( Sebelius lies that Obama was clueless of rampant website problems - and if true , is that supposed to be a comfort ? )
Sebelius: Obama didn’t know about website problems until after launch
POSTED AT 10:01 PM ON OCTOBER 22, 2013 BY MARY KATHARINE HAM
Hey, he reads about every other crisis in the paper. Why not this one, too?
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told CNN’s Sanjay Gupta that President Obama was completely clueless about serious problems with HealthCare.gov pre-launch. This despite troubles with the minimal testing done on the site and serious concerns from insurance companies, who were even pushing for delay.
President Barack Obama didn’t know of problems with the Affordable Care Act’s website — despite insurance companies’ complaints and the site’s crashing during a test run — until days into its now well-documented abysmal launch, the nation’s health chief told CNN on Tuesday.In an exclusive interview with CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted that there is concern in her department and the White House over the technical debacle surrounding the Obamacare website rollout, saying “no one could be more frustrated than I am and the president.”The site was supposed to make it simple for people to search and sign-up for new health care policies starting on October 1, but instead it’s been clunky and, at times, inoperable.“We’re not at all satisfied with the workings of the website,” Sebelius said. “We want it to be smooth and easy and let consumers’ compare plans.”
So, was the president so very uninterested in making sure his legacy law got launched with a modicum of competence that he never checked to make sure this was going well? Is he so surrounded by yes men and women that no one could bring themselves to tell him about this? Was Sebelius just straight-up lying to him day in and day out? Or, is she taking one for the team because he knew there were problems and was too stubborn to delay? I have pretty low expectations for Obama and government in general, but I remain a bit mystified at just how negligent it appears he was. If there’s one thing he is intensely interested in, it’s his own legacy, right?
Sebelius’ star continues to rise in this interview. Check out the tone she strikes. Gupta asks if she should resign, to which she replies, she serves “at the pleasure of the president.”
She uses the bogus giant traffic excuse yet again, even though the Washington Post reported some 2,000 users crashed the site in testing.
She declares there is reason for optimism in the Obamacare launch because, you see, there are so very many people lawfully required to buy insurance being prevented from buying it by this website. It’s not a crisis; it’s an opportunity! It’s a crisitunity.
“What we’re seeing in not only the states that are run by the federal website, but states around the country, is that interest is huge,” she said. “People are eager to have this affordable product, and that product is there.”
She admits she hasn’t tried to sign up using HealthCare.gov because “I have insurance.” Nice. The hundreds of thousands of people losing theirs and with no way to sign up for new, crappier plans appreciate the knife-twisting, Kath.
And, finally, this classic Kinsleyan gaffe: “We anticipated at the outset that everyone would never use the website,” she said.
The entire interview is below, and no, there is nothing in it that suggests they have any idea how to fix this thing.
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/10/22/it-begins-dems-number-two-in-the-house-calls-for-more-money-for-obamacare-website/
It begins: Dems’ number two in the House calls for more money for ObamaCare website
POSTED AT 7:21 PM ON OCTOBER 22, 2013 BY ALLAHPUNDIT
The best part of this is that he admits he doesn’t know if the site actually needs more money or not. “Give them a little” is something he seems to say almost reflexively, I guess because when a government program is failing badly, that’s just what you do. For Hoyer, throwing another hundred million or two into this quicksand is really just a symbolic vote of confidence in it, I think, nothing more. When you’re $17 trillion in debt, it’s all Monopoly money at this point anyway.
I wonder if he knows that the site’s already three times over budget. I know he wouldn’t care if he did know, but does he know? I’m curious to see just how closely the Democratic leadership is following the growth of this precious little pony they gifted to America.
Asked Tuesday how Congress could help improve the system by which millions of Americans must buy insurance by the end of the year, the House minority whip and Maryland Democrat said, “We can give them a little money.”“[Republicans have] been pretty much focused in the House of Representatives on undermining the implementation of the Affordable Care Act in every which way that we possibly could,” he said.Hoyer admitted that he does not know whether the project, which has already cost more than $400 million, has faced funding problems. “I don’t think that’s the reason,” he said. “If I know that, I’ll blame it.”…“I certainly believe it’s a bad performance,” Hoyer said. “Obviously this was not done the way it should have been done, and I’m sure if I was a Republican I would yell and scream about it as well.
