Submitted by MitchTobol on

I can understand

Categories
Tech News

The Affordable Health Care Act, affectionately know as ObamaCare, is getting so much attention these days. It was the focus of a government shutdown but this blog is not about the politics...it's about the website.

 

Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of Health and Human Services, is responsible for the development and operation of the site and she is getting skewered. Right now she is traveling around the country getting people to sign up. Most recently she was in Tampa Bay where people in audience with their laptops ready couldn't get on the site. There have been calls for her to resign and she refuses till she "gets this right."

 

I'm on Kathleen's side. The expectations for technology to work seamlessly 100% of the time is a falicy. She was tasked with creating, testing and rolling out an online marketing exchange for millions of Americans in under 2 years. Even if the development time could not be extended, there was no way anybody could have antipicated the amount of traffic which has far exceeded expectations.

 

I totally understand. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt and the bag of chips. There is no way to anticipate everything that might happen to a website. It's exists in the public domain and has to work on about a bunch of different browsers in many versions on countless types of computers. It's not easy but with the simplicity of using a computer and mobile devices, we, expect it to be.

 

Look at Gotham's website. Two years in development, not quite a year live and I'm still addressing issues that need to be fixed. At least it's operating and hasn't crashed from millions of people trying to gain access.

Comments

Submitted by Liz_Saldana on Sat, 10/19/2013 - 03:46

Permalink
Liz Saldana

While I agree technology should not be expected to perform seamlessly 100% of the time, I'm not sure I agree there was no way they could have anticipated the amount of traffic there would be. From what I understand, the AHCA was created specifically because millions of Americans don't have health care insurance. There may be no way to predict how many people will log on at once; but if the government really believes millions of Americans need this program, shouldn't the infrastructure have been built to accommodate the possibility?

Submitted by NULL (not verified) on Sat, 10/19/2013 - 03:47

Permalink

I can't get my password to be accepted. Frustrating

Submitted by StephenMichel on Sat, 10/19/2013 - 04:16

Permalink
Stephen Michel

I agree with Liz. While any new system will have break in issues, not being able to handle the volume should not be one of them. They should have anticipated the high initial volume. If they wanted to build a system that would handle the normal daily volume, they should have rolled the system out over a week or two, by opening it to 6 or 7 states at a time.

Submitted by Katalin_Goencz on Sat, 10/19/2013 - 04:46

Permalink
Katalin Goencz

Part of the problem is, dare to be political here, congress. The actual law is written in such a convoluted way that it took years to decipher the intent of each piece. During the process of creating the Exchanges many questions were not answered on time, and some parts were answered wrong. It was like moving a foundation and walls in a house in the middle of construction.
If congress would have taken the time to write the law, instead of letting the insurance and drug company lobby creating it, it may have been a better law. The words of Nancy Pelosi still rings in my ears “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy?”
Cynthia Somma

You can understand the anxiety that millions feel about health coverage?
It is not about the uninsured..it is about all of us...my office plan was dropped, my parents plan was dropped, UPS dropped spousal coverage, IBM, Trader Joe's says see you later retirees you're on your own...
You know I love your work--you designed my website.:)
The Gotham website is awesome ----just don't compare it to what some of us have sincere anxiety over.
If National Grid decides to drop their retirees, I wll be paying 25k a year for my family.
As for the websites they were mainly for informational purposes (at first)...not long ago we used land lines..and real people answering them....Kathleen S did that...it was not staffed well enough and not quick enough...Jan 2014 is around the corner.
Good luck to all of us.
Katalin is correct, as we are both in similar business, we can't educate---and we should be able to by now.
Corey Bearak

I agree with Mitch. As to the other things that occur, politics and gouging at play and it sorts out. No anticipated everyone -- or at least it seems that way -- would attempt to log on on day one. Obviously the interest exceeded expectations and that means an impact or too next year on the political side.

Submitted by Erik_Scheibe on Sat, 10/19/2013 - 16:12

Permalink
Erik Scheibe

If you want to encapsule the inherent problem with everything that has happened surrounding this legislation, it's that this is inherently a wealth re-distribution program, rather than a cost reduction program. Those on the left believe in it, but have to be dishonest about it because the vast majority of the American people would have rejected it violently if they had truly understood the ramifications of the program. It is prototypical "Ends Justify The Means" politics, and now with the pending devastation, they have to pretend that it really isn't as bad as everyone said it was going to be. After all, the President flat out told us we wouldn't lose our health plans, right? He flat out told us that the Medicare rationing board's recommendations wouldn't be binding, right?

Add new comment

Restricted HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2 id> <h3 id> <h4 id> <h5 id> <h6 id>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.