>Sounds ominous- but it dates from last November and clearly the site is working now since the original enrollment target actually was met:
>
>http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/01/politics/obamacare-signups-target/

Now that the water is "safe" (at least I believe so, and I appreciate all the private emails from people)...

I obviously can't speak about the denial of service attacks - other than to say any group who engaged in attacks should be punished to fullest extent of the law. Sabotage is never the way to go.

On the other issue, it is very questionable whether any enrollment target has actually been met. I'm sure you know enough about KPIs to understand the value of measurement, validity of the data and the process, etc.

The RAND corporation is reporting that of the 7.1 million, only about 23% had no prior insurance. That's roughly 1.6 million. Of those 1.6 million, only a bit over half have paid so far. So currently the most reliable number available is that about 858,000 had no insurance before, AND have paid their first premium. (which, by the way, the administration rather quietly acknowledges).

Yes, that number might very well go up in another month - but even if every one of those 1.6 million pay their premium, it's still small compared to the stated goal.

Many of the 7.1 million are people who lost their plans and were thrown onto the exchanges (with some finding better plans and some having to settle for worse plans). There is no official number but is generally believed to be at least 4 million people Others came in through Medicaid expansion. And of those, roughly 80-85% have paid. (In some states it's above 90% and in others just barely above 50%)

It's not a stretch to say that so far, what we've seen is a shift of coverage, more than an outright expansion in coverage. The 7.1 number just doesn't have much credibility at this time.

I personally would have a little more trust if the leaders would speak honestly about the numbers - they are not "cooked", but certainly do not tell the story.

And remember that another goal was to enroll a certain % of the "coveted age group" of 18-34. By last count, they're somewhere between 10-12 percentage points under that. Even supporters of the law acknowledge this will have a negative impact on premiums.

Maybe a year from now, things might be different. I'll admit the one thing (the only thing) I like about the new law is the topic of pre-existing conditions. But coverage means nothing if you can't get care, and the growing instances where people are not able to use the doctor/hospital of their choice just continues to undercut the promises of this law.

So these are hardly numbers the administration should be boasting about.