Ouze wrote:
Well, you would think that, since you're a dirty liberal who is eager to gulp down the lies the left-wing media has fed you about Zombie Reagan, Hero of 'Murica.

Spoiler:

Washington (CNN) -- She apologized for the "miserably frustrating" problems with the Obamacare website and promised it would get fixed.
But no matter what Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House committee Wednesday, her words were no match for the screen showing that HealthCare.gov was telling its users: "The system is down at the moment."

The 3 1/2-hour House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing was a public grilling of Sebelius over the problems with President Barack Obama's signature health care reforms as well as a public platform for the partisan politics that have dominated debate on the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

Sebelius promised the packed hearing room that a "vast majority" of consumers will be able to shop online for health insurance under Obamacare by the end of November without the problems currently being reported, such as Wednesday's inaccessibility.

"In these early weeks, access to HealthCare.gov has been a miserably frustrating experience for way too many Americans, including many who have waited years, in some cases their entire lives, for the security of health insurance," Sebelius said, adding she was "as frustrated and angry as anyone" with the flawed launch of the website.
Speaking directly to Americans confronting the problems, Sebelius said: "You deserve better. I apologize. I'm accountable to you for fixing these problems."

The former Kansas governor also admitted to having made a mistake when she told Obama the website was "ready to go" for its October 1 launch.
"Clearly, I was wrong. We were wrong," she said. "We knew that in any big, new, complicated system there would be problems. No one ever imagined the volume of issues and problems that we have had and we must fix it."

Speaking in Boston later in the day, Obama acknowledged that the website was too slow and too many people "have gotten stuck" in it, adding "I'm not happy about it."
The President said he takes "full responsibility for making sure it gets fixed ASAP."

At the hearing, Republican Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, the panel's chairman, opened the session by saying news of Obamacare problems "seems to get worse by the day," adding that "Americans are scared" and "may be losing their faith in the government."

However, Sebelius said the sweeping health care program has delivered on its central promise to provide affordable coverage. Thousands of people have been able to access the website to look at new health coverage options that will give them security of knowing they won't go bankrupt if they get sick, she said.

She echoed the overall administration stance -- that a team of experts is scrambling to fix the errors.
Republicans have called for Sebelius to be fired for the Obamacare problems, but a White House spokesman said Wednesday that Obama has "complete confidence" in her.
"She took responsibility for many of the problems that are evident with the (Obamacare) website, but she also deserves credit for the other aspects of the Affordable Care Act implementation that have gone well," spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters.

The hearing included fiery partisan exchanges with Republicans, who have tried to dismantle the health care reforms. They said the website problems foreshadow deeper issues while Democrats accused them of trying to kill reforms that benefit millions of Americans.

GOP legislators repeatedly cited letters from insurance companies informing some people with individual policies that their plans were being changed or discontinued as proof that Obama misled the public when he repeatedly promised Americans could keep coverage they liked under the reforms.

"We also are most concerned about the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of folks who in fact have gotten a cancellation from their individual insurance plan," Upton said after the hearing.
Asked about the canceled or altered policies, Sebelius said Obama was accurate because people who bought their own health coverage before Obamacare was signed into law in 2010 can keep those policies if they choose under a "grandfather" clause included in the legislation.
Therefore, those who like their health care plan can keep it, she said, relying on the technicality that the coverage must predate the law.

Obama said at the Boston rally that people who have their policies discontinued should "just shop around in the new marketplace" for better plans.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation website, 15.4 million people had individual health care coverage in 2011, representing about 5% of the population. The vast majority of Americans have coverage through their employer, Medicare, Medicaid or other public providers and will not be affected by changes involving individual coverage.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Tuesday that "a significant portion" of the 5% of people with individual coverage will end up paying less for better policies when they shop around in the new exchanges.

At Wednesday's hearing, Sebelius said the troubled Obamacare website has cost $174 million so far, including $56 million for technological support, and that the government still owed more under contracts with outside companies that run well into 2014.

Some of the criticism of the website's launch has to do with what Obama and other officials knew and when they knew it.
CNN has learned the administration received stark warnings just one month before the launch that the federal health care site was not ready to go live, according to a confidential report.
The caution, from the main contractor CGI Federal, warned of a number of risks and issues for HealthCare.gov, even as company executives were testifying publicly that the project had achieved key milestones.

Sebelius told the committee that the outside contractors that built the website never recommended delaying the October 1 launch.
She admitted that "we did not adequately do end-to-end testing" of the website and that various components "were not locked and loaded into the system" until mid-September.
The contracts with the private companies working on the Obamacare website do not have any "built-in penalties" allowing her department to charge them for disappointing or faulty work, Sebelius said. However, she said the agency will not pay for incomplete work.

Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, accused Sebelius of putting the private information of Americans at risk by failing to properly test security measures on the website.
"This is a completely unacceptable level of security," he said. "You know it's not secure."
Sebelius responded that testing occurs regularly, and she told Rogers she would get back to him on whether any end-to-end security test of the entire system has ever occurred. Rogers responded that he knows there have been no such comprehensive security tests.

An internal government memo, obtained by CNN on Wednesday and written just days before the website opened, warned of a "high" security risk because of a lack of testing.
"Due to system readiness issues, the (security control assessment) was only partly completed," said the memo from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. "This constitutes a risk that must be accepted and mitigated to support the Marketplace Day 1 operations."
In an exclusive interview with CNN last week, Sebelius said Obama didn't know of the problems with the Affordable Care Act's website until after the troubled launch. This was despite the fact that insurance companies had been complaining and the site crashed during a pre-launch test run.

Invited to testify last week, Sebelius put it off for travel related to efforts promoting enrollment in new health insurance exchanges under the health care reforms, Obama's most significant domestic policy achievement.

One of her lieutenants -- Marilyn Tavenner, who heads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services unit that oversees the HealthCare.gov website -- became the first government official to face congressional questioning on Tuesday at a House Ways and Means Committee hearing.

Washington (CNN) -- The Obama administration was given stark warnings just one month before launch that the federal healthcare site was not ready to go live, according to a confidential report obtained by CNN.

The caution, from the main contractor CGI, warned of a number of open risks and issues for the HealthCare.gov web site even as company executives were testifying publicly that the project had achieved key milestones.

On Capitol Hill on Tuesday, Medicaid Chief Marilyn Tavenner, whose job it was to oversee the October 1 rollout of the website, said she did not foresee its problems.
"No, we had tested the website and we were comfortable with its performance," she said. "Now, like I said, we knew all along there would be as with any new website, some individual glitches we would have to work out. But, the volume issue and the creation of account issues was not anticipated and obviously took us by surprise. And did not show up in testing."

But the CGI document, which describes "top risks currently open" and "outstanding issues currently being mitigated" says the testing timeframes are "not adequate to complete full functional, system, and integration testing activities" and lists the impact of the problems as "significant."

Another element is listed as " not enough time in schedule to conduct adequate performance testing" and given the highest priority.
Healthcare.gov: What works and what doesn't?

CGI had no comment other than to confirm authenticity of the report that also gave "the highest priority" and warns "we don't have access to monitoring tools" and "hub services are intermittently unavailable" -- short for the "site's not working sometimes."

One concern, listed as "severe," warned, "CGI does not have access to necessary tools to manage envs in test, imp, and prod. Specifically (1) we don't have access to central log collection / view (2) we don't have access to monitoring tools. We have repeatedly asked CMS and URS but have not been granted this access."

The report, which documents issues from August 2013 and was sent to at least one employee at CMS by an executive at CGI on September 6, was submitted in response to a request by the House Oversight Committee, which is now investigating the rollout of the health law.

E-mail addresses and some names on the document were redacted before it was obtained by CNN.
CGI also said in the document they were putting a team in place to alert whenever the hub goes down.

CMS pointed to part of the report that said all "upcoming major milestones" were seen as "on track."
Brian Cook, an agency spokesman, said the report was "not a dire warning" but more of a "list of things to do" if read in full.
"What's been done, what needs to be done, what needs to be resolved. It is misleading to cherry pick a few lines," he said, adding that the report identified issues and "we worked to address those issues and all issues identified."

It is not clear if a later report detailed that the issues were resolved. But the warnings run counter to Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' stated optimism to CNN's Sanjay Gupta that when she woke up

Cheryl Campbell, a Senior Vice President for CGI Federal told lawmakers on Capitol Hill October 25, "no one ever gets enough time for testing."
Campbell, whose company has a contract worth a possible total of more than $200 million for its work on the system, noted than an end-to-end test conducted within two weeks of the launch caused the system to crash. She said it was up to CMS to decide on proceeding with the rollout.
Campbell did not raise any alarm bells on Capitol Hill back in September, when she told a House Committee CGI was confident it could get the job done.
"To date, the marketplace implementation has achieved all of its key milestones from the initial architecture review in October 2011 to project baseline review in March 2012 and, most recently, the operational readiness review in September 2013," before the website went live.

"We know that consumers are eager to purchase this coverage and to the millions of Americans who have attempted to use healthcare.gov to shop and enroll in healthcare coverage," she said. "I want to apologize to you that the website has not worked as well as it should."
It was a big switch from August, before CGI's report, when Tavenner told lawmakers the rollout was "on track."
"CMS is ready for October 1 and we're motivated and ready for the hard work ahead," she said at that time.

Washington (CNN) - She had been in the congressional hot seat for two and a half hours. And many Republicans had been waiting just as long to ask her questions.