Ace notes that that line about Republicans undermining implementation may signal a sly inchoate Democratic attempt to suggest, without clearly stating, that it’s the shutdown that caused Healthcare.gov’s problems, not Obama’s incompetence. That’s false, of course, but there are indeed people out there in this great big country of ours who believe it. Expect to hear more of it as “repairs” to the site drag on and on, and on. Meanwhile, Ben Domenechsaw the “more money” gambit coming a few days ago:
4. With the White House’s blessing, a Gang of Insert Number Here with some vulnerable/moderate Dems (Manchin, Landrieu, Pryor, Begich, Heitkamp, Warner… maybe Baucus?) could press for a package of “fix the exchanges” legislation, which could conceivably offer Republicans a chance to pass delay while appropriating more funding for the exchanges – something like: delay the mandate, delay some of the goodies, and take the exchanges offline and give them more money to fix them.
Are there even six Republicans in the Senate willing to be part of a gang like that, though? The idea of any GOPer colluding with Democrats to fix the exchanges, even if they’re able to win a delay of the law in the process, seems unthinkable to me. They’d be accused of rescuing O’s boondoggle at a moment of supreme weakness; everything you heard after the shutdown ended about RINOs like Boehner and McConnell now “owning” O-Care because they couldn’t figure out a way to stop it would multiply by a hundred. On the other hand, if the caucus unites in opposition and vows not a penny more for “repairs,” they risk being perceived as endorsing the “let it burn” approach to O-Care. Even Ted Cruz has problems with LIB — for good reason, says Breitbart’s Joel Pollak:
It is tempting, now that President Barack Obama and the mainstream media are rubbing Republicans’ noses in the mess that was the government shutdown, to let them take the “credit” for Obamacare and force them to implement it as “settled law.” After all, they played their part in forcing the shutdown by resisting any change or delay at all to Obamacare. So let them take the “credit” for that supposedly triumphant stance.The problem is that a member of Congress has to face his or her constituents and explain what he or she is doing to help them–not in 2017, when the only realistic possibility for repealing Obamacare will arise, but today. It would be unacceptable for Rubio or Cruz to tell their constituents that the voters have to be taught a lesson. So they have to take some kind of action to “fix” Obamacare, while still pressing for its repeal.
The only way to spare the public pain from ObamaCare, the “defunders” will say, was to defund it before it started. True, but Senate math being what it was, it wasn’t going to happen. And it didn’t happen, so what’s the Plan B to spare people now? Rubio proposes delaying the individual mandate to prevent them from suffering an unjust penalty, but if Democrats agreed to do that, it would wreak more immediate havoc on the insurance industry than fixing the website would. I’m not sure what Cruz’s Plan B is but no doubt we’ll find out in the next few days. This is why Domenech thinks the gang option is, although improbable, at least possible: You may get six purple-state Republicans who decide that the least bad option here between cutting O a blank check and declaring that not a penny of money will be spent to rescue ObamaCare no matter how many Biblical plagues its half-assed implementation unleashes upon the land is to give Obama the money he needs for the site in return for major concessions on the order of delaying the law for awhile. Can’t wait for that next round of RINO/true conservative throat-slitting.
Published October 22, 2013, 09:36 PM
Feds ask Blue Cross Blue Shield not to release exchange numbers
FARGO – The Obama administration asked North Dakota’s largest health insurer not to publicize how many people have signed up for health insurance through a new online exchange, a company official says.
By: Kyle Potter, INFORUM
Spanish website completely down...
HHS Finds TWO Enrollees for Ads...
and hard to tell satire from " marketing "......
Brosurance: A Keg Standing Ovation For ObamaCare's Greatest Hit
Just when you thought ObamaCare couldn't stoop any lower in its "sales pitch", it does.
and there's more...
Why does Sebelius still have a job if “nobody’s madder than” Obama over Healthcare.gov debacle?
POSTED AT 12:41 PM ON OCTOBER 22, 2013 BY ED MORRISSEY
“Nobody’s madder than me,” Barack Obama told the nation yesterday, “about the fact that the website isn’t working as well as it should.” But is he? In the same speech, he extolled the system that hardly anyone can access, while failing to even suggest that the President should hold people accountable for the rank incompetence that produced the debacle. Three weeks into the fiasco, the only accountability being exercised is coming from Congress, where HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has finally agreed to testify after first claiming she had no time to talk with Congress about the massive failure produced by her agency after a 42-month head start.
