Most of this was known before the contract was ever let for the website, and they hired CGI anyway.
Makes you ask "Why?"
"Healthcare.gov" web developer CGI has a long & storied checkered past
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by thisnumbersdisconnected, Oct 23, 2013.
-
-
Rules of combat #8 -- always remember your weapon was made by the lowest bidder....
-
-
preachinjesus Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Bloomberg Weekly has a great piece about this and NPR's Diane Rehms Show had a great installment this week.
The coding is terrible for the site. But that is half the issue.
A badly coded site should site be operational. The other part of the challenge is that the site has to communicate and integrate with hundreds of other sites that are programmed differently.
Of course since the government was in charge of handling this the job was guaranteed to be bungled. We lack leadership in Washington, we lack competency in Washington, we lack focus. The website is a mess and will have to be systematically rewritten. But it won't get better soon. Just wait til the teenage hackers start in on it...get ready for a mess. The wisdom of our founders will be realized, the federal government is, at best, a necessary evil. -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
preachinjesus Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Edited to add: I looked it up and see the costs haven't been completely lined out by the GAO. I'd suspect the contract for the firm that developed the site would be about $100 million over three years. That makes sense. The $560 million sounds like a FoxNews number and probably isn't accurate. The total cost, at least what the GAO is reporting, is likely closer to $300 million but that probably also includes server usage and data center creation. I can see that this project, over 5 years would cost that much. IMHO, it is still too much but the government isn't trying to be efficient with this, they're trying to push it through. That always costs more.