Doc Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 Hmmmm. As I previously wrote, the House in 2009 unanimously passed H.R. 3590, the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009." Further, the purpose of the bill was to offer a housing tax break to service members. However, when H.R. 3590 reached the Senate, Harry Reid (D-Nev.) removed all but the first sentence of the original bill, and renamed it the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," which then passed in the Senate and continued on through the legislative process. Consequently, the Pacific Legal Foundation argues that while H.R. 3590 originated in the House, because of how it was remade in the Senate, it violates the intent of the Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, a.k.a. the "Origination Clause," which states, "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives."
DC Tom Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 Remain calm, all is well. Obamacare Document Reveals ‘Drop Dead’ Date for Back End Fixes. “Apparently, Obamacare is in a lot bigger trouble than anyone has let on — or anyone has imagined.” Weren't some of us pointing this out back in October? The most amazingly clueless part of this, though, is that the administration thinks the problem was CGI and not their own mismanagement, and that switching horses in mid-stream is the solution. I hope for Accenture's sake that they're getting well-paid for the risk.
IDBillzFan Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 I hope for Accenture's sake that they're getting well-paid for the risk. What risk? There's no risk. Look at CGI. They still have multiple contracts with the government for millions upon millions of dollars. When no one is interested in accountability, no one cares about risk. Can't get it done? Here's another $90M to some other group.
keepthefaith Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 And of course the question as to who and how CGI was selected as the provider will never be answered.
Nanker Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 Yes. Accenture is at risk of getting even larger contracts from the Feds - regardless if this thing continues to circle the drain or actually ends up letting a few thousand people acquire health care coverage through it.
IDBillzFan Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 And of course the question as to who and how CGI was selected as the provider will never be answered. We know how. The chick VP at CGI went to school with Michelle Obama and Barry handed her the contract uncontested.
DC Tom Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 And of course the question as to who and how CGI was selected as the provider will never be answered. It's been answered: they were awarded the work as an extension to an existing contract vehicle with HHS, according to a no-bid process similar to what people bitched about when Halliburton got their Iraq contracts. There's nothing wrong with that, per se...but you've just got to love the hypocrisy.
OCinBuffalo Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 Remain calm, all is well. Obamacare Document Reveals ‘Drop Dead’ Date for Back End Fixes. “Apparently, Obamacare is in a lot bigger trouble than anyone has let on — or anyone has imagined.” What's that? You say Accenture gave the media something? Hmmm....it seems somebody said: Well Democrats? Now you're F'ed: http://www.bloomberg...nt-website.html Every single damning email, every single status report, will be forwarded to the media. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that had already started. That's merely the competent approach, especially for this kind of project. Accenture's managers aren't going be left holding the bag here. No chance. Moving on...also from B-man's link: officials realized in December that the need to bring on Accenture was so urgent that there was no time to go through the “full and open competition process” before awarding them with a $91 million contract. “There is limited time to build this functionality and failure to deliver…by mid-March 2014 will result in financial harm to the government,” the document says. Oh really? Yes, when it comes to projects like these only the REAL elite will do. Accenture has a good chance to get this done, because they actually KNOW how to do this work. But, just remember, "elite" also means: No way that Accenture fails here, even if they don't meet the deadline, there's no way they fail. The leaking to the media, and various other tactics(I could write the deliverables myself, right now), will see to that. Hmmm somebody said: Should have gone with one of the Bigs from the beginning. $45 million on day 1. Get used to it. Accenture will rob you blind, and, the Rs will be killing you for it. There's practically nothing that will change this dynamic. Moving on from that(how hilarious is this?)....the next thing from B-man's link: Accenture will also have to clean up some aspects of the project that CGI failed to complete, such as the notorious 834 enrollment transmissions to insurance companies that in October and November were transmitting inaccurate and garbled data. But...but....but...I thought this thing was "done", and that the 834 transactions(which I have specifically referred to multiple times) were all taken care of....because Apple, Google, and various other Valley resources had been secretly engaged to come in and make it all better. Chef and 4mer: it's over. In fact, somebody said: Hmmm I wonder: whatever happened to Google, Apple and the rest of the Valley people? Somebody seemed to think they were the answer.... Never. They've been moved aside: because the NFL in IT has now been engaged...as I said would happen. Valley people do a fine job making consumer stuff. They are good blacksmiths. But, when it comest to full-scale corporate? You need the best = the people with factories, who know how to run them. Well, here we are in January, and, the "website"(which never was a website) is not done. Not even close. This whole thing is hanging by a thread. But, politically, it doesn't matter, not even a little bit. Whether the financial system isn't built(which would be a surprise, since this is Accenture's core competency), or is, Accenture will pull what they have pulled every single time I've worked with them. No matter what: the Administration, and Democrats by proxy(seen to by the Rs), are going to get the shaft here, because Accenture will make sure that everyone knows who screwed up, why, when, and how, from 2009 until today. They will release everything they can get their hands on, NDA or no. They aren't going to leave it to chance. They will line up the reasons for WHY the financial system is not built by March, and the media will have them...by the end of February at the latest. Clearly that effort has already begun. This way, if it is ready? They can demand tons of money, and remind(brag) to all their other clients/future clients, that they got the job done despite overwhelming odds against. And, if it isn't? They will have built in their reasons(excuses) for why. The leaders of this project are looking at being set for life if they can pull this off, but, they aren't going to let themselves get fired if they don't. This is called: competence, in my business. It's as simple as that. And this? Yes. Accenture is at risk of getting even larger contracts from the Feds - regardless if this thing continues to circle the drain or actually ends up letting a few thousand people acquire health care coverage through it. At risk? (I know what you mean, but the phrasing is useful) There is no risk here for Accenture: they are going to see to that. How do I know this? Because I've lived it, literally. None of this is "predictions". This is: I know what's going to happen, because I know WHY it has to happen.
B-Man Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) Historic Law to Un-insure People, Then Insure Some of Them and Claim a Victory for Social Justice The Wall Street Journal had a devastating report this weekend on how most, and perhaps the overwhelming majority, of people enrolled on the Obamacare exchanges were previously insured: Early signals suggest the majority of the 2.2 million people who sought to enroll in private insurance through new marketplaces through Dec. 28 were previously covered elsewhere, raising questions about how swiftly this part of the health overhaul will be able to make a significant dent in the number of uninsured. Insurers, brokers and consultants estimate at least two-thirds of those consumers previously bought their own coverage or were enrolled in employer-backed plans. The estimate from a McKinsey survey of the percentage who were previously insured is much higher: Only 11% of consumers who bought new coverage under the law were previously uninsured, according to a McKinsey & Co. survey of consumers thought to be eligible for the health-law marketplaces. The result is based on a sampling of 4,563 consumers performed between November and January, of whom 389 had enrolled in new insurance. We had to upset the apple cart of American health insurance for this? . Edited January 20, 2014 by B-Man
Koko78 Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 We had to upset the apple cart of American health insurance for this? The millionaires and billionaires aren't paying their fair share for their corporate jets. Romney has a horse. Christie is fat and created a traffic jam!
IDBillzFan Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 While I've never been very good at predicting things, I think I'm safe to predict that David Kennedy has an IRS audit coming in the very near future. Hacker David Kennedy: I hacked Obamacare website in four minutes using a standard browser. Once the website can collect people's payment methods, this is going to get ugly. “And 70,000 was just one of the numbers that I was able to go up to and I stopped after that,” he said. “You know, I’m sure it’s hundreds of thousands, if not more, and it was done within about a 4 minute timeframe. So, it’s just wide open.”[/color] “You can literally just open up your browser, go to this, and extract all this information without actually having to hack the website itself,” he said. Mr. Kennedy testified before Congress Thursday that HealthCare.gov was “100 percent” insecure, Washington Free Beaconreported. “What we learned was that they had rushed through what we call the software development life cycle where they actually build the application,” he said on Fox. “So when you do that, security doesn’t really get integrated into it. And what happened with the rocky launch in October is they slapped a bunch of servers in trying to fix the website just to keep it up and running so that people could actually go and use it. The problem is they still didn’t imbed any security into it.”
JuanGuzman Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 Sharon Mills, a disabled nurse, long depended on other people’s kindness to manage her diabetes. She scrounged free samples from doctors’ offices, signed up for drug company discounts and asked for money from her parents and friends. Her church often helped, but last month used its charitable funds to help repair other members’ furnaces.Ms. Mills, 54, who suffered renal failure last year after having irregular access to medication, said her dependence on others left her feeling helpless and depressed. “I got to the point when I decided I just didn’t want to be here anymore,” she said. So when a blue slip of paper arrived in the mail this month with a new Medicaid number on it — part of the expanded coverage offered under the Affordable Care Act — Ms. Mills said she felt as if she could breathe again for the first time in years. “The heavy thing that was pressing on me is gone,” she said. As health care coverage under the new law sputters to life, it is already having a profound effect on the lives of poor Americans. Enrollment in private insurance plans has been sluggish, but sign-ups for Medicaid, the federal insurance program for the poor, have surged in many states. Here in West Virginia, which has some of the shortest life spans and highest poverty rates in the country, the strength of the demand has surprised officials, with more than 75,000 people enrolling in Medicaid. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/health/peace-of-mind-is-first-benefit-for-many-now-getting-medicaid.html?hp&_r=0
IDBillzFan Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 http://www.nytimes.c...id.html?hp&_r=0 Typical progressive garbage: wreck it for millions so you can talk about how you saved one.
birdog1960 Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 in the manner of b-man i'll just link this: http://www.suntimes....re-numbers.html
B-Man Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 Obamacare Security Risks Abound "I don't understand how we’re still discussing whether the website is insecure or not. It is insecure -100 percent.”
3rdnlng Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 in the manner of b-man i'll just link this: http://www.suntimes....re-numbers.html No B-Man also pastes a snippet or more to allow other posters to see if they want to bother opening the link. This article was as disingeuous as it gets. He accuses the Daily Caller article of the same thing he did in the article. With his unconnected shots at conservatives his flaming liberal outlook was apparent. The article gets 4 Pinocchios and you get 2 for posting it here.
birdog1960 Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 No B-Man also pastes a snippet or more to allow other posters to see if they want to bother opening the link. This article was as disingeuous as it gets. He accuses the Daily Caller article of the same thing he did in the article. With his unconnected shots at conservatives his flaming liberal outlook was apparent. The article gets 4 Pinocchios and you get 2 for posting it here. how was it disingenuous? the article (and drudge by linking it) used medical tourism from canada as a measure of citizens' satisfaction of their health system. it then showed that as a percentage (and absolute number) americans engage in medical tourism much more often than canadians. it was the daily caller and drudge link that were disingenuous. there. now you have your snippet since you obviously didn't understand the article the first time.
B-Man Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 Survey Says: Obamacare is Now a Top Worry for Mid-Sized Companies Companies that are not confident tend not to hire workers. Now Obamacare is rendering many US mid-sized less confident than they would like to be, or that the struggling economy needs them to be, according to MarketWatch . Megan McArdle recounts the basic case: In a nutshell, Obamacare has so far fallen dramatically short of what was expected — technically, and in almost every other way. Enrollment is below expectations: According to the data we have so far, more than half of the much-touted Medicaid expansion came from people who were already eligible before the health-care law passed, and this weekend, the Wall Street Journal reported that the overwhelming majority of people buying insurance through the exchanges seem to be folks who already had insurance. Coverage is less generous than many people expected, with narrower provider networks and higher deductibles. The promised $2,500 that the average family was told they could save on premiums has predictably failed to materialize. And of course, we now know that if you like your doctor and plan, there is no reason to think you can keep them. Which is one reason the law has not gotten any more popular since it passed. The administration and its supporters have been counting on the coverage expansion to put Obamacare beyond repeal. So what if the coverage expansion is anemic, the plans bare-bones, the website sort of a disaster? It’s a foundation upon which we can build — and now that so many people have coverage, the thinking goes, Republicans will never dare to touch it. The inevitable problems can be fixed down the road. But it’s far from clear that this is true . . . Read the whole thing.
3rdnlng Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 how was it disingenuous? the article (and drudge by linking it) used medical tourism from canada as a measure of citizens' satisfaction of their health system. it then showed that as a percentage (and absolute number) americans engage in medical tourism much more often than canadians. it was the daily caller and drudge link that were disingenuous. there. now you have your snippet since you obviously didn't understand the article the first time. how was it disingenuous? the article (and drudge by linking it) used medical tourism from canada as a measure of citizens' satisfaction of their health system. it then showed that as a percentage (and absolute number) americans engage in medical tourism much more often than canadians. it was the daily caller and drudge link that were disingenuous. there. now you have your snippet since you obviously didn't understand the article the first time. I absolutely understood the article in the first place. Take off your dunce hat and take some guesses as to why people from Canada are coming here for medical needs. Then before you put that hat back on think about why U.S. citizens are going abroad for treatment. See the link below that provides the orignal Daily Caller article, not the loony thing you linked by a far left hack. http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/16/report-tens-of-thousands-fled-socialized-canadian-medicine-in-2013/
JuanGuzman Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 I absolutely understood the article in the first place. Take off your dunce hat and take some guesses as to why people from Canada are coming here for medical needs. Then before you put that hat back on think about why U.S. citizens are going abroad for treatment. See the link below that provides the orignal Daily Caller article, not the loony thing you linked by a far left hack. http://dailycaller.c...dicine-in-2013/ Haha oh man wow,it's like you can't even concede one argument despite evidence. Too me the Sun Times article pointed out that there is one medical tourist for every 414 people in the U.S., while in Canada, there is one for every 836 people. So American's are more likely than Canadians to "Flee" the country over its health system. Basically calling out the Drudge Report for linking to an abosultely B.S. article that wasn't properly fact checked. Morover where the American numbers come an independant largely trustworthy source, the Canadians come from a ThinkTank that gets paid to spout views of its donors. All It is basic math, if your argument is that because people seek health care out of country then their health care system is flawed? Well you need to check the numbers how many americans are leaving the system. Sure if you want to argue quality vs. affordability fine go do that. But again the data shows that Canadian's live longer than american and pay much less per-capita for health care. Everyone is insured.
Recommended Posts