Over/under date for Obamacare 1-year delay?

[Balt]

Everyone says that, but is it true? Rates for the young have skyrocketed, leaving them a choice between paying a relatively small fine and buying a very expensive health insurance policy. That suggests recruitment will be far below initial projections. If young healthy people don't sign up in projected numbers then the insurance companies take a hit, but there are mechanisms in place for them to be reimbursed part of those losses and they can raise next year's premiums to make up the shortfall.

I didn't say it was a good idea, just that it was the idea, and one that Obamacare is probably unsustainable without. I agree 100% that many young people are probably just going to opt out and take the penalty. That is what I would have done from age 22 - 30, since there was no way I could have afforded health insurance (unless the government was going to fund almost 100% of it). Young adults can stay on their parents' plans longer now, and I think that's the only way many of them will stay insured. Unemployment and low wages among young people is a big big problem right now. The idea that they can take on the burden of funding the older folks (who are better off now than they have ever been) is kind of laughable.

The insurance companies may get reimbursed, as you suggest, but that still leaves a big check that someone at the table has to pick up. Whether it's the government or the insurance companies, Obamacare still fails if they can't get young people paying for the riskier folks. If everyone's premiums skyrocket in the second year or if the government's expenditures far exceed expectations, the whole thing is going to be a major clusterfuck.

In any case, my opinion still stands: The Obamacare mandate will not be delayed by a year. To do so would basically be throwing in the towel on the entire thing.

 

[glenn1]

Looks like 4 Senate Democrats now have publicly signed onto supporting a 1-year delay of the individual mandate.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...nerable-senate-dem-looks-for-obamacare-tweaks

 

[shira]

Looks like 4 Senate Democrats now have publicly signed onto supporting a 1-year delay of the individual mandate.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...nerable-senate-dem-looks-for-obamacare-tweaks

Where are you seeing that they support a "1-year delay?" All I see is that they support an "extension" of the allowed time beyond the March 31 deadline. And if the online process takes a month or more to stabilize, it would be reasonable to allow a month for month slip in the deadline.

 

[First]

Bahahahaha!!! Beautiful sarcasm!!

In the off chance you were being serious, you've just shown your complete lack of knowledge of systems like this. A fix for this botched abortion is months away at best.

Yet CGI Federal, one of the primary private contractors on Obamacare, says it'll be fixed by December 15th under oath in the House. What a dope!

Btw, I love how laymans pretend they know "systems", as if the shitty 2-person DC they once set up for a mom and pop means they're a "systems" guy. This is a database contract for enterprise Oracle software tied to massive CMS databases comprising all sorts of things we're clearly not privy to legally. This isn't Windows 2003 Server with Access db you set up in your basement.

 

[spacejamz]

Yet CGI Federal, one of the primary private contractors on Obamacare, says it'll be fixed by December 15th under oath in the House. What a dope!

Btw, I love how laymans pretend they know "systems", as if the shitty 2-person DC they once set up for a mom and pop means they're a "systems" guy. This is a database contract for enterprise Oracle software tied to massive CMS databases comprising all sorts of things we're clearly not privy to legally. This isn't Windows 2003 Server with Access db you set up in your basement.

Didn't CGI say several weeks before Oct 1 that everything would go smoothly?? But yes, we should believe them now...

 

[werepossum]

I didn't say it was a good idea, just that it was the idea, and one that Obamacare is probably unsustainable without. I agree 100% that many young people are probably just going to opt out and take the penalty. That is what I would have done from age 22 - 30, since there was no way I could have afforded health insurance (unless the government was going to fund almost 100% of it). Young adults can stay on their parents' plans longer now, and I think that's the only way many of them will stay insured. Unemployment and low wages among young people is a big big problem right now. The idea that they can take on the burden of funding the older folks (who are better off now than they have ever been) is kind of laughable.

The insurance companies may get reimbursed, as you suggest, but that still leaves a big check that someone at the table has to pick up. Whether it's the government or the insurance companies, Obamacare still fails if they can't get young people paying for the riskier folks. If everyone's premiums skyrocket in the second year or if the government's expenditures far exceed expectations, the whole thing is going to be a major clusterfuck.

In any case, my opinion still stands: The Obamacare mandate will not be delayed by a year. To do so would basically be throwing in the towel on the entire thing.

I think we're pretty much in agreement. I agree that the Obamacare mandate will likely not be delayed for a year, although waiving this year's penalties and starting next year with the stiffer second year penalties makes some sense. I don't think they'll do that because of the political climate. And honestly I don't think it will be strictly necessary. I expect there will be a lot of people who don't make the six week extended deadline, but mostly because a lot of people will wait until the last minute even if the last minute comes six weeks later than expected.

 

[First]

Didn't CGI say several weeks before Oct 1 that everything would go smoothly?? But yes, we should believe them now...

I don't know that for a fact, do you? Testimony or documented evidence would be good to see.

 

[werepossum]

Where are you seeing that they support a "1-year delay?" All I see is that they support an "extension" of the allowed time beyond the March 31 deadline. And if the online process takes a month or more to stabilize, it would be reasonable to allow a month for month slip in the deadline.

Manchin is pushing for a one-year extension. He's probably looking down the road at his own re-election battle; although West Virginia is a long time Democrat stronghold, it's also probably the most anti-Obama state because of his war on coal. (Though that may well change by the time he faces re-election due to the booming coal export market - hard to be too upset about the war on coal if coal is booming, no matter who is buying.)