My column at The Week advises Obama to start demonstrating actual anger by canning the people responsible for this $400 million disaster, starting with Sebelius:
Obama insisted, “Nobody’s madder than me about the fact that the website isn’t working as well as it should.” Getting angry would be a good start. However, the only anger Obama flashed at all in his speech was aimed at critics pointing out the failures, and not the people who were responsible for the system’s creation. This website cost the American people more than $400 million, according to the Times, and yet not once in Obama’s speech did he say he would impose accountability for the failure. In fact, the word “accountable” never appears in his speech, despite the nine-figure price tag and the 42 months HHS had to get this right.The president did promise a “tech surge” to find and eliminate the problems in the website, including the transmission of bad data to insurers. He reassured Americans that “America’s top private-sector tech companies” had offered their help to resolve the problem, noting that they “have seen things like this happen before.” That’s debatable, especially on the scale and scope of this failure, but it’s at least true that private-sector firms occasionally have to deal with failing projects. However, they usually solve the problem by imposing substantial penalties for those responsible for the failure, such as demotions and terminations, and replace them with more competent personnel to rescue the projects. They also usually don’t start off by blaming the critics for the problem and then trying to get consumers to believe that everything is hunky-dory.The scope of this failure demands changes at HHS — at least if Obama wants Americans to have trust in this system. Kathleen Sebelius’ top priority since March 2010 was preparing for the rollout of the ObamaCare exchanges, and yet they have all but collapsed, to the point that two successive weekends of patches can’t fix the issues. (The last patch was to add a button explaining how to use the call center rather than the website, but the call center can’t properly handle the requests, either.) HHS’s subsidiary agency Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and its administrator Marilyn Tavenner were responsible for developing and launching Healthcare.gov, but Obama didn’t mention either agency or its top executives in his speech. If Obama is “madder” than anyone, who is he mad at?Here’s a better question. Why should Americans believe that the broken system will be fixed within weeks by the same people who had control of this project for the last three-plus years and had $400 million at their disposal? Asking people to trust in the failed management team that delivered the current fiasco would be like asking them to believe that they can keep their plan if they like their plan. It’s time to clean house, or better yet, admit defeat and pursue other means of reforming the health-insurance industry — like, say, turning it back over to the same private sector that Obama had to call this week for a rescue of his Big Government project failure.
I’m hardly alone in wondering why heads aren’t already rolling in the executive branch. Bloomberg’s editors also scoff at Obama’s expression of impotent and largely undetectable anger, and especially at Obama’s pep rally yesterday:
In remarks this morning in the White House Rose Garden, President Barack Obama said HealthCare.gov, the website that is supposed to be the conduit through which people buy insurance under the new health-care law, “hasn’t worked as smoothly as it was supposed to.” That’s a little like saying a plane that crashed into a mountain, caught fire and exploded didn’t land as smoothly as it was supposed to.Three weeks into the most flagrant debacle of his presidency, Obama didn’t say what went wrong, why or who was to blame. He offered no details about what the administration is doing to fix it (“We’ve got people working overtime”), or how long it will take. And he expressed no contrition, saying only that “Nobody’s madder than me.” …Third, the president should demonstrate that failure has consequences. Obama is fond of comparing the rollout of HealthCare.gov to that of an Apple Inc. (AAPL) product. Surely, if less than 1 percent of the people who tried to use the company’s latest operating system could do so, the executives responsible would not keep their jobs.
John Dickerson also takes on the Apple talking point, noting that consumers had other options when their mapping program turned out to be buggy on release. He also points out in Slate that the administration has either been dishonest, incompetent, or both:
The president’s speech was just the latest attempt to put the problems with Healthcare.gov into perspective—a job that is not going well. Before the site was launched, the president said it would make signing up for health care as easy as making a plane reservation. When, after a few rocky days that turned out to be too rosy, the administration dropped the airline analogy. Now the experience more closely approximates the saga of having your flight delayed. First, the airline tells you it will be a half hour, then it stretches it to an hour, then two, then you’re offered a voucher for a drink. After four hours, it dawns on you that the plane is never taking off. They continue to assure you it will—just before they cancel your flight.
