Scrap that Nov. 30 deadline for Obamacare website fix?

At least, that's the intuitive feeling I get.

Why?

First, Obama is considering letting people sign up for Obamacare directly via insurance companies. I think that's a fairly strong indication that HealthCare.gov will NOT be fixed by Nov. 30. (And Megan McArdle claims this is breaking the law.)

Second? If up to 40 percent of IT systems supporting it still need to be fixed, I don't see that being completed in 11 days.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Deputy Chief Information Officer Henry Chao (said) ... financial management tools remain unfinished, particularly the process that will deliver payments to insurers. ...

Chao said that the consumer portion of the website, including account registration, plan shopping and enrollment functions, won’t be affected by the ongoing development effort, but that “back office” functions including accounting and payment systems were not yet complete.

That said, from the rest of the story, it's clear House Republicans are playing at least as much politics as normal with this issue.

At the same time, per the second page, it seems clear oversight of HealthCare.gov is still haphazard. Yes, enrollment numbers may be increasing. But, per the second link, that's not the problem. The payout side is the biggie. And, if insurers ain't getting money, they ain't taking Obamacare clients.

Hence the first link. Which basically gets even closer to corporate socialism, in a sense.

So, if the website is fixed in the public's eye, it won't be, in the eyes of Blue Cross, et al.

There's another deadline. Dec. 23 is the deadline to sign up for insurance for the new year. Maybe Obama doesn't fully hit that target on software fixes either, as Amy Davidson notes at the New Yorker. She, too adds (this is the New Yorker, not the New York Post, folks) that much of the problem is Dear Leader's:

After five years in the White House, Obama still believes that he can go into a corner, tinker with something until it’s better, and win on the merits. The long view can serve him well, but it can also leave him unprepared when the other side won’t give up on an all-out battle. Health-care reform is the President’s signature legislative achievement, and a historic one. To preserve it, he needs to fight for it politically, state by state. This time, the Obama brand alone isn’t enough.

Chances of him truly grasping that? C'mon, we've seen enough of him over five years. Chances are 50-50 at best.

Meanwhile, Brian Beutler, now of Salon, but formerly of the Obamiac Talking Points Memo site (famed in my mind for running slide shows of White House photographers' pix, for doing like the mainstream media and unnecessarily letting Obama officials go off the record and other things) cites Kentucky's state-level exchange as Example A, and the only example, of why the GOP will lose the Obamacare fight. Given that it's a state-level exchange, and has about zip to do with HealthCare.gov, it sounds like what it is: an Obamiac puff piece. State exchanges were up and working from the start, therefore don't have to overcome the burden of bad expectations. Or bad base-level design, or other things.

And, Beutler's piece doesn't address any of the behind-the-scenes for individuals issues that the federal site probably won't have fixed by Nov. 30, either.

Have a #Coke and an #Upworthly-esque #positivity smile

An Upworthy-type website, breathlessly passing on Coke's annoucement of suspending "committed advertising" and redirecting that money to help Philippine victims of Typhoon Haiyan, might make you think so. But, let's look further?

First, the money it's already donated? A company as big as Coke budgets that every year as part of its nonprofit support expenses. Whether, at the end of its current fiscal year, Coke does anything more, I don't know.

Second, $2.5 million is nice, yes, but a drop in the bucket out of $48 billion in annual revenue and $9 billion in annual profit, per Wikipedia.

Third, if Coke wants to be a real corporate citizen, it can stop supporting paramilitaries in Columbia, stop supporting the harassment of union organizers by local bottlers, primarily in Columbia but also in Guatemala, then hiding behind the legal shield of "but, it wasn't us, just local contractors," stop exploiting groundwater exploitation in developing nations, and more. Wikipedia has a roundup link about its bad press in the past.

Is Coke as exploitative as, say Nike? Probably not. But, it's nowhere near a corporate saint.

And, back to the money. Coke doesn't need "scheduled advertising." Contra JPMorgan Chase with its recent Twitter Tweet-in stupidity, Coke knows its getting beaucoup free advertising from Upworthy, or rather Barfworthy, type websites who "blog" stuff like this uncritically, and then from people who pass on links like that on Twitter or other social media. From the business side, it's genius.

From the public side, it's bullshit.

Coke could have followed the "pray in your closet" admonition of Jesus, and done this in private, saying nothing until asked about why its ads were not on the air. Or, it could have done a bonus donation to the Philippines and kept quiet about it, while keeping its ads on the air.

Back again to Coke's statement:

"Any committed advertising space will be redirected to the relief and rebuilding efforts for the people in Visayas," Coca-Cola's statement on Tuesday read.

