First, apologies to my readers for the diversion from the usual fare, but I’ll point out that this entry is covered under the masthead in the category of “recent news” and there’s a relevant WUWT category.
Since like many of you, I’ve been forced to sign a document (at my radio station where I employed part-time) that confirms I’ve been given another document that advises me of my Obamacare rights, and of course being in tune to the news, I’ve been wondering if the claims about the Obamacare websites are as bad as claimed.
I read an article in the Pittsburgh Tribune “Sebelius visit fails to reassure as health care website glitches persist” that said:
Sebelius, who is making similar trips to cities across the country to spread the word about the website, told the audience of about 100 people that Healthcare.gov was “open for business.”
“Believe me, we had some early glitches,” said Sebelius, who was introduced by Rooney, a backer of the law. “But it’s getting better every day.”
So, I decided to find out myself. I went to http://healthcare.gov and chose my state, California. What follows is a record of what I actually got. I never made it past step 1:
Try it yourself: https://coveredca.com/shopandcompare/
NOTE: To be accurate, the website security certificate will work if the “www” is used as prefix, but not the link above sans www. By following the link from the Tribune article, with no other changes on my part, I ended up with the sans “www” connection, which they didn’t get a proper security certificate for. One wonders how many other “glitches” exist in basic security on these websites.
Even when you go in with the “www” there are problems. In Firefox I get this:
UPDATE: Reader Ben points out that it gets a failing grade from an SSL grading service, SSL Labs:
Source: https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=coveredca.com
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
commieBob says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:16 am
Brian Mulroney (the Canadian equivalent of Thatcher and Reagan) called it a sacred trust.
—————————————————————————————————————————
Really??? You actually think Mulroney is on the same level as Reagan and Thatcher!? LOL BWHAHAHA. Mulroney is one of the original CINOs. Only slightly better that Clarke was. The only reason he won two majorities is because the Liberals were is such disarray. As far as the “excellent (but not perfect) system” goes well I just experienced 41 hours in emergency in that excellent system where I was left writhing in pain for 8 hours (4 in the public waiting room) before anyone seriously took a look at me. After a multitude of tests and 8 hours waiting for a bed that never materialized (at the end of the 41 hours) I was well enough to get up and leave. The only way I was going back was unconscious in an ambulance. Don’t even get me going on Nurse Ratchet at the front ER desk.
andrewmharding says:
October 13, 2013 at 5:27 am
“…Like Communism it is a good idea in theory, but terrible in practice!”
NO. Neither Communism nor Obamacare were EVER good ideas. The fruits of my labor do not belong to the “collective.” And I have no “right” to force another person to pay for something I want or need.
i lived in the USA for 20 years…great country…my wife is american…but i never had insurance..luckily i never got sick…i exercise…anyway the great socialist Bismarck was the first to introduce national health insurance …starting with Truman…several presidents…tried to introduce something similar to the British or Canadian systems…which are very popular in those countries…always blocked by the medical lobby…these guys are making a killing…the No 1 cause of bankruptcy in the USA…is medical bills…the best part is that when you are completely broke and declare bankruptcy…you qualify for Medicaid…and get top class care…this is lunacy…the Obama gang were very sophisticated in using the internet to raise funds..why cant they get these computer programs right..?
Bob Greene says: October 13, 2013 at 6:27 am
I agree!
I forgot to add your critical detail that the rebate is not the same for everyone.
Ed_B says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:08 am
“Amazing statement.. as if someone with no means, or with pre existing conditions have any right to select.. Ha!! Go die!”
So if you have no means to buy a car or house, should the rest of us be required to subsidize you?
Pre existing conditions usually have a waiting period. Insurance is pooled risk, in order to take from the pool you must first pay into it.
Perhaps the biggest (and saddest) problem in the US today is the indoctrination of nearly 3 generations that an individual has no responsibility for their own outcome. Just rely on the government to take care of you at the expense of everyone else. Face it America, the socialists have won, they simply bought their way into control by giving away other people’s money to more than 51% of the population. And as the central government takes more and more control of your life and you have less and less choice about things, you will slowly die.. Welcome to the world of the Eloi and the Morlocks.
chris y says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:17 am
“Finally, even if Obamacare is repealed, I am 95% confident that insurance premiums will not drop. There is a money diode in place at the insurance carriers. If you don’t like your new premiums, you get to keep them.”
Pay cash instead.
The dirty secret is insurance payers (following the lead of CMS) have reimbursement rates set as percentages of the fee for a procedure. Very frequently, the percentage reimbursed has fallen below 50% to 30% or even 25% of the nominal fee. Providers are forced to raise rates to stay in business – or give up insurance patients. If insurance payers were required to publish reimbursement amounts and not percentages, the main justification for Obamacare would evaporate instantly.
More healthcare providers are taking cash now. That’s the only way I’ll go. I won’t be signing up for anything according to ACA. I have no medical records, and the government won’t be getting any.
Just say no.
@Alan D McIntire There’s no way the government can enforce penalties on everyone who didn’t sign up within the required time frame.
You give too much credit to the Gov’t. Remember, its the IRS in charge on enforcement: they will still levy the fine. They may have to pay it back if you argue, but I would be willing to bet the $95 first-year penalty that it would take quite a while for you to see any refund.
Hmm- and thinking about it: remember the law says you have to be covered by a plan, not necessarily theirs. I can see them making the legal argument that, despite the site’s failures, you had the legal obligation to seek outside the site to obey the law. I don’t know if a judge would buy it, but I’d bet a lawyer would try that argument- right or wrong.
@gopal panicker You are missing a very large fact in this entire debate. The insurance companies are behind Obamacare because they stand to make a killing, at least the largest ones. This is the worst example of corporate cronyism, in that they have made it a crime not to purchase a product as a term of citizenship, but the system does not insure any more people than were insured before. All it has effectively done is nationalize an insurance system that was based (somewhat) on open markets. The failures of the system were the government interventions. If they had simply submitted a bill that was two pages of reforms it would have freed up the market to accept people that did not have means to participate. The pre-existing condition issues could have been fixed with one line added to the existing HIPPA law.
I would ask you not to copy and paste propaganda from left-wing websites and hide the code with “…” edits. Most of America is not happy with this government take over of our industry, and watching political cronies make billions direct from our paychecks in the process. We are a poorer nation for it.
The Affordable Care Act was promoted and passed with the primary assertion that it was not a new tax on Americans. However, when it was challenged in the Supreme Court, the Court stated that it was only constitutional if it was a tax. Viola! Tax it is.
We should be calling it the Affordable Care Tax Act or the Obamacare Tax.
The “Pass It So We Can See What Is In It Tax” is just too wordy.
andrewmharding says:
October 13, 2013 at 5:27 am
Believe me it does not work! The NHS has treatment free at the point of delivery, so we have citizens of the EU flocking here to use the service. The service is abused and has no value (people only value something if they have to pay for it directly in the first place) and is top heavy with overpaid managers, deputy managers etc, etc.
How can you possibly say that “it does not work”, there are millions of people who are alive today or who have their lives improved who would disagree with you.
Although I agree about Health Tourists and top heavy management, but that is a result of trying to apply Private Industry standards and profit making to a Public Service.
Bob Greene-
“I heard lots of anecdotes about Canadians coming across the border to get treatment in the US they couldn’t get or were waiting for very long periods to get in Canada.”
I have an older family member the M.D. who lives in Canada. He has always said that the U.S. needs universal health insurance like Canada. During one visit I asked him how he was recovering from some serious health problems that he had. He said he was doing better, thanks to the fact that he got treated at a high quality facility with no wait time- at a Mayo clinic in the U.S.
@Bob Greene Evidence disagrees with your statement. People are not getting lower insurance rates, they are higher with higher deductibles. Citizens have been posting their experiences on Healthcare.gov’s Facebook page with screen captures. Pre-existing conditions have been causing deductibles with 10’s of thousands of dollars in deductibles and many hundreds of dollars in monthly premiums. We have been seeing for months the way business has reacted due to the regulation (not law) that full-time work is now considered 30 hours a week. To cope with the added costs or regulation jobs and hours have been cut. This is the result when elected legislators openly mock citizens by telling them “We will have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it”.
It seems to me all the people associated with the web site should be not working due to the glorious Shutdown. Perhaps all that is being done by gov’t contractors so their work isn’t creating an expectation of additional payments.
Look, the ACA program has already been a failure several times, in multiple ways.
First failure: it was presented as a plan that would save the average family $2400 per year by the end of 2012. It did not save at all, and typical costs went up 3k per year. Really, a double-failure.
Second failure: If we have a health-care plan we like, we can keep that plan. Millions found out earlier this year before October 1 that that was not the case. Even where companies did not drop coverage for their employees, many did drop coverage for their families, and as long as the employer has a plan for the employee the subsidies will not apply in the exchange plans. Even those of us with employers that will still be providing family plans have found that many of the plans we were offered and using previously have been eliminated. Many insurers have pulled out of many states completely.
Third Failure: The saving would be so great from the ACA, that we would be able to cover those without current (2008-2010) health insurance for free. Based upon the feedback from people trying to sign up, this isn’t the generally the case or even close to it. For some the insurance cost goes up only a little, and for others a lot, with reports of huge deductibles they’ll never be able to pay.
Fourth failure: The actual signup was officially announced in June of this year to have been ready. Clearly it wasn’t. Not only was it not ready, but it apparently was known for at least a couple of months not to be ready. At least one state didn’t even pretend it will be ready any time soon. Even some states with already existing exchange programs weren’t able to use the system.
At this point we’ve seen enough failure to easily justify shutting it down; the damage done already will cost a great deal to undo and will escalate from here.
And we haven’t even gotten to the full bore part of the plan, for which internal audits are reported as projecting an average increase per family of $7400 per year in health-care costs.
Further, these are introductory costs for 2014. 2015 costs are expected to be much higher. The tax for avoiding the plans are known to be much higher.
All of the above is assuming a government which is at least trying to be equitable…but as we’ve seen in the IRS targeting against political opponents, and even more-so in the National Park Service targeting all of us, starting with closing unmanned memorials, hundreds of federally unmanned and unsupported campgrounds, hundreds of concessionaires, and innumerable walking paths; to keeping tourists, foreign and domestic, captive in a hotel under armed guard; and sending armed men to force people out of their owned homes – just to capriciously create pain to the populace for political advantage. A program like this creates even more potential for retribution against the unliked – even momentarily unliked.
Look, the ACA program has already been a failure several times, in multiple ways.
First failure: it was presented as a plan that would save the average family $2400 per year by the end of 2012. It did not save at all, and typical costs went up 3k per year. Really, a double-failure.
Second failure: If we have a health-care plan we like, we can keep that plan. Millions found out earlier this year before October 1 that that was not the case. Even where companies did not drop coverage for their employees, many did drop coverage for their families, and as long as the employer has a plan for the employee the subsidies will not apply in the exchange plans. Even those of us with employers that will still be providing family plans have found that many of the plans we were offered and using previously have been eliminated. Many insurers have pulled out of many states completely.
Third Failure: The saving would be so great from the ACA, that we would be able to cover those without current (2008-2010) health insurance for free. Based upon the feedback from people trying to sign up, this isn’t the generally the case or even close to it. For some the insurance cost goes up only a little, and for others a lot, with reports of huge deductibles they’ll never be able to pay.
Fourth failure: The actual signup was officially announced in June of this year to have been ready. Clearly it wasn’t. Not only was it not ready, but it apparently was known for at least a couple of months not to be ready. At least one state didn’t even pretend it will be ready any time soon. Even some states with already existing exchange programs weren’t able to use the system.
At this point we’ve seen enough failure to easily justify shutting it down; the damage done already will cost a great deal to undo and will escalate from here.
And we haven’t even gotten to the full bore part of the plan, for which internal audits are reported as projecting an average increase per family of $7400 per year in health-care costs.
Further, these are introductory costs for 2014. 2015 costs are expected to be much higher. The tax for avoiding the plans are known to be much higher.
All of the above is assuming a government which is at least trying to be equitable…but as we’ve seen in the IRS targeting against political opponents, and even more-so in the National Park Service targeting all of us, starting with closing unmanned memorials, hundreds of federally unmanned and unsupported campgrounds, hundreds of concessionaires, and innumerable walking paths; to keeping tourists, foreign and domestic, captive in a hotel under armed guard; and sending armed men to force people out of their owned homes – just to capriciously create pain to the populace for political advantage. A program like this creates even more potential for retribution against the unliked – even momentarily unliked.
JohnM says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:07 am
[about the NHS:]
“Dental care has not caught-up yet, that is all so 20th century still.”
Sorry to burst your bubble, John, but your dental care is 19th century. I’m in Germany and had several British expats as colleagues who had British Teeth.
John M you are full of it! the NHS does not work, unless you want people dead, it is dysfunctional and vastly overpriced, before I left the sinking ship 5 years back, I had to pay extra to make my NHS coverage worth while, this cost me over half the premium that would have bought me decent coverage in the USA where at the time the healthcare was way better. There was barely a hospital other than the many private ones that did not give out free MSRA or worse the flesh eating bug with every operation, my doctor was a friend and when I split my cartilage he would not send me to the local huge hospital, “you dont want Trelliske messing about in there” was his comment.Hi did give me exercises that did the trick in the end! In the UK the main difference I can see between the private and NHS hospitals is the union involvement.
I dont see the software companies blaming politicians, they should get a contract and if the politicians want to move goalposts then say no! its called being professional !
Ed_B says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:08 am
The USA spends twice what any other modern country does on healthcare per capita and gets lousy or no service for 1/3 its citizens.
This is the most untrue statement in health care. The vast majority of monies spent for or on healthcare is done by private persons or companies. It is not an expense of the USA. And since a law exists that requires all persons that show up at an emergency room must be seen regardless or ability to pay, all citizens can get some care. The service is extended to non-citizens and that is part or the problem. People come here from all over the world including Canada to get fast available care.
Hunter: “Something in the $100 million dollar range was spent on this embarrassingly badly written website.”
The numbers being bandied about, are that $97 million was the original budgeted cost, but that $634 million is what was actually paid to the prime contractor.
Thanks for bringing up certificate security, Anthony. In my work with the FBI, I’ve learned that exploits aimed at certificates are surging. This company has some good information on the threat and has numerous white papers available for download in case readers are interested: http://www.venafi.com/
You are all assuming that they want it to work. I suspect they want it to fail so they have justification to move to a single payer system. Get ready for a national sales tax my American friends. In Ontario health, education and debt servicing takes up the vast majority of the budget. We pay a 13% sales tax sometimes applied to other taxes so we pay tax on tax with our after tax dollars.
Alvin says:
October 13, 2013 at 6:53 am
@Alvin “You are missing a very large fact in this entire debate. The insurance companies are behind Obamacare because they stand to make a killing, at least the largest ones. ”
That offer was how they got the insurance company buy-in…everyone would have to buy a plan. It wasn’t the insurance companies idea, but why would they say “no”?
Anthony, here is my experience so far.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield sent me a letter saying that my insurance was canceled as of 1January. I was invited to sign up early to get continuous coverage to a more expensive product.
You see the reason my coverage was canceled was it did not meet the minimums according to the new law. So much for if you like your insurance you can keep it. Obama lied period.
andrewmharding on October 13, 2013 at 5:27 am
In Sweden it did actually work. Then some years ago, when the socialists still was in government, they turned over some of the control to local (hobby) politicians. Just the very same way they did with the national mandatory school system and now both systems are basically crap! Subsequently, commercial interests was allowed within schools, healthcare and social services, resulting in some senior citizens have been treated worse than what it’s allowed to treat animals … (Yes, this is Swedish neosocialistic politics …)
I have asthma and I don’t dare to go to the local ICU, as it will take me minimum 3-4 hour before I get any treatment at all. If I ever get a acute heart condition …?
When the healthcare system once worked in Sweden, we had a lot of foreign officials from around the world visiting us, just to observe how we got it to work (yes, even US and UK officials got inspired …).
A nation with a good healthcare system usually have healthy people generating tax money. This way more money becomes available generating better public service (except when ignorant and/or corrupted politicians are involved …)
No, I am not a socialist or any other form of leftist nutcase, just a realist …