4 ms·
Regardless of how hard it was to make a functioning "data hub", they should have, at the very least, built a functioning registration system that is independent
by vinhboy 13y ago
Regardless of how hard it was to make a functioning "data hub", they should have, at the very least, built a functioning registration system that is independent of all other fail points. This way, at the very least, they could have the names and contact information of everyone who wanted to fill out a form. Then they can go back and process the forms at a later date.
- hga 13y agoSupposedly the problem there was a very late change from somewhere in the White House to CMS, in August or September, to preclude the possibility of window shopping and require registration with a lot of verification up front. E.g. we know Experian is part of that process, said to be for identification and income verification. It's been reported that people who don't have credit records (e.g. those sufficiently ill they've stayed under the care of their families) get told by Healthcare.gov to contact Experian, who then upon discovering they don't have a record of them tells them they have to get the Healthcare.gov people to create a “Manual Process Identity Proof” ... which few if any of them know how to do, or whom to send someone to.
- lnanek2 13y agoThat's what I hated most about healthcare.gov. Other sites I could get a quote quite easily and decide to go with them or not. healthcare.gov had a bunch of forms that didn't work so I couldn't get a quote after hours of trying. Even if I let long loading pages sit there for long periods of time, some failed out and other times my data was lost.