1. I am no fan of CGI, but before I blame them, we need to see the requirements document they were provided. If the requirements were not provided or if CGI built to the requirements they were provided, then it really isn’t their fault. So let’s see the requirements document, detailed test plans, etc. before blaming the contractor.

    The people advising HHS and helping to develop the requirements should have been another gov’t agency familiar with this type of activity or another support contractor. That isn’t uncommon in large IT efforts. One contractor advising and developing requirements for the gov’t agency and they are prohibited from actually doing the work.

    This approach has often been successful but is usually why large IT projects cannot be done in less than 3 years.

  2. “Meanwhile, it would be good if those who trumpet the merits of commerce running everything show they are not mere shills by holding private companies to account when things go wrong and customers are short-changed.”

    A remarkably silly thing to say by someone who is a shill for Obamacare.

    FYI Nick, customers do hold private companies accountable when things go wrong and they get short-changed. They stop being customers and buy from the competition instead.

  3. I actually do blame CGI Federal but ultimately it is on the head of HHS for not following through and verifying it was in a working condition. They spent a ridiculous amount of time and money setting up this website only to have to blow up in their faces. I do hope CGI Federal goes away as they seem terrible at what they do, unless their main mission is to extort technically challenged government appointees for bloated contracts. Many companies could have built a functioning site for 1/3 the cost and time. But there again, maybe the government kept shifting the scope of the work on CGI Federal, which wouldn’t make it their fault if it came in late and over budget.

    I’d love it if the ACA did actually provide affordable care, but that doesn’t seem possible with rates set to explode 40% or more over the next two years.

    I get the impression the author isn’t very versed in technology. That “new technology” email has been around since the early nineteen nineties. And Time Warner is a lousy company which only maintains customers because of their virtual monopoly and the government regulations and licensing set up to prevent competition. Google is one of the few capable of taking on the cable entertainment industry and is doing so in limited markets like Kansas City with fiber optic service, but it’s slow to roll out. The author also has entirely ignored DirecTV and HughesNet services which compete very well against cable.

Comments are closed.