The Thing From Bloggy Swamp

"Music is real--the rest is scenery." Fats Waller
OCTOBER 24, 2013 9:02AM

Guy Named Mike Offers to Fix ObamaCare Website for $600

Rate: 3 Flag

WORCESTER, Mass. Mike Andruzzioni, a freelance web designer and part-time cab dispatcher, today offered to fix glitches in the website created to administer the Affordable Care Act for a fixed-price, “all-in” of $600.

Mike: “If you sold t-shirts on your site you could make a lot of money.”

“I’ve got one I’m doing for the Quinsigamond Community College cheerleading squad, and a bug to fix in the PayPal button on another I set up for Joey’s Pizza & Grinders, but after that I’m wide open,” Andruzzioni said during an interview at his triple-decker apartment in the Main South neighborhood of this gritty industrial city. “Grinder” is the name given to long sandwiches in Worcester that are referred to as “submarines” or “hoagies” elsewhere in America.

The website to sign up for coverage under the Affordable Care Act, sometimes referred to as “ObamaCare,” has proven to be inadequate with many healthy young people, essential to the economic success of the government healthcare program, giving up in frustration after discovering that it does not offer photographs of cats. “You’ve definitely got to have funny cat pictures,” Andruzzioni said. “Whoever left out that critical feature of any state-of-the-art website ought to be fired, I-M-H-O.”

Zients: “Facebook had problems at first, and it still played a critical role in matching up preppy college students, a much more important social goal than healthcare.”

The problems with the website have high-ranking administration officials back on their heels, scrambling to save the President’s signature achievement. “We’re talking to branding consultants about a re-launch,” said Jeffrey Zients, a Presidential Innovation Fellow who has been tapped for his skills as “fixer” to correct the problems with ObamaCare. “Three possible new names they’ve come up with are PelosiCare, ReaganCare and BushCare.”

Main South neighborhood

Andruzzioni is known for his everyday low prices for web design services, which makes his bid attractive compared to the $600 million that the government has already spent on the webite. When asked how he arrived at his estimate, he said “Simple. I can usually do it for 10% of what the other guy charged.”

Author tags:

obamacare, satire, comedy, spoof, humor

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
(an art form)
I wouldn't touch this one
with my Louisville Slugger!
I hope you bought a t-shirt before you checked out.
I know you're going for laughs, but this is not a laughing matter. Certainly, those of us adversely affected by insurance caps and denial of insurance due to per-existing conditions are not laughing and Republican hypocrisy and perfidy.

I find it despicable that so-called Conservatives continue to denigrate and deride a policy they first proposed, a policy actually put in place by Republican Governor Mitt Romney. What's worse, once their plan was made into law by Democrats, they did everything in their power to sabotage and/or defeat that law, a law intended to at long last bring health insurance to all (or at least most) citizens -- as is the case in most of the rest of the industrialized western world (not to mention several lesser countries not on that list). That this is not the case in this the richest nation on Earth is a national disgrace, not to mention a tragedy for millions of Americans.

The ACA may not insure everyone, and for damned sure, it is not what the Left hoped for; but for all its faults, it is a giant step toward an idea and an ideal first put forward more than a century ago by Republican President Teddy Roosevelt.

If the Republicans were wise, they'd stop playing politics with healthcare reform. But they won't, just as they won't stop trying to undo Social Security and Medicare. Ultimately, attempting to undo the social safety net is going to bite them in the arse. For as it is written, sow the wind, and you will reap the whirlwind
Tom, "conservatives" is overstating the case if you're referring to the Heritage Foundation. They were an isolated voice in support of mandatory coverage, and have now abandoned their position. They certainly don't speak for anybody but themselves, and they're a small outfit.

As for Romney, he was proud of what he accomplished (he had the artist include a copy of the universal health care law in his official portrait when he left office) but he was only one leg of the stool--Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature by veto-proof majorities, and there was going to be a universal health care law here regardless of who was governor. In any event, the people who drafted the ACA should have looked more closely at what actually happened in Mass: costs continued to go up, coverage increased but only incrementally (about 1%) and people in the lower middle classes actually got squeezed. Some made too much to get subsidized, but not enough to afford private plans available through the exchange. And then the state government sued them!

Our healthcare system is screwed up here for a variety of reasons (a lot of expensive teaching hospitals, mandatory plans that cover a lot of extras some people don't need) so using our law as a model probably wasn't a great idea, at least not until the bugs got worked out.
Con, agreed that healthcare costs are a pressing problem -- and given an aging population, that problem is sure to get worse before it gets better. But that is only one part of the problem, and it is not the part that is presently being addressed, which is to how to insure all Americans -- or at least that is the concern for some.

You and I can go on endlessly about this, and you can poo-poo the Heritage connection, tho I think you're being a bit disingenuous in that regard, but clearly that was the Republican position before it was co-opted -- out of desperation -- by the Democrats.

As for the rest of my comment, I stand by it in regard to which side is interested in building and maintaining a social safety net, and which side is determined to tear it down.
The Massachusetts program has been screwed up by the federal initiative, in healthcare (as it was in education, where we had to lower our standards to meet the Common Core). Our state connector website has now been affected by the federal website's problems. I think it would have been better to proceed state by state. I know that leaves people in less "enlightened" (those are the quotations of dubiety) states potentially in the lurch, but it also gives them a reason to get involved in local retail politics.