• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

"Healthcare.gov" Went Down Again

Mike

Well-known member
Too many in the industry say that the only way to make this work is to scrap it and start all over. :lol:


By Simon Moya-Smith, Staff Writer, NBC News

The company that operates HealthCare.gov experienced a connectivity glitch on Sunday, another complication for an already beleaguered population of would-be health care applicants.

White House officials said the company that operates the hub, Terremark, was working to resolve the issue as quickly as possible.

Health and Human Services spokesman Joanne Peters said in a statement that the website was down because the company "experienced a failure in a networking component, and planned maintenance to replace it brought down network connectivity to the data center."

"Our understanding is that this failure is likely impacting several other sites, in addition to HealthCare.gov and the Data Services Hub," she added.

The Oct. 1 launch of Obama's health care law, also known as Obamacare, has been marred by technical glitches and delays.

The department has encouraged website users to contact their call center to apply for coverage.

NBC's Kristen Welker and Reuters contributed to this report.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
There is NO REASON for such a cluster-dfuck with this thing.

But, I'm a still pro iinsurance for everyone.....but good grief they are cutting their nose off to spite their face with this thing
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
There is NO REASON for such a cluster-dfuck with this thing.

But, I'm a still pro iinsurance for everyone.....but good grief they are cutting their nose off to spite their face with this thing

Can we count you in the camp of not believing that this will ultimately bring down health care costs, improve the overall quality of health care, and reduce waiting times for procedures?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
kolanuraven said:
There is NO REASON for such a cluster-dfuck with this thing.

But, I'm a still pro iinsurance for everyone.....but good grief they are cutting their nose off to spite their face with this thing

Can we count you in the camp of not believing that this will ultimately bring down health care costs, improve the overall quality of health care, and reduce waiting times for procedures?

Since you asked so nice, I shall answer.


I think it will be a long road BUT I honestly do think that it will change and improve the health care system we've come to know here in the US.

We have no stepped over the edge and there is no returning to the old system now....we have no where to go but forward.

Really, the biggest ' cost'/expense/burden of the health care system, of us and any/or country, are the ones who steal from the system,I mean patient and providers.


It is a mess and was no way perfect before Oct 1st.

Again, I will say there is NO EXCUSE for the way this system has been handled....but I feel it will improve as now there are more eyes than EVER expected on it.


Now, let's let hoppy and Larry make their rants..................
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Whitewing said:
kolanuraven said:
There is NO REASON for such a cluster-dfuck with this thing.

But, I'm a still pro iinsurance for everyone.....but good grief they are cutting their nose off to spite their face with this thing

Can we count you in the camp of not believing that this will ultimately bring down health care costs, improve the overall quality of health care, and reduce waiting times for procedures?

Since you asked so nice, I shall answer.


I think it will be a long road BUT I honestly do think that it will change and improve the health care system we've come to know here in the US.

We have no stepped over the edge and there is no returning to the old system now....we have no where to go but forward.

Really, the biggest ' cost'/expense/burden of the health care system, of us and any/or country, are the ones who steal from the system,I mean patient and providers.


It is a mess and was no way perfect before Oct 1st.

Again, I will say there is NO EXCUSE for the way this system has been handled....but I feel it will improve as now there are more eyes than EVER expected on it.


Now, let's let hoppy and Larry make their rants..................

If Obamacare is supposedly good enough for the people of this country, why isn't it good enough for the President and the members of Congress? That should make all of us smell a rat right off the bat. :roll:

Obama should follow the wise words of Ted Williams: "If you don't think too good, don't think too often." :cowboy:
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Soapweed said:
kolanuraven said:
Whitewing said:
Can we count you in the camp of not believing that this will ultimately bring down health care costs, improve the overall quality of health care, and reduce waiting times for procedures?

Since you asked so nice, I shall answer.


I think it will be a long road BUT I honestly do think that it will change and improve the health care system we've come to know here in the US.

We have no stepped over the edge and there is no returning to the old system now....we have no where to go but forward.

Really, the biggest ' cost'/expense/burden of the health care system, of us and any/or country, are the ones who steal from the system,I mean patient and providers.


It is a mess and was no way perfect before Oct 1st.

Again, I will say there is NO EXCUSE for the way this system has been handled....but I feel it will improve as now there are more eyes than EVER expected on it.


Now, let's let hoppy and Larry make their rants..................

If Obamacare is supposedly good enough for the people of this country, why isn't it good enough for the President and the members of Congress? That should make all of us smell a rat right off the bat. :roll:

Obama should follow the wise words of Ted Williams: "If you don't think too good, don't think too often." :cowboy:




FORGET the slang name " obama care".....and remember that a program practically the same was the thoughts of Ronald Reagan and was implimented by Romney.....BOTH Republicans.

Just forget that name....It's the Affordable Care Act....or ACA


Congress wanted exempt from the program.....right then and there the Pres should have said NO WAY.

But, he didn't and I can only guess in the hopes of getting some coorporation out of them. Well, that dog won't hunt!!
 

Larrry

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
There is NO REASON for such a cluster-dfuck with this thing.

But, I'm a still pro iinsurance for everyone.....but good grief they are cutting their nose off to spite their face with this thing

You can't say you weren't warned

Not much to rant on, just letting this failure speak for itself. You just don't see the government improving anything. They just throw more money at it.
History proves that
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska is the despicable one who sold us all out by giving Obama the last vote he needed. It's a shame that a once fairly good person couldn't stand on the principles and the wishes of the people he was supposedly representing. :mad:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Soapweed said:
kolanuraven said:
Whitewing said:
Can we count you in the camp of not believing that this will ultimately bring down health care costs, improve the overall quality of health care, and reduce waiting times for procedures?

Since you asked so nice, I shall answer.


I think it will be a long road BUT I honestly do think that it will change and improve the health care system we've come to know here in the US.

We have no stepped over the edge and there is no returning to the old system now....we have no where to go but forward.

Really, the biggest ' cost'/expense/burden of the health care system, of us and any/or country, are the ones who steal from the system,I mean patient and providers.


It is a mess and was no way perfect before Oct 1st.

Again, I will say there is NO EXCUSE for the way this system has been handled....but I feel it will improve as now there are more eyes than EVER expected on it.


Now, let's let hoppy and Larry make their rants..................

If Obamacare is supposedly good enough for the people of this country, why isn't it good enough for the President and the members of Congress? That should make all of us smell a rat right off the bat. :roll:

Obama should follow the wise words of Ted Williams: "If you don't think too good, don't think too often." :cowboy:

Soap- the story that the President and members of Congress are exempt from ACA is an absolute flat out lie perpetrated by some extremists and a couple of nutcase Congressmen who are playing political games...


Is Congress exempted from Obamacare?

8:02 pm, Sep 28, 2013 | Written by Mark Robison


The claim

Congress is exempt from Obamacare.


The background

Gary Tracy wrote to Fact Checker: “I’m seeing anti-Obamacare signs at protests that say stuff like ‘Exempt America,’ charging that Congress has exempted itself from the ACA (Affordable Care Act) while forcing it on the rest of us. I don’t believe that to be a truthful representation of reality, but I haven't seen a highly visible refutation.”

Tracy is right that this is common. For instance, last week, Roger Farrell of Sparks wrote to say, “If Obamacare is so great, why then did the Congress that voted for it for the American people demand to be exempted from it?”

The Reno Gazette-Journal’s Voices page even ran an editorial cartoon last month with the caption “D-Day on Obamacare Beach.” It showed a drawing of congressmen (no women) seeming to abandon regular Americans on the beach and saying “Um … we exempted ourselves. So … good luck to the rest of you.”

Here’s what the law’s text says: “Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and Congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are — (I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an Amendment made by this Act).”

In other words, Congress must use Obamacare.


It’s strange that a rumor about a congressional exemption would get started. This is because the amendment cited above was created by a Republican and trumpeted at the time for forcing Congress to participate.

Most Americans won’t use Obamacare marketplaces (formerly called exchanges). This is because their employers already offer them insurance, and Obamacare is intended for the uninsured. The federal government offers health insurance to its workers so Congress and its staff would not have had to use Obamacare. Some didn’t think this was right.

On Sept. 30, 2009, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) issued a press release:

Senator Chuck Grassley has won approval for his legislation to require that members of Congress and congressional staff access health insurance through the exchange that would be created by the health care reform legislation under consideration by the Finance Committee.

“‘The more that Congress experiences the laws we pass, the better the laws are likely to be,’ Grassley said.

“Members of the committee agreed through unanimous consent on Tuesday night to support the Grassley amendment. …

“‘My interest in having Members of Congress participate in the exchange is consistent with my long-held view that Congress should live under the same laws it passes for the rest of the country,’ Grassley said.”

This rumor is an example of a zombie claim — no matter how many times it’s killed, it still won’t die.


Back in January 2010, Aaron Albright, press secretary for the House Committee on Education and Labor, told FactCheck.org: “People actually believe we wrote in the bill that Congress exempts itself from these requirements. That falsehood has been going around since the very beginning.”

The falsehood was resurrected for the umpteenth time last month when the U.S. Office of Personnel Management issued a rule to clarify part of the law that wasn’t specified in the written bill.

As mentioned, the federal government already offers health insurance to its workers. Like most employers, it covers part of workers’ health insurance costs. Because Congress and its staff are being treated differently than all other employers in order to force it to use the Obamacare marketplace, there was no language stating that the government could cover part of the premiums for Congress as it currently does.

Last month, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management issued a rule saying that, yes, this was OK to do, as long as the premium coverage wasn’t more than it is for other federal workers.


In response, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) issued a carefully phrased statement that Obama somehow had exempted Congress and its staff from “the full effect of the law.”

Does the new rule mean Congress won’t have to get health insurance through the Obamacare marketplaces? No, they still have to.

Does this mean Congress is getting special treatment? No, members and their staffs still get no benefit they don’t currently get.



The verdict

While there are legitimate concerns about President Obama’s health care law — much of which kicks into gear Oct. 1 — this isn’t one.

Critics of Obamacare want it both ways. When Congress and its staff were treated like workers for any other large employer, the president’s health care plan was deemed faulty because Congress didn’t have to use the plan. So then after a Republican amendment forced Congress to participate, critics still want to call it faulty because … well, because of a flat-out falsehood that Congress really is still exempt.

This is the type of claim that merits the lowest truthmeter rating, signifying willful or malicious disregard for the truth.


Why Congress is (or isn't) exempt from Obamacare

Gregory Korte, USA TODAY 6:44 p.m. EDT September 27, 2013


WASHINGTON — Of all the arguments against the Affordable Care Act that congressional Republicans are mustering in the debate over the spending bill, one hits closest to home. Congress, they say, is exempt from the very law that applies to everyone else.

The truth: Members of Congress are treated differently under Obamacare, but they're not exempt. In fact, by forcing them to purchase health insurance through publicly run exchanges, they're impacted more by that key provision than similar employees in private sector — or even in government.

But members of Congress will also be able to purchase their insurance under terms that are more favorable than other employees — in government or in business — who have access to employer-provided health care.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/27/is-congress-exempt-from-obamacare/2883635/


Maybe you who seek to remain closed minded will believe Bloomberg ..




Congress’s Absurd Debate Over Its Obamacare ‘Exemption’

By the Editors Oct 15, 2013 3:53 PM MT

House Republicans are having trouble deciding whether it’s a good idea to sacrifice their staffs’ health-care benefits at the altar of opposing Obamacare. In their defense, deciding between whether to abandon a baldly political argument or alienate your own employees is no easy choice.

For months, Republicans have argued that the Barack Obama administration exempted members of Congress and their staffs from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, allowing their insurance premiums to continue being paid by the government. A House proposal this morning would have allowed those employer contributions for staff but not for members of Congress or the president.

Some Republicans objected to the compromise, leading the House leadership to propose a new bill that once again strips staff of their health benefits. This afternoon, that bill appeared headed for a vote. This evening, that vote was canceled.

To see the problem, it’s necessary to first understand the utter fallacy of the Republicans’ basic complaint. Obamacare created state health-insurance exchanges expressly for people who don’t get coverage through their employers. At the insistence of Republican Senator Charles Grassley, it made one exception when the law was written: Members of Congress and their staffs would also have to use the exchanges(The idea seems to have been to embarrass Democrats by forcing them to object to the idea. Instead, they embraced it.)

That created a wrinkle: The law did not say whether the government, which pays the premiums for congressional staff, could keep paying them for exchange-based coverage.

So when the Office of Personnel Management, which handles employee benefits for Congress, ruled that the government could continue paying the premiums for members and staff, it wasn’t creating an exemption; it was trying to make sense of one that Republicans had already made.

Yet for Republicans, the idea that Congress would get special treatment, whatever the reason, was grounds for a new attack on Obamacare. The personnel ruling became, in the words of Republican Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, “a special subsidy to purchase health insurance on the Obamacare Exchange unavailable to every other American.”

Of course it was unavailable to every other American: No other American with employer-based coverage is required to use an exchange. In a world of partly false and half-false attacks on Obamacare, the congressional “exemption” is a purebred.

It also carries a price. By opposing the nonexistent exemption, House Republicans are opposing a basic health-insurance benefit for their own employees.

There may be merit in leading members of Congress and the administration onto the health-insurance exchanges, to give them a close look at how well or how poorly the system works and what might be done to improve it. But there’s no wisdom in stripping them or staff members of their existing benefits -- especially if the purpose is simply to nurture a fabricated complaint about the law.

Congress is not exempt from the law- in fact Grassley made it so they have no other choice but get insurance under the ACA...

And Kola is right again- the ACA is mirrored after proposals put forward by Republicans for years... Nixon in the 70's wrote a letter to Congress requesting mandates for all to get health coverage... It was the conservatives answer in opposition to Hillarycare again in the 90's--BUT now that Obama went along with the mandate idea- its became that Evil Obamacare...


Our local radio station did an interview with a local insurance agent-- who besides reading the entire law, has followed the rules of its implementation and went to classes on it so he can help folks set up whatever plan best fits them thru their state exchanges ....

His advice to everyone was first off RELAX- its not the end of the world as some paranoid folks profess....And his second advice was not to believe every post on FB or e-mail being sent out as he said much of the info being put out was FALSE and done so to scare people...