The stories keep shifting. Administration officials said the site had been tested as thoroughly as the IRS computer systems that handle electronic tax returns. Now Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admits the system wasn’t tested enough. In the first several days, administration officials spoke of “glitches,” and Secretary Sebelius asked that people give the government the same amount of slack Apple gets when it launches a new product. But the administration dropped that analogy because, unlike Apple’s quick admission that Apple Maps was a mess, the government can’t just let users install Google Maps (and there have been no quick firings for the mess, as there were at Apple). The president and his team then said the website snafus were the result of huge traffic, but that explanation doesn’t explain the considerable technical problems now being reported. Reports of the extraordinary number of people who have accessed the site are themselves full of fuzzy claims that seek to oversell the success.
There’s a dangerous spiral that can take hold in these situations, as spin intended to distract from the current mess becomes its own problem. That is especially true when the facts demonstrate that the story the administration was selling is too optimistic: Either the White House knew how bad things were and wasn’t playing it straight or it didn’t know how bad things were and is just inept.
Obama can’t ask us to trust that the same people who spent 42 months and $400 million delivering this debacle have the requisite skills to repair it within weeks while in operation. At least, not with a straight face.
Update: Matt Lewis suggests that Obama hire Jim Leyland. He’s got a better record.
Rubio: I’m introducing a bill to delay the individual mandate until the ObamaCare website is fixed
POSTED AT 11:21 AM ON OCTOBER 22, 2013 BY ALLAHPUNDIT
Smart politics. It won’t pass, but then it’s not really designed to.
He said all he is calling for is a delay on the requirement until the U.S. General Accounting Office certifies the Web site is working and has been functioning for six consecutive months.Rubio said he’s hopeful the measure will pass, especially as the deadline draws closer. “As weeks go on, there’s going to be a look for a solution to the problem. It’s not fair to punish people for buying something that’s not available,” he said. “Quite frankly, I think that’s where we’re going to have to wind up anyway. You saw yesterday, the White House didn’t rule out a delay. Jay Carney didn’t rule it out because they understand that the problems that this web site faces are significant and are going to be very difficult to fix in a number of weeks.”
Says one commenter in Headlines of Rubio’s bill, “It would collapse the insurance market.” Indeed it would, potentially. Delay the mandate for months and you’re all but guaranteeing that healthy uninsured people won’t sign up soon, which means insurers won’t have the new revenue they were banking on to cover sick people’s preexisting conditions. Voila — you’ve created the conditions for an industry death spiral. Democrats know it too, just like they also know that they’re not getting anything like single-payer through Congress so long as there’s a Republican majority in the House. So they have no choice but to oppose Rubio’s bill and defeat it in the Senate, even though doing so will make for terrible politics. There are lots and lots and lots of things the public doesn’t understand about ObamaCare, but one thing everyone understands is that it’s unfair to punish people for not doing something the government’s made it all but impossible for them to do. Rubio’s bill essentially forces Democrats to argue that it is fair somehow in the name of keeping the mandate in effect. Would they rather do that or would they rather delay the entire law to make sure the death spiral doesn’t happen?
A separate, mostly academic question related to this is whether delaying the mandate requires Congress to pass something or whether Obama can just decide to do it on his own. His defenders, naturally, say he has unilateral authority to do it; he could invoke a “hardship” exemption under the law to declare that, because Healthcare.gov isn’t working, “no affordable qualified health plan available through the Exchange” exists for millions of people and therefore they’re off the hook on paying any penalty. That would allow him to bypass Rubio and the Republicans in setting up some sort of mandate delay, but it doesn’t solve his death-spiral problem. If O-Care fans have now reached the point where they’re gaming out the best legal strategy for putting off the mandate for awhile, we’re well into “nightmare” territory for the left.
Exit question: How many uninsured low-information voters know that the penalty for not signing up for insurance isn’t $95 but rather the higher of $95 or one percent of income?Megan McArdle included that in her list of four overlooked points about the health-care rollout a few days ago and I’ve been wondering about it ever since. Imagine you’re 25, uninsured, and generating $40,000 in income annually. The media’s given you the impression lately that you’ll have to cough up 95 bucks next March if you don’t get covered. Not so; you’ll have to cough up 400 bucks. Imagine how surprised lots of uninsured people will be when they finally find out how much they’re in for.