What constitutes relief and rebuilding? How long with this last? Is Coke working with recognized Philippine nonprofits and multinational NGOs that respect local issues, or will it be working with Westernized ones that cater to multinational corporate interests?

As with most big corporate PR, there's plenty of lines to read between. Unfortunately, "positivity" type websites let themselves be played in the likes of Coke's hands just like cheap violins. That said, Upworthy itself isn't all positivity, all the time. It occasionally bends a small bit, especially when it's to support a socially liberal neoliberalism of mainstream Democratic neoliberalism. Other places, like its longform cousin, Brain Pickings? Smile, smile, smile.

For people who call this "cynicism"? I call it reality, as run through the blender of skepticism and critical thinking. And, say that you might be the type of person gullible to the online-driven phenomenon of "branding."

And, with the continued hollowing out of the US economy, plus, Google's promise to individuals (which will be taken up much more by corporations) of being able to create social media "bots," this will only get worse.

Finally, any website that deliberately misspells a standard English word as part of its URL draws a baleful eye from me anyway.

4 out of 5 users may actually use #Obamacare! By Nov. 30!

If you're nearly my age, or older, you probably remember the old TV jingle about how "Four out of five dentists ... recommend Trident."

Well, according to the Washington Post, it looks like an earlier blog post of mine saying I didn't expect Team Obama to have the federal exchange website for Obamacare ready by Nov. 30 may just be at least partially true:

The Obama administration has set a Nov. 30 deadline — next Saturday — by which officials have promised that HealthCare.gov will work smoothly for about four out of five consumers who attempt to use it to sign up for health plans. Even now, the official familiar with the project said, CGI’s work on the repairs is not always going well; roughly one-third to half the new computer code the company is writing cannot be used because it is revealing flaws when it is fully examined by a group of outside testers, including some insurance companies.

That said, since it sounds like even the latest promise from Dear Leader is likely to not be ... er, fully operative, to riff back to Richard Nixon days?

Meanwhile, having perhaps learned a lesson, I assume Team Obama's already working on its post-Nov. 30 "spin" plans. And, Obamiacs, especially the ones who have blamed right-wing DDoS attacks, or a CGI Federal who has contributed politically to both parties for allegedly deliberately tanking, are you working on your "spin" too?

Instead, why don't you ask the wunderkind to hold up a mirror to himself, because that's where a lot of the problems started.

Actually, there will be a Plan C.

Assuming that the promises above are indeed too optimistic? First, Obama is considering letting people sign up for Obamacare directly via insurance companies. I think that's a fairly strong indication that HealthCare.gov will NOT be fixed by Nov. 30. And, I believe he'll follow through on that, which in turn will actually cause even more havoc.

#Cardinals pull off Freese-Bourjos trade — shortstop ramifications

Actually, it's a four-player trade. The Cardinals are trading David Freese and Fernando Salas to the Angels for Peter Bourjos and minor league prospect Randal Grichuk.

Several thoughts, first in brief, then expanded.

First, this saves the Cards a few dinero, as Bourjos is one year behind Freese in the arbitration years cycle and four years younger, and Salas was entering his first arbitration year. Besides, Salas had no room in a jammed Cardinal rotation; heck, the Angels might try to make him a starter. Second, it adds speed to the current Cardinals roster, something I, John Mozeliak and Mike Matheny have all been looking for. Third, it leaves open the possibility of Jon Jay becoming trade bait, especially if the Cards judge that Oscar Taveras is big-league ready even before the start of spring training. Fourth, Grichuk could be of some value. He has a decent slugging percentage and a bit of speed, but needs to cut his strikeouts and take more walks.

And, as with the Rangers-Tigers trade, we know this means an expected position shift will now happen. Matt Carpenter's headed to third, and presumably, speaking of big-league ready, Kolten Wong's starting the year in St. Louis.

So, it looks like a win-win, but one that tilts toward St. Louis, I think. That's with the one big caveat of Bourjos staying healthy. And, assuming that happens, I might have been generous toward the Angels in my win-win. Rather, let's call it a win-make progress deal.

Now, about those money savings? It's not a lot, but, let's say, $4M a year total. That leads us back to shortstop land. The Cards now have more money to spend on either a free agent, or to pay a certain high-paid shortstop acquired by trade. Could this put the Cards in on Troy Tulowitzki, if Colorado will trade him at the right price, as well as Stephen Drew, Jhonny Peralta and the other free agents? In any case, this could be moving the Cardinals closer to the post-Pete Kozma era.

That said, if Peralta is now asking for $56-$75M, scratch him. Not worth it.

Anyway, on the grounds of the trade alone, this is a boost to the Cardinals. Plus, with Wong and Bourjas, plus any speed out of Taveras, this is a faster Cardinals team. Also, definitely vs. the 2013 Freese, the infield shifts should make this a better defensive team. ESPN pointed out that, despite winning the National League title, the Cards were in the bottom third of baseball in defense.

