Computer systems like the ACA's don't 'just work'

  • Article by: Virginia Postrel , Bloomberg News
  • Updated: October 26, 2013 - 4:22 PM

Actually, that’s no surprise. Yet planners got taken in by the illusion.

  • 39
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
windigolakeOct. 26, 13 4:44 PM

"The website is a disaster" === Another right wing lie. Even more people have signed up than was originally expected by this time. I've go on to, and it worked just fine for me. A little slow, but what's the rush? I've had many more problems with commercial websites that have been running for years. And since the ACA is allowing me to get insurance for about half of what I was paying the robber barons with my skin cancer diagnosis, it is a godsend.

badcopperOct. 26, 13 6:38 PM

Another right wing lie. Even more people have signed up than was originally expected by this time.------ please cite the source of the original forecast and the figures you purport that have signed up.

goferfanzOct. 26, 13 8:19 PM

The article poignantly cites the statement that the website is only part of the law. That is and will be the problem with this unfolding disaster. For a President who boldly campaigned on "YOU CAN KEEP YOUR DOCTOR. PERIOD. YOU CAN KEEP YOUR INSURANCE POLICY. PERIOD." Americans by the hundreds of thousands (or is it now into the millions) are now learning how false that is as health plans are being cancelled due to the ACA mandates. Sadly, it is now unclear if President Obama's credibility is lower at home or abroad. The pain is just beginning........

Jim1960Oct. 27, 13 1:45 AM

Just another article that is a "total crock" written by someone who apparently has no understanding of what is involved. As an IT Professional of 40+ years; who had a specialty of "fixing broken projects" this is just another in a long series of "broken projects". The first thing that need to be done is to keep all of the "armchair experts" out of the way. An assessment of the point of "difficulty" needs to be made. Each of these areas of difficulty then need to be addressed in a priority sequence. The "website" is only the front end of a complex system. It can be repaired. I myself was able to establish an account within about five minutes; the system came back recognizing my Medicare account; my Part D Provider and showed the most recent claims on my account. The words "that it doesn't work" are always used; which is not true. What is happening is that it may be slow due to high demand of usage; it may have some interface problems to legacy systems. It will be made whole. Most of the TEAPublicans who are ranting and raving are not even affected by this new system. Example being Rafael Cruz who gets his healthcare insurance from his wife who works for the Banksters Goldman Sachs. Just cool it people.

herby2013Oct. 27, 13 6:02 AM

"Computer systems like the ACA's don't 'just work'" And neither do most Democrat voters which is why so many of them are on welfare. The fact that the government website had problems isn't the real problem. The REAL problem is the INSANE amount of money spent on the website! Half a billion dollars! For absolute failure!

herby2013Oct. 27, 13 6:06 AM

By the way, folks, did you know that 90% of the people who enrolled in health plans on the MNSure website in its first 2 weeks of operation qualified for Medicaid? That's right. We are a welfare nation now. You can thank the Democratic Party as we head off the cliff of national bankruptcy.

badcopperOct. 27, 13 6:41 AM

Just another article that is a "total crock" written by someone who apparently has no understanding of what is involved.----- your "point of difficulty" is not in any SDLC lexicon. Guess we know who the armchair quarterback is,

conniemercerOct. 27, 13 7:35 AM

The website contract was awarded no-bid to a Canadian contractor who is a friend of Michele Obama. It was estimated to cost 70 million and ended up costing 800 million. It will cost hundreds 0of millions to fix. They had five years to build the software. This is not surprising given the fact we elected a man with no leadership skill, business experience, work history, questionable academic skills and political experience that was 90% campaigning.

Douglind33Oct. 27, 13 8:05 AM

I spent a lot of yeas working on system rollouts. Most stumbled on GO LIVE day, some never did work correctly and a few were immediately successful. The odds of any system "working" on DAY ONE are not very good. This example is no surprise. The important question is how soon and how well will it recover. Like most long range programs, this one will be debugged out over time. Three years from now, this so-called "disaster" will be just another system among countless systems.

RossbergOct. 27, 13 8:31 AM

What's even more infuriating than the web site itself is its supporters' trivialization of its problems as being glithches, wrinkles, kinks, etc. as though they are innocuous programming typos which can be solved with a few keystrokes. They should just admit it - the website is broken and we have no evidence that any user has done anything successfully other than create their own user profile. If that weren't the case we'd be blanketed in press releases bragging about all the new policies being issued. Will they eventually get it to "work"? Of course, since "work" is a vague term and it would be political suicide to admit otherwise. With half a billion dollars dumped into it plus whatever new money is needed, no matter what it eventually looks like you'll get something that will be declared a success by its promoters and some carefully selected users. However, if Target or Best Buy came out with a web site with as many issues as this one there would be mass firings up and down their organization chart. But apparently there are no standards to which we hold government employees so we end up with a product which looks like it was put together as a Web Programming 101 assignment. But don't blame the contractors. Anyone who's done programming has experienced the frustration of dealing with idiot customers who effectively sabotage projects by having no clue what they want until it's too late to make and test the required code changes.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters