Why is the Obamacare web site crashing so much? The “Chicago Way”

Posted by: Phineas on October 15, 2013 at 4:33 pm

**Posted by Phineas

"Train wreck"

“Train wreck”

That’s a question many have been asking, including speculation that, due to faulty design, the site is effectively attacking itself.

However, there’s another, albeit related cause for why people are having such a horrific experience with the site. Writing in Forbes, Avik Roy reports on a growing consensus that the the principal reason is the site is trying to hide the true costs of the policies it’s selling:

“Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an option to browse before registering,” report Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal. “But that tool was delayed, people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed? “An HHS spokeswoman said the agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies.” (Emphasis added.)

As you know if you’ve been following this space, Obamacare’s bevy of mandates, regulations, taxes, and fees drives up the cost of the insurance plans that are offered under the law’s public exchanges. A Manhattan Institute analysis I helped conduct found that, on average, the cheapest plan offered in a given state, under Obamacare, will be 99 percent more expensive for men, and 62 percent more expensive for women, than the cheapest plan offered under the old system. And those disparities are even wider for healthy people.

Roy then asks the logical question: why create a system that raises the price of coverage?

Because, silly. It’s all about the wealth redistribution:

The answer is that Obamacare wasn’t designed to help healthy people with average incomes get health insurance. It was designed to force those people to pay more for coverage, in order to subsidize insurance for people with incomes near the poverty line, and those with chronic or costly medical conditions.

But the laws’ supporters and enforcers don’t want you to know that, because it would violate the President’s incessantly repeated promise that nothing would change for the people that Obamacare doesn’t directly help. If you shop for Obamacare-based coverage without knowing if you qualify for subsidies, you might be discouraged by the law’s steep costs. (Link added.)

In other words, Healthcare.gov demands to know your income information first so that it can calculate what, if any, subsidy you’re eligible for, in an attempt to both tempt you and shield you from sticker shock. But this then leads to “traffic congestion” as the site processes data from you and thousands of other users and then tries to verify what’s been input. And that, in turn, leads to the now-infamous site crashes.

Thus, base and deceptive political considerations were put ahead of seeing that Americans got at least a functional web site for their $634 million. We shouldn’t be surprised, though; it’s the Chicago way.

There’s much more, so be sure to read it all.

RELATED: At Hot Air, Allahpundit discusses on a health industry expert calling for the whole healthcare.gov site to be taken down for a month to fix the myriad problems. Heckuva job, Mr. President.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 Responses to “Why is the Obamacare web site crashing so much? The “Chicago Way””

Comments

  1. John A says:

    “Obamacare” was a disaster and known to be so before it was rammed through. And of course it was meant to increase insurance costs so as to “allow” those who could (or would) not otherwise insure to be covered.

    But the idea has been looked at for decades: see the Republican bill submitted circa 1972, for one. Just how it is that every time it has come up, it seemed to start from scratch rather than improving on earlier models…

    Now, this argument is ridiculous. If you want to get a discount on your automobile insurance because your vehicle is a two-cylinder diesel and you only average fifteen miles of driving per week, you have to include that info in your application. If you do not want to pay for flood insurance for your home because you happen to live several hundred feet above the [local] water table, you must disclose that in your application. If a business wants a break on fire insurance because its HQ is concrete and steel with automatic fire-suppression system[s] rather than wood buildings with not even piped-in water, that must appear in its application.

    The “.gov” website is a ridiculous piece of crapulous idiocy, but not for asking pertinent questions.

  2. Great White Rat says:

    Why is the Obamacare web site crashing so much?

    Maybe it’s because the software developer has a track record of incompetence?

    The developer was fired by the province of Ontario for being years behind schedule in creating their – wait for it – medical registry site.

    Oh, and what they did deliver, according to the article, was technologically obsolete by the time it was implemented.

    Of course, the Obamabots are refusing to answer questions about whether they knew the company was incompetent before giving them the contract. Which, when you think about it, does answer the question.

    But hey, what’s another demonstration of ineptitude by this administration? By now we ought to be used to such displays, no? As Hillary might say, at this point what difference does it make?

  3. Carlos says:

    Thus, base and deceptive political considerations were put ahead…

    Go ahead, name me one thing Obama has done in the last twenty years or so that did not have the same “base and deceptive considerations.”

    I’m waiting. (crickets chirping.)

  4. Drew the Infidel says:

    The explanation for the site crashing cannot be because of the throngs of citizens eager to participate in the healthcare law’s offerings when 47% of the US population is not even aware it is, in fact, a law.