When Rep. Gregg Harper, R-Mississippi, got his chance, he pounded away at Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius hard enough to elicit a rare, audible sign of frustration from her.

Sebelius blurted out a word common to exasperated teenagers and zen masters alike, "whatever."

It came after Harper repeatedly asked if President Barack Obama should be seen as responsible for the HealthCare.gov problems.

The first two times, Sebelius answered that she was responsible for the debacle, that it was her job.

And so Harper, asked a final and third time: "It is the President's ultimate responsibility, correct?"

Sebelius gestured toward him and the search for words found only frustration.

"You clearly, uh," (then a small pause, followed by), "whatever."

The Secretary put both her hands in the air, briefly, then resumed.

"He is the President. He is responsible for government programs," she concluded.

 Ouze wrote:
Well, you would think that, since you're a dirty liberal who is eager to gulp down the lies the left-wing media has fed you about Zombie Reagan, Hero of 'Murica.

 djones520 wrote:
The President is blaming the insurance companies for this.

Nevermind the fact that the bill required them to change their policies, which means they couldn't be grandfathered...

I swear to god, has he ever claimed responsibility for anything bad that has happened on his watch? I'd honestly like to know, because it always seems he's just trying to shirk responsibility when bad happens, and is eager to claim credit when the good happens.

Leadership means that ‘‘the buck stops here.’’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

OBAMA: Well, here's what I remember, is that when I came into office, I knew I was going to have a big mess to clean up and, frankly, the mess has been bigger than I think a lot of people anticipated at the time. We have made steady progress on these fronts, but we're not making progress fast enough.
And what I continue to believe is that ultimately the buck stops with me. I'm going to be accountable. I think people understand that a lot of these problems were decades in the making. People understand that this financial crisis was the worst since the Great Depression. But, ultimately, they say, look, he's the president, we think he has good intentions, but we're impatient and we want to see things move faster

The uncommunicative communications team at the White House seems to think “I had no idea” and “I learned from the newspapers” are answers befitting the president in response to the plethora of scandals. They are not aware, apparently, that the answer is embarrassing, perpetuating the narrative that the president doesn’t govern, he only campaigns.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Well, you would think that, since you're a dirty liberal who is eager to gulp down the lies the left-wing media has fed you about Zombie Reagan, Hero of 'Murica.

I thought my comment was fairly witty, damn you Ouze you one upped me! I'm gonna go cry into my Taco Bell.

Americans who sign up for insurance on the state exchanges may not have access to the nation's top hospitals, Watchdog.org reports.

The Obama Administration has been claiming that insurance companies will be competing for your dollars under the Affordable Care Act, but apparently they haven't surveyed the nation's top hospitals.

Americans who sign up for Obamacare will be getting a big surprise if they expect to access premium health care that may have been previously covered under their personal policies. Most of the top hospitals will accept insurance from just one or two companies operating under Obamacare.

See list here.

"This doesn't surprise me," said Gail Wilensky, Medicare advisor for the second Bush Administration and senior fellow for Project HOPE. "There has been an incredible amount of focus on the premium cost and subsidy, and precious little focus on what you get for your money."

Regulations driven by the Obama White House have indeed made insurance more affordable – if, like Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, you're looking only at price. But responding to Obamacare caps on premiums, many insurers will, in turn, simply offer top-tier doctors and hospitals far less cash for services rendered.

Watchdog.org looked at the top 18 hospitals nationwide as ranked by U.S. News and World Report for 2013-2014. We contacted each hospital to determine their contracts and talked to several insurance companies, as well.

The result of our investigation: Many top hospitals are simply opting out of Obamacare.

Chances are the individual plan you purchased outside Obamacare would allow you to go to these facilities. For example, fourth-ranked Cleveland Clinic accepts dozens of insurance plans if you buy one on your own. But go through Obamacare and you have just one choice: Medical Mutual of Ohio.

And that's not because their exchanges don't offer options. Both Ohio and California have a dozen insurance companies on their exchanges, yet two of the states' premier hospitals – Cleveland Clinic and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center – have only one company in their respective networks.

A few, like No. 1-rated Johns Hopkins in Maryland, are mandated under state law to accept all insurance companies. Other than that, the hospital with the largest number of insurance companies is University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland with just four. Fully 11 of the 18 hospitals had just one or two carriers.

"Many companies have selectively entered the exchanges because they are concerned that (the exchanges) will be dominated by risky, high-using populations who wanted insurance (before Obamacare) and couldn't afford it," said Wilsensky, who is also on the board of directors of UnitedHealth. "They are pressed to narrow their networks to stay within the premiums."

Consumers, too, will struggle with the new system. Many exchanges don't even list the insurance companies on their web sites. Some that do, like California, don't provide names of doctors or hospitals.