WH spokesman: I can’t speak to whether the website will be fixed by March, but the phone service is awesome
POSTED AT 9:21 PM ON OCTOBER 21, 2013 BY ERIKA JOHNSEN
So, it’s official, I suppose. The administration’s fallback, all-purpose talking point concerning ObamaCare is metastisizing from the “high volume,” “nineteen million unique visitors,” “high interest” line of obfuscation to include the “ObamaCare is so much more than a website” line that President Obama used in his
infomercial speech outside the White House this morning. Hey, the website is merely one of the available portals you can use to access the (basically “free”!) benefits now available to you through the ACA. The paper and telephone routes maybe burdensome, old-fashioned, and more confusing, but they’re equally sweet options for getting on board with this legally mandated program — never mind the easy, user-friendly signup experience we promised you, it’s not that important.
Jake Tapper made it a rough afternoon segment for White House spokesman David Simas:
TAPPER: Will the website be up and running, can you promise by December 15th, or the by March deadline, either one of the dates, can yes or no, can you promise?SIMAS: So Jake, yes, between the website and all of the other ways that people have to sign up –TAPPER: That wasn’t really the question.SIMAS: But here’s the reality. Any American over the course of the next six months who either doesn’t have insurance or is on the individual market, between the website service that prior to october 1st didn’t exist, a 1-800 number prior to October 1st that didn’t exist, navigators and the ability to do it on their own, they can get insurance and will. …The main purpose of the Affordable Care Act is not a website. It’s to make sure that any American who is either uninsured or in the individual market has options to get insurance. That will happen. That’s our sole focus and that’s what we’re going to do.
Something tells me, however, that even the administration doesn’t think they can run this entire enrollment period off of paper and telephone enrollments, and in the meantime, they don’t seem to want to even ballpark a date for when the website will be really and truly fixed. Yikes.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-21/despite-presidents-urging-obamacare-helpline-lives-its-name
( You really can't make this up ..... )
Despite President's Urging, Obamacare Helpline Lives Up To Its Name
It would appear, despite the President's urging, that Obamacare's helpline is living up to its mnemonics. As The National Review reports, President Obama emerged on Monday to assure Americans that the “kinks” surrounding the federal and state health-care exchanges are improving and urged consumers to call the exchange hotline if they continue to encounter problems online. Shortly after he made the suggestion, Twitter lit up with reporters and others who attempted to do so but failed to get through to a navigator as promised.
Indeed, Mr. President, 1-800-318-2596 to you too.
...
After dialing the number, some callers got a busy signal, others received an automated message, and yet others were referred back to Healthcare.gov.
POSTED AT 5:31 PM ON OCTOBER 19, 2013 BY ERIKA JOHNSEN
If you were wondering whether the increasing pile of evidence indicating that HealthCare.Gov’s problems are not merely opening “glitches” but deep-seated design defects — as well as the growing chorus of IT experts suggesting that the Obama administration might want to consider starting over on the badly bungled project — would have any effect whatsoever on their determination to plow forward with their arbitrary and political deadlines… don’t hold your breath. HHS Secretary Sebelius would like you to know that completely rebuilding the website is just not gonna’ happen, via the WSJ:
After two weeks of review, the HHS secretary concluded, “We didn’t have enough testing, specifically for high volumes, for a very complicated project.”The online insurance marketplace needed five years of construction and a year of testing, she said: “We had two years and almost no testing.” …Overall, she said, the website is functional and “we will hit the mark” within the law’s six-month open enrollment period that began Oct. 1. “I’m not throwing out the system and starting over,’” she said. …Mrs. Sebelius convenes meetings, often three times a day, to monitor progress against the technological snafus. “I can’t fix the website myself,” she said. “But I’m working around the clock to find out what we know in extraordinary and honest detail, hold our contractors and our team accountable, and accelerate the timeline to resolve the problems.”
Gee, “not enough testing” — ya’ think? Isn’t “accelerating the timeline” what got us into this mess?