 

[spacejamz]

I don't know that for a fact, do you? Testimony or documented evidence would be good to see.

http://nation.time.com/2013/10/23/contractors-launch-obamacare-blame-game-without-a-glitch/

Testifying about the site’s readiness on Sept. 10, before it launched on Oct. 1 and became hobbled by error messages and bottlenecks, Campbell told House members that CGI Federal’s work on the site, healthcare.gov, was proceeding smoothly and on schedule. She fielded just a few quick follow-up questions, including one from Democratic Representative Frank Pallone, who asked, “Are you on track to deliver on your contract and have things up and running?”

“The answer would be yes. We’re prepared,” she answered.

 

[PokerGuy]

Yet CGI Federal, one of the primary private contractors on Obamacare, says it'll be fixed by December 15th under oath in the House. What a dope!

Of course, we should believe the very dopes who brought us this disaster when they tell us it will all be wonderful soon. The same dopes that screwed up so bad in canada that they got booted out of that contract. Yep, sounds logical to me

 

[First]

http://nation.time.com/2013/10/23/contractors-launch-obamacare-blame-game-without-a-glitch/

Testifying about the site’s readiness on Sept. 10, before it launched on Oct. 1 and became hobbled by error messages and bottlenecks, Campbell told House members that CGI Federal’s work on the site, healthcare.gov, was proceeding smoothly and on schedule. She fielded just a few quick follow-up questions, including one from Democratic Representative Frank Pallone, who asked, “Are you on track to deliver on your contract and have things up and running?”

“The answer would be yes. We’re prepared,” she answered.

I bolded and underlined the relevant portion for you. The same Cheryl Campbell testified today CGI Federal was not responsible for end-to-end testing, they were responsible for a portion of the overall picture:

And why, she was asked, didn’t she warn the committee when she testified in mid-September that there hadn’t been any “end-to-end testing” of the entire website and all other systems that work with it? “It was not our area of responsibility to do end-to-end testing,” she said.

Get it?

 

[First]

Btw, shame on CGI and any other contractor, including the gov't aka CMS, for not having this up and running near 100% With a project of this scope, I honestly couldn't tell you who's responsible because that's going into the weeds of a design and implementation process that 1) isn't public and 2) probably beyond my understanding. But it's definitely clear it's a major screwup, and it would be equally ridiculous to sober observers if they can't fix this before Dec. 15th. A few weeks is one thing, 10 weeks is stretching it.

 

[piasabird]

I prdict a lot of people will just not buy insurance and the rate of people not submitting their taxes to the IRS will increase. I also predict the IRS will repossess peoples houses or businesses if they dont pay thier fines. It is very dangerous to give the IRS more power.

 

[spacejamz]

I bolded and underlined the relevant portion for you. The same Cheryl Campbell testified today CGI Federal was not responsible for end-to-end testing, they were responsible for a portion of the overall picture:

Get it?

Great...then why does it matter if CGI says they will be fixed by Dec 15 if they can just point the finger at someone else if it isn't working?

And it is hilarious that all of the major contractors who developed this POS are pointing the fingers at each other...How can Campbell say they delivered everything that was required when they are blaming the HHS for changing the requirements at the last minute? Something is rotten in Denmark here and you refuse to see it..

For CGI to say that they successfully tested their piece when they were the main contractor for the project and then see the results that occurred, something isn't adding up.

It make you wonder what kind of testing they did. With all of the data that needs to be passed back and forth between all of these systems, how do you actually test just your piece anyway? Do you simulate the data that your system expects from the other vendors? When you send your data out, do you assume it is properly formatted? Testing with the other vendors is needed to identify if there errors during the data exchange between system....To say that you tested your piece in vacuum is inexcusable. During the testing that should have gone during development, these companies should have been talking to each other about the field formats, required fields, etc.

But you keep defending this patheticness though, I am sure obama appreciates your support...

 

[Agent11]

I think it will stay open purely for the reason of saving political face. The current Democratic 'establishment' will be hoisted upon their own petard for quite some time as problems mount in the practical implementation of the law. This is the strategy many wanted to pursue in the first place, as the law was seeming more flawed as it progressed.

 

[First]

Great...then why does it matter if CGI says they will be fixed by Dec 15 if they can just point the finger at someone else if it isn't working?

I imagine because they're part of the ongoing strategy meetings, would be a good guess. None of it will be revealed in detail but if you throw enough money at a problem it'll get fixed, as sad as that is considering it could add millions to the tab.

And it is hilarious that all of the major contractors who developed this POS are pointing the fingers at each other...How can Campbell say they delivered everything that was required when they are blaming the HHS for changing the requirements at the last minute? Something is rotten in Denmark here and you refuse to see it..

For CGI to say that they successfully tested their piece when they were the main contractor for the project and then see the results that occurred, something isn't adding up.

It make you wonder what kind of testing they did. With all of the data that needs to be passed back and forth between all of these systems, how do you actually test just your piece anyway? Do you simulate the data that your system expects from the other vendors? When you send your data out, do you assume it is properly formatted? Testing with the other vendors is needed to identify if there errors during the data exchange between system....To say that you tested your piece in vacuum is inexcusable. During the testing that should have gone during development, these companies should have been talking to each other about the field formats, required fields, etc.

Gee, wanna guess why? Something isn't right, no shit. It's political dynamite because everything about the law is politicized. Ya think that's maybe why?

But you keep defending this patheticness though, I am sure obama appreciates your support...

lol, because clearly you are interested in seeing the law succeed.