    Zachriel,

    The so-called scientific evidence from warmists has been disputed by other prominent scientists. Dr. Leslie Woodcock, a professor emeritus of chemical thermodynamics at the University of Manchester in England, with a Ph.D. from the University of London, is one such person, who has served as a senior research consultant at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Laboratory in Ohio. He has asserted in his interviews that the theory of manmade climate change is an “unsubstantiated hypothesis”.

    Other notable details about Woodcock credentials are that he is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, a founding editor of the journal Molecular Simulation, a recipient of a Max Planck Society Visiting Fellowship, and a former guest scientist at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology. He has gone on to say that water is a much more powerful greenhouse gas and there is 20 times more of it in our atmosphere than carbon dioxide, which kind of de-emphasizes the effects that CO2 is supposed to have on this planet.

    Furthermore, like many have already observed, global warming has become an industry all unto itself, being very lucrative (i.e. Al Gore) and politically advantageous for those who ascribe to it, especially in their increased ability to receive tons of government grant money. Ironically, Woodcock differentiates “real scientists,” as being those having no political interest in global warming, and thus are able to be more objective in their analysis of climate changes.

Leave a Comment