And as for working “working around the clock,” I find it rather interesting that Secretary Sebelius finds “scheduling conflicts” to be a passable excuse for refusing to appear in front of Congress next week to answer what many on the Right and the Left now agree are reasonable questions about why the administration insisted upon moving forward with a product that at least somebody over there knew wasn’t ready, and yet she seems to have the time to attend galas in the meantime. Most curious, really, as CNN pointed out on Friday:
The WSJ editors are not impressed:
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is even refusing to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee in a hearing this coming Thursday. HHS claims she has scheduling conflicts, but we hope she isn’t in the White House catacomb under interrogation by Valerie Jarrett about her department’s incompetence.The department is also refusing to make available lower-level officials who might detail the source or sources of this debacle. Ducking an investigation with spin is one thing. Responding with a wall of silence to the invitation of a duly elected congressional body probing the use of more than half a billion taxpayer dollars is another. This Obama crowd is something else.
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/10/21/nyt-obamacare-website-only-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-of-disaster/
NYT: ObamaCare website only the tip of the iceberg of disaster
POSTED AT 8:01 AM ON OCTOBER 21, 2013 BY ED MORRISSEY
We’ve had plenty of evidence that the Healthcare.gov website issues go well beyond coding problems on the front end, where Americans create accounts before gaining access to the actual insurance-plan marketplace. The New York Times reports today that the marketplaces themselves are just as buggy — and that it might take weeks or months to get all the issues fixed:
Federal contractors have identified most of the main problems crippling President Obama’s online health insurance marketplace, but the administration has been slow to issue orders for fixing those flaws, and some contractors worry that the system may be weeks away from operating smoothly, people close to the project say.Administration officials approached the contractors last week to see if they could perform the necessary repairs and reboot the system by Nov. 1. However, that goal struck many contractors as unrealistic, at least for major components of the system. Some specialists working on the project said the online system required such extensive repairs that it might not operate smoothly until after the Dec. 15 deadline for people to sign up for coverage starting in January, although that view is not universally shared.
The scope of the problem is massive:
In interviews, experts said the technological problems of the site went far beyond the roadblocks to creating accounts that continue to prevent legions of users from even registering. Indeed, several said, the login problems, though vexing to consumers, may be the easiest to solve. One specialist said that as many as five million lines of software code may need to be rewritten before the Web site runs properly.“The account creation and registration problems are masking the problems that will happen later,” said one person involved in the repair effort.
CMS, the agency at HHS responsible for the ObamaCare exchanges, is dragging its feet on change orders necessary to start correcting the front-end issues. That may be in part because the entire system is suspect. As other news organizations have already reported, the NYT confirms that the system passes bad data to the insurers, which means even those few people who have managed to buy insurance through the system may actually still be uninsured and not know it.
The Times makes the “complexity” argument:
One major problem slowing repairs, people close to the program say, is that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency in charge of the exchange, is responsible for making sure that the separately designed databases and pieces of software from 55 contractors work together. It is not common for a federal agency to assume that role, and numerous people involved in the project said the agency did not have the expertise to do the job and did not fully understand what it entailed.
We’ve argues all along that the government doesn’t have the expertise for this job — which is why ObamaCare would be such a disaster. But the complexity argument is nonsense. NASA managed to coordinate hundreds of contractors on space exploration, and completed the Mercury project and moved into the Gemini project in the same period of time CMS and HHS have had to launch a website.
Barack Obama will give a Rose Garden speech today that promises a “tech surge” to solve the problems:
The Obama administration has promised a “tech surge” to tackle the myriad technical issues that have plagued HealthCare.gov, acknowledging that the online health insurance marketplace “has not lived up to the expectations of the American people.”“Our team is bringing in some of the best and brightest from both inside and outside government to scrub in with the team and help improve healthcare.gov,” the administration said in a 600-word post that was published Sunday on the Web site of the US Department of Health and Human Services. “We’re also putting in place tools and processes to aggressively monitor and identify parts of healthcare.gov where individuals are encountering errors or having difficulty using the site.”Business Insider’s Joe Weisenthal is skeptical about that idea:
It’s doubtful that code patches will solve the problem, and the White House can’t afford a do-over at this point, which might take another three years. And even when they do get the site fixed, the escalation in prices, deductibles, and co-pays still await Americans consumers. It’s difficult to see how this could be any more of a train wreck.
No comments:
Post a Comment