The price differences among hospitals "can be pretty profound," said Joe Mondy, spokesman for Cigna insurance. "When you are doing a cost comparison with doctors, you should look up the quality of the hospital as well. Hospital 'Y' could be great at pediatrics and not great at surgery."

Insurers operating in the exchanges are apparently hesitant to talk about the trade-off between price and quality. Two of the nation's largest insurers – Wellpoint and Aetna – refused to respond to a dozen calls and emails placed over the course of a week.

Wellpoint and Aetna's decision to not educate the public on its choices doesn't sit well with two experts.

"There is no reason to keep that quiet. It's not going to be a good secret for very long when people want to use the plans," Wilensky said.

"In many cases, consumers are shopping blind when it comes to what doctors and hospitals are included in their Obamacare exchange plans," said Josh Archambault, senior fellow with the think tank Foundation for Government Accountability. "These patients will be in for a rude awakening once they need care, and get stuck with a big bill for going out-of-network without realizing it."

All of this represents a larger problem with the Affordable Care Act, said Archambault, who has extensively studied the law.

"It reflects deeper issues in implementation," he said. "Some hospitals and doctors don't even know if they are in the network."

Just look at Seattle Children's Hospital, which ranks No. 11 on the U.S. News & World Report best pediatric hospital list. When Obamacare rolled out, the hospital found itself with just two out of seven insurance companies on Washington's exchange. The hospital sued the state's Office of Insurance on Oct. 4 for "failure to ensure adequate network coverage."

"Children's is the only pediatric hospital in King County and the preeminent provider of many pediatric specialty services in the Northwest," a hospital press release said. " Some of these specialized services not available elsewhere in our area or region include acute cancer care, level IV neonatal intensive care and heart, liver and intestinal transplantation."

And for doctors in Texas, "Basically, we don't know," said Stephen Brotherton, president of the Texas Medical Association. "We can't find out. At this point, it's part of the various unknowns with the marketplace. There are ways you can be on plans and not even realize it."

 Easy E wrote:
Here is what this thread has taught me:

1. People who don't like Obamacare still don't like it at all.
2. People who don't hate Obamacare still don't hate it.

A 15 page thread summarized in a few words.

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

 Easy E wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

...and together we could rule the Galaxy as father and son!

 whembly wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Here is what this thread has taught me:

1. People who don't like Obamacare still don't like it at all.
2. People who don't hate Obamacare still don't hate it.

A 15 page thread summarized in a few words.

I still don't know your view... other than a few snarks.

Wassup?

EDIT: Oh sorry... I forgot my place... IT'S WORST THAN BENGHAZI-GATE, IRS-GATE, GATE-GATE!*

*Did I do that right?

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

...and together we could rule the Galaxy as father and son!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 Easy E wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Here is what this thread has taught me:

1. People who don't like Obamacare still don't like it at all.
2. People who don't hate Obamacare still don't hate it.

A 15 page thread summarized in a few words.

I still don't know your view... other than a few snarks.

Wassup?

EDIT: Oh sorry... I forgot my place... IT'S WORST THAN BENGHAZI-GATE, IRS-GATE, GATE-GATE!*

*Did I do that right?

Well, when all hope is dead...snark is all I have left. It's kind of like Theatre of the Absurd or Existentialism, but instead of laughter and/or depression the only natural response left is snarkiness. Snarkentilism perhaps?

My honest position? It is way to early to call. I need the perspective of a few years before I call it a failure or not.

However, I knew the status quo could not stand and something had to be done. I would prefer Single-Payer, but I also realize that would not happen in the political climate of the time. I was satisfied that this was the best we would get for change to the status quo even though I personally don't like all the changes much.

 Easy E wrote:
Here is what this thread has taught me:

1. People who don't like Obamacare still don't like it at all.
2. People who don't hate Obamacare still don't hate it.

A 15 page thread summarized in a few words.

Relapse wrote:
I dread seeing how badly Obamacare is going to end up wrecking company insurance plans. It's done wonders for individuals.

 Frazzled wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

Oh God no.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

Oh God no.

As someone who's lived with both, on both sides of the Atlantic, as someone who's had elderly relatives go through both systems with chronic illness, as someone who's worked for private medical insurance and the NHS, I can tell you, all of you Americans, that you'd be better served with state healthcare than the current system.

The NHS was an amazing thing, it's still fairly remarkable, even if the right wing in the UK is trying to dismantle it.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:
America... If only you'd stayed with the Empire, then we might have given you our NHS!

Oh God no.

As someone who's lived with both, on both sides of the Atlantic, as someone who's had elderly relatives go through both systems with chronic illness, as someone who's worked for private medical insurance and the NHS, I can tell you, all of you Americans, that you'd be better served with state healthcare than the current system.

The NHS was an amazing thing, it's still fairly remarkable, even if the right wing in the UK is trying to dismantle it.

 whembly wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yeesh... just saw this on my twittah feed.

o.O




.