An upgraded defense plus all the young gun arms? Yikes.

Meanwhile, just as the Texas-Detroit trade seemed to tighten the market on middle infielders, the Cardinals have more money to play. Or, per a post of mine about a week ago, the Cardinals can feel more comfortable staying put, waiting to be the pursued rather than the pursuer, in the shortstop trade world.

Is the Green Party of Texas dead?

It's more than a rhetorical question, to be honest.

First, there's been no updates to the Texas Green Party of Texas's website, as far as news stores being posted, etc., since the start of August. That's nearly four months now.

Second, when I wrote to the contact email address to inquire about what was up with that and to inquire, since we're officially in the start of election season, if the party knew about any Green candidates who had filed for office yet?

My email bounced.

Now, I'm not registered as a Green, but I've voted Green in the last three presidential elections, and there was even a Green Congresscritter candidate in Odessa in 2010. I have promoted voting Green, and not just as a protest vote.

This ain't good, being dead in the e-water. Not good at all.

Anybody who has closer connections with official Texas Greendom than me, feel free to weigh in with any information.

Update: I have gotten an email back, from Kat Swift, co-chair of the state's executive committee. Don't know why my original bounced. The party doesn't announce filings until Dec. 9, when the filing window closes. I understand why, because you can have withdrawals. On the other hand, reporting filings as they happen juices up the party's presence in the news cycle.

Harry Reid trumps a 5-year Kumbaya chorus

I'm not a total fan of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. He can still be in the pocket of hardrock miners in Nevada too much, and I'm still not sure just how liberal he is on socioeconomic issues.

But, I know he's less of a neoliberal, or seems to be, than Preznit Kumbaya, aka Dear Leader, aka President Barack Obama. And, he's certainly not in any special love with any mythical mellifluousness of his voice. 

First, the end of the filibustering of district and circuit court nominees was needed, period. Republicans, who talk about the poor as thieving criminals, were stealing not just one and a half loaves, but 3 or 4 loaves compared to the agreement to take the possible "nuclear option" off the table in Shrub Bush's presidency.

Second, anything that makes John McCain whine, exposes his hypocrisy, and catches his tail in a vice halfway between hardcore conservative and true nutbar is fine by me.

Let's read the Schmuck Talk Express™:

"They're governed by the newer members... who have never been in a minority, who are primarily driving this issue," McCain told reporters after the vote. "They succeeded and they will pay a very, very heavy price for it."

Really? Harry Reid's been around as long as you have, John.

See, what this is, is what psychologists call "projection." Here's what McCain was actually saying:

"(House Republicans are) governed by the newer members... who have never been in a minority, who are primarily driving this issue," McCain told reporters after the vote. "They succeeded (in the government shutdown) and they will pay a very, very heavy price for it."

Glad I could translate, Schmuck Talk.

Third, the Senate GOP had become the party of obstruction and obstruction, with young turks there finding a willing ally in Yertle the Turtle, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Reid pointed that out shortly before the denouement:

On the Senate floor Thursday morning, Reid pointed out that half of the 168 filibusters of executive and judicial nominees in American history have come during the Obama Administration. "These nominees deserve at least an up-or-down vote," Reid said. "But Republican filibusters deny them a fair vote and deny the president his team.

Half. Period. End of story.

The Atlantic notes that Reid and McConnell don't really like each other, but both have been in the Senate long enough to try patchwork fixes. But, McConnell either couldn't or wouldn't do more.

And, that's important related to this. McConnell has long crowed about his knowledge of Senate parliamentary procedure arcana, and Reid just trumped him. My take is Yertle wouldn't do more, rather

Fourth, we know Reid squeezed Vice President Joe Biden out of the picture on government shutdown talks earlier this fall. Per my Photoshopped caption, he just put Dear Leader on notice, I think, that he will play the same hardball tactics, or worse, come next year. Reid finally decided, in the Chicago language and mannerisms that Obama is allegedly supposed to understand and practice, that it was time to bring a gun to a gunfight. McCain, in negotiations, brought an inadequate counteroffer, or a water pistol, if you will.

As for long-term ramifications? Well, the GOP needs to do more work on getting its Ted Cruzes and other knucklewalkers in line. Because, if the inside-the-Beltway take is correct on how this will make the GOP madder, I think Reid is ready to fire back.

Maybe Harry can even dissuade Dear Leader from chained CPI for entitlements and other nuttery of his Catfood Commission.

Or, I hope, get the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to find people to "primary" Carl Levin, Joe Manchin, and Mark Pryor.