The painful path to Obamacare deadline

Comments (49)
theJoe wrote:

You would not know notable if it snuck up and bit you. This health care helps SO MANY people and yet we don’t here you say a thing about that.

Dec 24, 2013 2:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Foren wrote:

“Rollout” is one word.

Come on, guys.

Dec 24, 2013 2:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MDJ1 wrote:

@the Joe. I guess the millions of people that have lost their healthcare plans are part of the SO MANY you speak of. Obamacare is a joke. Wake up and smell the cup of Joe dude. It’s a catastrophe!

Dec 24, 2013 2:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IDeeMerk wrote:

“The image I always had (of Obama’s administrative efforts) was of a horse with blinders on, just plowing ahead and ignoring everything else,” he said.

I think we are being unfair to the horse, unless you are just showing the arse with his tail raised proudly high.

Dec 24, 2013 2:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
grazor50 wrote:

Rollout is just the beginning problem, take note, most of those signing up are lower income and getting gov.credit to help pay the premiums and the purchase is for the lowest cost insyrance with high deductibles, with that in mind, who is responsible to the hospitals and doctors when these lower income cannot afford the premium rates and pay the hospital bills until the deductible is met??

Dec 24, 2013 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IDeeMerk wrote:

The question is not how many have signed up, but rather, how many who signed up actually are insured, and how many who did not need to sign up no longer have insurance.

Dec 24, 2013 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Hawk420 wrote:

Why is Reuter’s lying?

“It marks the final deadline for most Americans to sign up for health insurance under President Barack Obama’s 2010 Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare . . .”

Because it does not mark the final deadline.

The reporter must never have been part of a dev team because that is what we do fix issues and the lead always is worried come on PAINFUL PATH? Really because it seems to me a few months to get the program working up to speed when the GOP refused to fund the web Site and The GOP States who are always shouting about states rights decided not to do their own web sites Really

What I think is Reuter’s is now part of the GOP propaganda wing That’s what Iget from this piece

Dec 24, 2013 2:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Hawk420 wrote:

Why is Reuter’s lying?

“It marks the final deadline for most Americans to sign up for health insurance under President Barack Obama’s 2010 Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare . . .”

Because it does not mark the final deadline.

The reporter must never have been part of a dev team because that is what we do fix issues and the lead always is worried come on PAINFUL PATH? Really because it seems to me a few months to get the program working up to speed when the GOP refused to fund the web Site and The GOP States who are always shouting about states rights decided not to do their own web sites Really

What I think is Reuter’s is now part of the GOP propaganda wing That’s what Iget from this piece

Dec 24, 2013 2:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ARJTurgot2 wrote:

Thousands of professional project managers in this country are reading this and similar stories and shaking their heads. There is no lesson here that was not learned decades ago; entire text books on PM are dedicated to how to avoid project failures like this. Do not blame the fed’s procurement process or the structure of organizations, this was a management failure caused by a vacuum at the top. The emperor has no clothes.

Dec 24, 2013 3:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PopUp wrote:

The US has many excellent IT companies it could have employed to construct this web site. Why did they pick a company from Canada. They have no idea what our health care system is all about. Furthermore, states that didn’t form their own health insurance marketplaces, have nobody to blame but themselves if they don’t like the choices available. They could have selected their own health insurance carriers.

Dec 24, 2013 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Big2Tex wrote:

Obviously PopUp does not work for any excellent IT companies. As for Obamacare….BWAHAHAHAAH HOHOHOHOH HEHEHEHEHEHEH HODOHODEHODEHODE HEEEE BWAHHHA HHHA HAHAHAHHAHHA WHAT A FRIGGIN’ JOKE. The most ill conceived, unworkable, unwanted, majority devastating, lack of compassion, evil program ever imagined. People losing jobs, people moving to part time, people losing healthcare insurance, people losing access to their doctors and major hospitals…and for what? So welfare driven, sexually obsessive, non-contributors to society can get contraception and abortions on demand free of charge. Yeah, that makes perfect sense in a civilized society. Keep worshipping your dear Obama and his minions who have totally wrecked healthcare and the economy. You silly ignorant swine, you voted for destruction now enjoy it in your ditches and under your bridges.

Dec 24, 2013 4:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dualcitizen wrote:

R u effn stupid? 14 identical posts. Go back to the basement and sleep.

