When I look around it is not really that an outrageous amount.
Yes, they are having a field day, but no; based on history and previous efforts, the lack of perspective is not only a result of the right wing, but a result of the laziness of the mainstream media.
And once again that is the result of the laziness of the mainstream media and exaggerations from the right wing one.
It is a big deal, there was a failure in the launch, but the lack of perspective should not be an excuse to ignore the blase attitude of wasting 24 billion dollars in an effort to defeat obamacare and people like you not wondering why the media is not remarking on that and the perspective one has to have, as pointed before one will have to dismiss the really dumb exaggerations, allow time to get tings right and get some heads to roll. In the case of the space program people did get dismissed for the Apollo 1 disaster, **but no one can say now that the Apollo program was a failure.
**
What?!?!!! How much do you think a website should cost?
Now tell me how much a website that DOESN’T WORK should cost?
Or because the website is a fucking disaster. Its certainly supports the notion that government can’t do anything right.
No, you’re just waving away a clear problem in implementation. Do all websites fail this badly on launch or is it just the government ones?
Noone is taking a blase attitude towards the shutdown. In case you haven’t been watching the poll numbers, Republicans have already paid the price for that (and will probably continue to pay the price unless we shoot ourselves in the dick by failing to accomplish basic shit like roll out a website).
At this point you are just deflecting blame by referring back to a prior scandal. How would that be any different than Republicans trying to bring up Solyndra or Benghazi during the shutdown?
Are you under the impression that there has been a LACK of outrage over the shutdown or that the outrage over the shutdown should immunize Obama from outrage over this total fuckup? You might be the one that needs a bit of perspective, or at least a less partisan one.
So tell me, who has been fired? Who should be fired? This was a preventable disaster and noone prevented it.
Crappy websites that don’t work well are nothing new, especially at launch. The real test will be if they can fix it. I invite you to look up the abomination that is the disneyworld.com website specifically the “My Disney Experience” section used for traveling to Walt Disney World (1 Billion+ and counting, though that includes hardware implementations).
Disaster? That label seems a bit premature if the insurance policies that are being issued don’t kick in until Jan 1, 2014.
Has the roll out gone smoothly? No, and I can get behind the pitting of the companies paid to do a professional job of the website roll out botching it badly.
But I’m not seeing actual harm in getting signed up in November as opposed to this past Oct. 1st beyond inconvenience.
It sounds like I was fortunate to live in a state (NY) that had set up its own health care exchange. Due to volume, I couldn’t complete my enrollment on the first day, but was able to finish it before the weekend using the early am hours.
Pretty happy that I landed a better plan at $340/mth as opposed to the $575/mth. It’s unfortunate that in an attempt to politicize the problem, the website issues are being misleadingly conflated by the GOP as symptomatic of issues with the ACA itself.
The botched rollout is a fucking disgrace. They even got an extra couple of weeks grace period because of the shutdown and they couldn’t even fix it in that time period. For a guy that seems pretty quick to throw career government employees under the bus he is awfully protective of his political appointees.
I live in Virginia, and the site seems to be working a lot better. The Obamacare exchange seems to be 40% to 75% cheaper than the individual insurance market circa 2008.
But if the Democrats had done their bound duty, and surrendered gracefully and given up on their demands for Mau-Mau socialized voodoo, then the $890 million squandered would have been saved, as well as the $2.4 billion sacrificed for the sake of the Republic. A futile sacrifice, it turns out, due to the stubborn intransigence of the Dems!
Are you counting project managers, regular managers, all the people interfacing with the government, people writing documentation, and the usual support staff? It sounds kind of low to me, actually.
I suspect companies like this have plenty of people on hand to allocate to big projects, as well as a pool of contractors. Just not that many people, especially in a relatively weak economy.
This is all just guessing, and I really don’t know the details about the scope of the project, but the fact that it took 9 months to code makes the people number seem like a mismatch (based on my own experiences).
“So we asked Julie Bataille, spokeswoman for the agency overseeing HealthCare.gov, for the total taxpayer cost committed for the federal exchange, and she said, “Total IT spending is in the neighborhood of about $630 million.””
That is the total for the whole shebang, not just the website as my point has been. If you want to that way you should also point out that that includes connections and systems that the states that are doing a better job so far are using, that should be included also in that “outrage”.
And it is still less than the 24 billions that the Republicans wasted to defeat the law.
“Total IT spending is in the neighborhood of about $630 million.” You do understand that the “connections” etc - that is, the backend - are part of the “website”, right?
Yes, and a big chunk of it goes to the states that are working better, there is also the item that could be missed that the article includes also the costs related to the tech surge, a number that was not part of the launch.
Once again, the launch of the federal site was a disaster, heads will likely roll for this, but this is not happening in a vacuum, there is still the reality that the Republicans have made the problems worse (the fact does remain that the states that supported the law are doing better) and my outrage meter is also affected by the fact that several billions were wasted by the Republicans just to defeat the law.
You know, I used to say as a joke that there was a syndrome among conservatives that causes them to have problems with timelines, I do not think that is a joke anymore.
Nope, you ignore that we were not talking about subsequent increases, like the tech surge and more experts called now, we were talking about the original costs of the launch of the federal website.
And read it again, “for the total taxpayer cost committed for the federal exchange” does not mean just the website.
No, that is the beauty of not linking to the article, the cite was missing the context that shows that she was talking about the costs of the surge too:
So no, it is ridiculous to claim all that IT work was used on the federal website alone, and sure, **new **information is telling us now that the cost is going up thanks to incompetency at launch time, but the cost of the original launch was not what some sources reported. Plenty of sources reported already on the most likely costs of the launch.
No, but the question was asked for IT spending on the federal exchange. Not including the state ones, as you tried to suggest.
Again, there is no way she could tell you what the cost of the “surge” is, since she has no way of knowing it. The “surge” did not happen yet. Gotta love it though how you think adding “dozens of new contract tech workers” would inflate costs by hundreds of million dollars. Those are some EXPENSIVE contract workers, aren’t they? A few tens of $million each?