For months, the Obama administration warned that consumers would face some difficulties during the launch of the long-awaited Affordable Care Act. Unfortunately, that prediction came true when people across the country encountered computer trouble while trying to access information and enroll in a health insurance plan.
Despite three years of planning, computer software designed by private contractors was not up to the task. In some cases, the federal website froze; in others, the links that allow customers to set up accounts did not work.
One of the principal contractors — Quality Software Services Inc. — had told Congress last month that HealthCare.gov would be ready for the surge when the program officially began Oct. 1. But federal health officials had to admit the system was overwhelmed by millions of users. In the first three days, there were 8.5 million visitors. Few things are more frustrating than trying to cope with a website that isn’t responding. And this was not your ordinary shopping cart; it was the day millions of uninsured had waited for, when they finally had a chance to obtain insurance coverage.
Rhode Island was not free from glitches but, like other state health exchanges, its was more efficient than the federal one, which caters to users in 36 states (including Maine). Health- Source RI had 30,416 hits in the first three days it was open. On Day 1, the site crashed for a couple of hours because of the volume. But 3,000 people were able to create accounts.
While software engineers worked around the clock trying to fix Health- Care.gov problems, it is dismaying that company officials have refused to answer questions about their performance. They have no right to remain mum on a project of this magnitude and significance.
Critics of Obamacare are predictably gleeful about the computer snafus and choose to ignore the good news that interest in the Affordable Care Act is strong. Moreover, there is time to fix the problems before actual insurance coverage begins, on Jan. 1.
— The Providence (R.I.) Journal
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less