Healthcare.gov Fails to Meet Its October 1 Advance Press

The editors of the Washington Post say that Healthcare.gov still isn’t where it should have been on October 1:

Leading up to its weekend deadline to get the site working, Obama administration officials assured the public that the “vast majority of users” would be able to use it. To them, “vast majority” means 80 percent of users — which is still too low. Officials boast the site is able to handle 50,000 simultaneous users. Yet that was the goal for Oct. 1, a day on which five times that many tried to access the site at once.

Then there are less-visible issues. Officials admit they are still having trouble with the files that transfer enrollment information to insurers. Other parts of the site’s back end still aren’t built. It was right — but not encouraging — that the Obama administration extended the date by which people have to apply to get coverage that starts on Jan. 1. Even that, though, is risky: Insurers will have only eight days to work out the logistics of enrolling those signing up late this month.

let alone where it should be now. And, as I mentioned in a post earlier today, the almost 40% of Americans who don’t have a broadband connection at home will still need to choose among using a dial-up connection to access Healthcare.gov, almost certainly a nightmarish experience, signing up with one of the healthcare exchanges over the phone, or doing so manually.

I wonder what the latency, the time from initial application to completed enrollment, is for persons enrolling exclusively via paper and the mails.

3 comments… add one
  • jan Link

    I listened to a discussion between Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress (having worked on Obamacare), and James Capretta, affiliated with the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Here is a portion of today’s manuscript where Capretta is analyzing the web site’s progress and where we stand today in the processing labyrinth of healthcare.gov:

    Look, the real test of Healthcare.gov is whether or not you make the right payment for the right people to the right insurance plan. It’s very easy to fix the front end enrollment if you turn off controls on the back end. It’s very clear from multiple media reports that the system is still not accurate when it makes payments to the insurance plan.

    In fact, they’re doing a workaround. They’re going to actually make large lump sum payments to the insurance plan, based on self- reporting from the insurance companies instead of actual individual subsidy calculations.

    So, they’re working around the whole problem instead of actually solving it.

    On the same program, Brit Hume commented on his own experience with the web site:

    In the state of Virginia, which we were — where we live, we were seeing what might be available to — that might be comparable to the wonderful plan we have here at Fox, and there was — there were plans available from exactly one company.

    The best plan available, for my wife, had — we tried to see how many of her doctors were covered by — included in the plan, zero.

    People are going to view the PPACA from their own personal experience with it. If it proves to be worthwhile, including ease of access, safe and professional processing, prices that are reasonable, with their hospitals and doctors intact then the PPACA will eventually be a success. Take away any of this, and there will be mounting and sustained dissatisfaction.

  • Red Barchetta Link

    I’m sending my application, written on parchment, by Pony Express. Seems appropriate for ObamaCare.

  • jan Link

    Good one, Drew!

Leave a Comment