3 Ways You Can Tell the Health Care Website Is Working

Here’s one: Republicans have stopped talking about it.

This December 2, 2013 photo shows a woman reading the HealthCare.gov insurance marketplace internet site in Washington, D.C.
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Alex Seitz Wald
Dec. 5, 2013, 11:10 a.m.

Just five days in­to the re­launch of the new and im­proved Health­Care.gov, it’s prob­ably too soon to say if the web­site is work­ing prop­erly in terms of tech­no­logy. The ini­tial num­bers look good. Al­though im­port­ant back-end prob­lems re­main, the site has handled close to a mil­lion users some days, and more people signed up Tues­day than in all of Oc­to­ber. But we don’t need the stats to know the web­site is work­ing in at least one im­port­ant way: polit­ic­ally.

Here’s how you can tell:

1) Re­pub­lic­ans have mostly stopped at­tack­ing the web­site.

Two sets of House Re­pub­lic­an talk­ing points shared with Na­tion­al Journ­al bare this out. Tues­day’s email, sent from the of­fice of GOP Con­fer­ence Chair­wo­man Cathy Mc­Mor­ris Rodgers, barely touches on the web­site, while Thursday’s doesn’t men­tion the site at all.

The first email in­structs Re­pub­lic­an mem­bers of Con­gress to high­light four of “Obama’s broken prom­ises.” The first three “prom­ises” re­late to cov­er­age prob­lems, such as poli­cy­hold­ers’ rates go­ing up. Law­makers are then en­cour­aged to at­tack the White House pledge that the web­site would be ready by Oct. 1, but not tar­get the web­site it­self.

Thursday’s memo, on the oth­er hand, make no ref­er­ence to the web­site at all. In­stead, it fo­cuses on a new poll show­ing that young Amer­ic­ans have soured on Obama­care, and en­cour­ages mem­bers to “host a town hall on a col­lege cam­pus in your dis­trict with mil­len­ni­als about Obama­care’s bur­den.”

An­oth­er in­dic­a­tion that Re­pub­lic­ans were leav­ing the web­site be­hind came Wed­nes­day, when the cam­paign arm of Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans re­vived Mitt Rom­ney’s at­tack on Demo­crats that Obama­care cuts Medi­care by more than $700 bil­lion. Bey­ond be­ing a slip­pery claim, it’s also an old one. It was a center­piece of Rom­ney’s cam­paign and was even used in the 2010 midterms. Poli­ti­Fact called it “a talk­ing point that won’t die” — and that was over a year ago.

It’s a safe bet that Re­pub­lic­ans wouldn’t be dust­ing off old ma­ter­i­al if the web­site were still giv­ing them fod­der for fresh at­tacks.

2) Demo­crats have calmed down.

As my Na­tion­al Journ­al col­leagues Sam Baker and Elahe Iz­adi re­por­ted, Demo­crat­ic law­makers, who seemed at wit’s end with Obama­care just two weeks ago, have gen­er­ally re­laxed, at least for now. “This has not been fun, the last month or so. But it’s get­ting bet­ter, even the last few days,” Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id told a Nevada TV sta­tion Wed­nes­day.

In­deed, the White House has moved in­to sales mode on the health care law, while the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee and oth­ers have transitioned — if tep­idly at first — in­to of­fense.

“We’re go­ing to make sure that Demo­crats win on Obama­care in 2014. Any­body who thinks that Demo­crats are go­ing to lose on Obama­care in 2014 are wrong,” said Charles Cham­ber­lain, the ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of Demo­cracy for Amer­ica, who ad­ded that his lib­er­al grass­roots group will use Re­pub­lic­ans’ op­pos­i­tion to the health law against them next year.

3) The me­dia has star­ted to move on.

In mid-Novem­ber, the Wash­ing­ton me­dia nar­rat­ive was en­tirely dom­in­ated by prob­lems with the web­site. The health law looked like an ab­ject fail­ure with little chance of re­cov­ery.

Since the web­site re­launch Sunday, cov­er­age has been more di­verse, with a ma­jor fo­cus oth­er is­sues like Ir­an, and more nu­anced when it comes to Obama­care. “It’s now clear that news or­gan­iz­a­tions are be­gin­ning to take ser­i­ously the idea that Demo­crats are not uni­formly on the de­fens­ive over Obama­care,” Greg Sar­gent notes.

Plus, the over­all volume of cov­er­age on the web­site is down. Ac­cord­ing to a Nex­is search, U.S. pub­lic­a­tions have wr­rit­ten 901 stor­ies about Health­Care.gov in the five days since the Sunday re­launch, com­pared with 1,611 dur­ing a five-day peri­od in mid-Novem­ber at the height of the pan­ic over the law. And the pace of cov­er­age may be slow­ing, from a peak of 272 stor­ies writ­ten Tues­day to 178 Wed­nes­day and 54 Thursday, as of pub­lish­ing.

It’s too early to tell if that trend will hold, but right now on Memor­andum, an in­flu­en­tial site that ranks news stor­ies based on how much people are link­ing to them, there’s just a single ref­er­ence to Health­Care.gov.

None of this is to say that the web­site is out of the woods tech­nic­ally. The back-end prob­lems are al­most more im­port­ant, if less vis­ible, than the user-side is­sues (though the Health and Hu­man Ser­vices De­part­ment said this week that they fixed a glitch re­spons­ible for 80 per­cent of those er­rors). And new prob­lems could emerge.

But the polit­ic­al-me­dia pan­ic has sub­sided, for the mo­ment, and Pres­id­ent Obama may just re­cov­er after all.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.