Obamacare website is supposed to work now. Is it ready for a surge in use?

How the Obamacare website works is an important question, notably because the period between now and Christmas is expected to see a rush of enrollment by people who hope to have new insurance in place by Jan. 1.

Mike Segar/Reuters
The front page of the Affordable Care Act website.

Get ready to find out what it means for the Obamacare website to “work smoothly for the vast majority of users.”

That was the phrase used a month ago by Jeffrey Zients, tapped by President Obama to lead a “tech surge” to fix the website, to describe how things would be going by the end of November.

The Obama administration’s self-set deadline of Nov. 30 is just about here. The process of enrolling for insurance on the federally run marketplace called HealthCare.gov has gotten considerably smoother than it was a month ago.

But the administration hasn’t gotten very specific about what its “work smoothly” promise means – and whether it can deliver for an expected rush of users next month.

As of Wednesday, administration officials have been saying they expect the site to work properly for 80 percent of users. A spokeswoman for the website has reported a sharp decline in “error” messages as they try to enroll. After each click, new pages load much faster than they did when the site launched on Oct. 1.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, while not using the words “all clear,” has urged a wary public to come and use the site.

But all this still leaves questions. If the 80 percent target is reached, what will the experience be for the other 20 percent? And for anyone who does successfully sign up, how many errors will crop up on the “back end” of the website, where information is transferred to the insurance firms that offer coverage? Tech crews have been working on fixing problems there.

There have also been lingering doubts about the ability of HealthCare.gov to handle a traffic surge. About 50,000 users at a time will be able to click through the enrollment process in December, say officials with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the agency that runs the site.

The 50,000 figure would match the administration’s internal goal that had been set before the Oct. 1 launch. That’s not bad, but it doesn’t leave lots of room for surges in demand. A headline in Kaiser Health News summed up the administration’s comments this way: “Consumers Urged To Give Healthcare.gov Another Try – Just Not Too Many Of Them.”

How the site works is an important question, notably because the period between now and the Christmas holiday is expected to see a rush of enrollment by people who hope to have new insurance in place by Jan. 1. (The deadline is Dec. 23 if one wants insurance starting Jan. 1.)

 On the social website Twitter, some Americans over the past week have reported quick and successful sign-ups. HealthCare.gov serves 36 states, while 14 have their own online shopping venues.

But the site’s first big test, since its error-prone launch, is just around the corner. People eager to shop in December include both Americans who don’t have insurance currently and some who have had their individual policies canceled as their insurers shift toward offering plans that meet coverage standards under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

A well-running website would help process the expected stream of enrollees and set the stage for welcoming another traffic surge before the end of March – the time by which Americans need to have insurance or owe a penalty under the ACA.

But if the fixes still leave lots of errors behind on the website, that could make it harder for states to set up the broad-based “pools” of insured people that the president envisioned when he signed Obamacare into law. Bad publicity might cause enrollment to be skewed toward those most desperate for insurance (often people with health challenges).

If lots of younger or healthier people bypass Obamacare and pay a tax penalty instead ($95 or 1 percent of income for 2014), the result could be rate hikes for 2015 – if insurance firms see that their average cost of providing coverage is higher than expected.

For now, it’s unclear whether that will happen. There’s still a good while before the March 31 enrollment window ends.

California has reported that so far, 23 percent of enrollees in its ACA exchange have been between ages 18 and 34. That’s similar to the percentages seen in some other states that run their own websites. National data aren’t available, but those early reports from states suggest that young people haven’t opted out of the process en masse.

The big waves of enrollment are presumably still to come, though.

By one forecast, from the Congressional Budget Office, about 7 million Americans may enroll in insurance over state exchanges (including the 36-state portal run by HealthCare.gov) for 2014.

Judged against that expectation, the early pace of sign-ups was disappointingly slow. About 106,000 Americans signed up in October across all 50 states.

For those who have trouble enrolling online, the Obama administration is seeking to ramp up a new alternative: making it easier for people to sign up directly with insurance firms offering coverage in their area.

Three large states – Florida, Ohio, and Texas – will be early testers of this “direct enrollment” option, the administration announced last week.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.