Dec 24, 2013 4:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
yubamary wrote:

QPopUp, they don’t tell much about the fact that one of the CEO’s of the Canadian company they choose went to school with Michelle O. and
@theJoe, perhaps the ACA will help some people that needed Medicaid but they could have fixed that by raising the limit on who could get Medical Assistant Supplements. Instead they created a very costly program for most of the citizens of our country.
Now most people will have to decide if they can buy, food, rent, or perhaps make a car payment. In addition some of the people who got the minimum insurance available under the ACA will have to now face higher hospital bills if they can pay them at all and if they can’t then the hospitals will have to increase their fees to cover the ones that don’t pay them. So in the end we will all have higher DR and Hospital bills and higher taxes. Therefore, in the end, who will have to pay, it certainly won’t be the government. I guess that’s what our President calls “Fair Share”. I’m tired of paying taxes so if your not please pay mine too.

Dec 24, 2013 6:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
shadylady2 wrote:

how many of you don’t realize-we are being dictated to?the smart ones will pay a fine before they will be TOLD what to do-in their private lives….

Dec 24, 2013 6:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kbill wrote:

“The greater good” has been the excuse for most of the ill-advised, and unconscionable laws this country has ever passed. The Affordable Care Act is, however, not even in the interest of the “greater good” rather it’s interest is in the lessor…my guess is that when the dust settles on the real cost of this Act, insuring the 15-million who didn’t have (including those who didn’t want) healthcare coverage will cost as much as insuring the other 85 percent. Welcome to Entitled America — Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, Veterans Benefits, and now Affordable Care…the parasite just exceeded the size of its host.

Dec 24, 2013 6:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cherrymaster wrote:

I joined the Amish Church at amishhomechurch.com. It is one of the exemptions. I can not afford this insurance. I hope it works.

Dec 25, 2013 12:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

Love the way people who refuse to insure against medical risks, and then freeload in ER, are ‘the smart ones’ according to GOP ideology.

Dec 25, 2013 1:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
Foreburner wrote:

When the walls
Come tumblin’ down
When the walls
Come crumblin’, crumblin’
When the walls
Come tumblin’, tumblin’
Down

Dec 25, 2013 6:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
pjkesq wrote:

Of course the law helps some people! All Americans should be happy about that. Insuring the uninsured is a noble goal. But that completely misses the point! The law was sold to the American public based on a pack of LIES.

“If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it! PERIOD, end of story!”

“If you like your Dr, you can keep them!”

“This law will create 4,000,000 jobs. 400,000 of those jobs almost immediately!”

“This law will lower the cost of healthcare for EVERYONE, improve quality of care and access to care”

“I will not sign a law that adds even a dime to the deficit.”

And then, as the website was being designed, the Administration continued to lie and claim that all was well. The Website will one day be fixed. The law is structurally unsound and will ultimately fail due to political pressures. It was sold as a law where everyone would be a winner. The reality of course is that tens of millions of americans will be affected in a negative way by this law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmg9vHCiJeM

As you can see from the Pelosi clip above; the law was sold as a magical piece of legislation that would make life better for everyone.

Of course anyone with even ONE OUNCE OF HONESTY knows that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/12/23/health_plan_sticker_shock_ahead_for_some_buyers_121041.html

The reason that Medicare and Social Security are so popular is that EVERYONE pays in and regardless of your economic status, everyone gets something out of the collective system.

Obamacare? TRAIN WRECK INDEED!

Dec 25, 2013 8:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
ruggerfool wrote:

Bakhtin where do you think all these newly insured will bo going for treatment when the wait times for a doc visit, skyrockets. Hint check Mass utilization of ERs

Dec 25, 2013 8:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
elangdon1955 wrote:

The ACA is an unmitigated disaster. Let’s all come back in a year and share the horror stories that will come about due to this one party rule.

Dec 25, 2013 9:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
AZreb wrote:

Loved the title part of another article that said the government is telling us “Don’t worry”. Really? With the mess made already, how can we not worry?

Now whispers of the government (TAXPAYERS) having to bail out the insurance companies if the young and healthy enrollees are outnumbered by the chronically ill. Hope the feds are prepared for that outcome – but the motto of “be prepared” does not seem in its lexicon.

Dec 25, 2013 9:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
pebbles14 wrote:

How To Opt Out Of Obamacare

Know your options and become savvy self-pay patients

Join a health care sharing ministry. These are voluntary, charitable membership organizations that agree to share medical bills among the membership. They function similar to insurance, and are probably the best alternative to conventional health insurance. There are four of them, at least that I know of. Three are open only to practicing Christians (Samaritan Ministries, Christian Healthcare Ministries, and Christian Care Ministry) while a fourth, Liberty HealthShare, is open to anyone who agrees with their ethical commitment to religious liberty. They operate entirely outside of Obamacare’s regulations, and typically offer benefits for about half the cost of similar health insurance. Members are also exempt from having to pay the tax for being uninsured.

