Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The link provided states that "The Government turned down the offer" not the Obama white house turned down the offer. get your facts straight from your own biased BS links.
Because the procurement process is such a headache, agencies often lock in contractors for longer periods. This speeds things up, but it also gives preference to Beltway insiders and excludes smaller companies. As a result, new programming frameworks and development methods take a long time to reach the government. A company that has already bagged a 10-year contract has little incentive to innovate.
The companies that built Healthcare.gov were selected in 2007, more than two years before the government knew it would be building a health-care shopping site. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the health department agency responsible for the site, issued a $4 billion ID / IQ that covered large tech projects for the next 10 years and approved 16 companies to build them.
When CMS was put in charge of Healthcare.gov, it turned to the 16 contractors and asked who wanted to build what. Four submitted bids for the fattest contract, which covered the bulk of the marketplace. CMS selected the lowest bid, which came from CGI Federal, a Canadian firm that got into US government work by buying an American company with an abysmal track record for delivering on government contracts.
Or just keep being outraged by whatever false drivel freerepublic, WND, and others spoonfeed you on a daily basis.
What i find interesting defender, is that staffers can be exempt, unions can be exempt, obamas favorite businesses can be exempt, addional lines can be added to the law after the passing of a law passed by party line vote, but the most important thing about the law, the part that must be correct to actually help people get insurance, had to be built by lowest bidder of approved contractors and cost 600 million dollars to partly be built wrong.
You got a bridge to try to sell me? Or prime swampland?
IF OBAMA wanted this built right he would have choosen who he wanted to build it and no one on the left would have complained. NO ONE on the left would say MR. PRESIDENT you cant have that company do it for free, you must pay taxpayer money to build it. That would be political suicide.
Connect proprietary hardware and load up propriety software and you've got a customer for life
Microsoft would have done the same thing.
Can you think of a company better equipped to handle the maintenance and updates of the site than IBM?
While your argument holds some truth, it doesn't make a viable case against it.
IBM is a major player in government information systems. I know because I use software built by them for the state governments every day. Know what? Their software works.
The link provided states that "The Government turned down the offer" not the Obama white house turned down the offer. get your facts straight from your own biased BS links.
Oh that's right, Obama knows nothing about nothing.
Oh that's right, Obama knows nothing about nothing.
To hear you guy's tell it, he knows everything about everything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