Here is a site that has some pretty fair fact checking for people to check out all the wild stories and e-mails going around...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/24/top-16-myths-about-health-care-law/
 

Steve

Well-known member
Just forget that name....It's the Affordable Care Act....or ACA

so what is so affordable about it.. other then that 80+% are signing up for free medicaid..

Obamacare's Website Is Crashing Because It Doesn't Want You To Know How Costly Its Plans Are

A growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside the government, have figured out a principal reason why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces you to create an account and enter detailed personal information before you can start shopping. This, in turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the government verifies your information and decides whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away.

HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true costs
http://www.forbes.com
 

Steve

Well-known member
When Obamacare was passed into law, Sen. Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican, attached language – later revised by Majority Leader Harry Reid - to the bill mandating that members of Congress and their staffers would have to buy health insurance on the newly created health insurance exchanges. What nobody accounted for at the time was that members of Congress and their staffers currently have health insurance through their employer –

That notion has been challenged by conservative critics of Obamacare who argue that under existing federal statutes Congress had to specifically pass legislation authorizing the premium subsidies for any insurance program other than FEHBP. Since congress did not do this, the administration, at the behest of Congressional Democrats, unilaterally extended premium contributions. By doing this, the critics argue, the administration “exempted” Congress from the law.

lets see... Grassley explicitly included congress and staff..

Reid changed it so there was "wiggle room"

and Obama read the rule as Reid intended and exempted them..

so yes OT,.. Santa Obama gave congress an exemption.. with the help of his little elf Reid
 

Mike

Well-known member
It very well could be the end of the world for some because the premiums have basically doubled in just a few weeks.

I have my letter from BCBS stating the doubling of my premium & raising my deductible to comply with ObamaCare and the estimates given me from the HealthCare.gov website which are notoriously low-balled on purpose, just to trick me in the system.

On a 1-10 scale, how stupid are you?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
When Obamacare was passed into law, Sen. Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican, attached language – later revised by Majority Leader Harry Reid - to the bill mandating that members of Congress and their staffers would have to buy health insurance on the newly created health insurance exchanges. What nobody accounted for at the time was that members of Congress and their staffers currently have health insurance through their employer –

That notion has been challenged by conservative critics of Obamacare who argue that under existing federal statutes Congress had to specifically pass legislation authorizing the premium subsidies for any insurance program other than FEHBP. Since congress did not do this, the administration, at the behest of Congressional Democrats, unilaterally extended premium contributions. By doing this, the critics argue, the administration “exempted” Congress from the law.

lets see... Grassley explicitly included congress and staff..

Reid changed it so there was "wiggle room"

and Obama read the rule as Reid intended and exempted them..

so yes OT,.. Santa Obama gave congress an exemption.. with the help of his little elf Reid

This rumor is an example of a zombie claim — no matter how many times it’s killed, it still won’t die.

Back in January 2010, Aaron Albright, press secretary for the House Committee on Education and Labor, told FactCheck.org: “People actually believe we wrote in the bill that Congress exempts itself from these requirements. That falsehood has been going around since the very beginning.”

The falsehood was resurrected for the umpteenth time last month when the U.S. Office of Personnel Management issued a rule to clarify part of the law that wasn’t specified in the written bill.

As mentioned, the federal government already offers health insurance to its workers. Like most employers, it covers part of workers’ health insurance costs. Because Congress and its staff are being treated differently than all other employers in order to force it to use the Obamacare marketplace, there was no language stating that the government could cover part of the premiums for Congress as it currently does.

Last month, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management issued a rule saying that, yes, this was OK to do, as long as the premium coverage wasn’t more than it is for other federal workers.


In response, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) issued a carefully phrased statement that Obama somehow had exempted Congress and its staff from “the full effect of the law.”

Does the new rule mean Congress won’t have to get health insurance through the Obamacare marketplaces? No, they still have to.

Does this mean Congress is getting special treatment? No, members and their staffs still get no benefit they don’t currently get.





The verdict

While there are legitimate concerns about President Obama’s health care law — much of which kicks into gear Oct. 1 — this isn’t one.


So all these major reporting agencies are wrong and you are right :roll:
Why do all of them say there is no exemption if there is :???: Another government conspiracy :roll:

Its all partisan politicians playing semantics games!

The only change was to keep giving the Congressional staff the same amount in insurance subsidies as they now get in employer co-pay to their insurance-- that is no exemption in my vocabulary...

I guess the alternative is to not give them the co-pay/subsidy- but raise their wages by the amount they lose by not getting it- if the Congress wants to keep access to capable employees...
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Looks like Fatlock fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

Just like Fatlock, these politicians (All Democrats & probably 80-85% of the Republicans) CANNOT be trusted. If their lips are moving, they are lying.
 
Top