From the article by Sean Parnell

http://thefederalist.com/2013/12/04/opt-obamacare/#.Up9MwGKiM_o.email

Dec 25, 2013 10:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
pebbles14 wrote:

Will Obamacare be repealed or won’t it? Will Congress fund it or won’t it? Will the web site be fixed or not? Blah, blah, blah. We the people just need to do what we need to do and Congress be damned. Resist. Refuse. Revolt. EXEMPT OURSELVES! We did not comply with Prohibition and we simply should not comply with Obamacare. For religious reasons. For privacy reasons. For the cause of liberty and freedom and in protest of the idea that the federal government (under one party rule, no less), can force private citizens to purchase anything with our own money. Are we citizens or subjects? Mice or (wo)men? Just say NO to socialism and to the corrupt, unionized, far left IRS: the gestapo of America’s political class. After all, the federal government ignores millions of illegals who are breaking U.S. immigration law every day. Our Founders pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. All we have to do is just say no to a scheme we all know is un-American and a violation of our most basic founding fundamentals of privacy, self reliance, limited government and individual freedom.

Dec 25, 2013 10:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

“Tuesday is a moment of truth for Obamacare.

It marks the final deadline …” – Reuters

Not so.

“Truth” to a demagogue like Obama is what he says it is, so the “Truth” is: There is no deadline as the law says, so “Don’t worry” …

Dec 25, 2013 10:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

“Tuesday is a moment of truth for Obamacare.

It marks the final deadline …” – Reuters

Not so.

“Truth” to a demagogue like Obama is what he says it is, so the “Truth” is: There is no deadline as the law says, so “Don’t worry” …

Dec 25, 2013 10:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

Umbrella coverage using your tax dollars is what the government is giving the insurers by capping any claims they incur at a maximum $45,000. The government covering the rest is bailing out the carriers for losses greater than $45k. Definition of a bailout is a rescue from financial distress which is exactly what the government is doing with the carriers under Obamacare. It is what it is, no matter how much the liberals want you to think otherwise.

Dec 25, 2013 5:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dmntiaprcx wrote:

In New Mexico we have a really stellar website for enrollment that has been up and running from the get-go. It is a model many states are asking about in hopes of improving their own. Costs of signing up have only increased 10% compared to 100-180% elsewhere. So far, $50M has been spent in the state making it work.

Enrollees as of this week? 291–thats all.

You cannot shove this down people’s throats, plain and simple.

Dec 25, 2013 9:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

As predicted, another rightie pops up parroting the same Fox soundbite – they all say the same thing even when the facts, with sources, have already been provided to prove them wrong.

Dec 25, 2013 10:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

Bot Kin: Do you and flashroostr take turns? Haven’t seen him here yet …

Dec 26, 2013 7:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

Why can Republicans never deal with facts, and start whining about the messenger instead? It is not my fault that Fox got it wrong and the right-wing sheep copied their stupidity.

Dec 27, 2013 1:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@Bakhtin` The facts are the facts. Anyone can look them up. As a matter of FACT, Reuters had an article a couple of weeks ago about the government paying for the coverage over $45k. If you can’t stand the truth then turn off your computer and stop reading it. Must be just a party verses party thing for you. I realize you would rather have the Chris Matthews thrill up the leg rather than try to learn the truth.

Dec 27, 2013 8:35am EST  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

Straw man, 4825. You have run out of arguments, haven’t you?

Nobody is disputing the government helping with costs over $45,000 dollars. I even provided you with a link to the relevant law because you hilariously claimed that it depended on the policy…

However, that does not mean it is a bailout, as you claimed because you read it on Fox. I even provided the link to where you read it.

You obviously haven’t followed the links, as those facts – it affects only 2% of claims, lasts only three years, and the government pays only 80% – shatter your Fox fantasy bailout and you can’t face that.

You also show again how little you understand about how business works, so little that you think a government can force higher risks onto insurers and *not* underwrite them. The bigger surprise for those of us who do understand business, is that it is only three years. The nearest comparable situation is Holland, and there the government underwrites permanently.

Dec 27, 2013 11:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

Bot Kin – If the “fox fantasies” you have in mind get carried out (e.g., while you continue your sleepwalking) you might get in trouble! Fox hunting is illegal in your jolly old England …

Dec 27, 2013 12:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.