Skip to comments.Obama administration mulls loosening tech hiring rules after ObamaCare rollout
Posted on 01/05/2014 1:59:50 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The Obama administration, stung by the failures of the HealthCare.gov rollout, is considering loosening hiring rules for technology specialists and creating a new federal unit dedicated to big tech projects, officials said.
The steps, some of which President Barack Obama could announce this quarter, are designed to address the lack of concentrated talent in civilian federal agencies to manage large technology projectsa shortcoming exposed by October's disastrous launch of the federal health-insurance site.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services initially served as its own general contractor on the project, but its lack of technical expertise quickly became apparent. Only after the site's launch did the White House bring in experts from Silicon Valley as well as a new general contractor.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This was a simple project, easily accomplished by competent people. There is no need for another government agency, an agency which will hire the same connected companies that fonged this project up.
One of those ideas is reversing the innovation-fellows program to have government technology specialists rotate through private-sector companies.
Who in the private sector would hire these doofuses, when they can go out and contract competent people.
In the face of this Obamacare screw-up [one of the all time worst government screw-ups] the very suggestion of this idea should be meet with howls.
The Services have already tried this with a couple tech areas. What happens when these ‘tech expert’ management organizations come into being is they create excessively bureaucratic management roadblocks and an added layer of frustration, and often a dubious technical expertise base.
Their ‘tech management experts’ often are DoD civilians some other federal organization is trying to get rid of but can’t fire.
Overall, this move by Obama is a tired and already-tried idea that doesn’t work in practice, in my opinion.
Would they have a say?
The; "I Almost Know What I'm Doing" (IAKWID) ... council
Just as we are forced by federal law to give up incandescent bulbs for lesser alternatives to save carbon, fifty-two adventurers set off on a doomed expedition to prove a falsity: that the ice cap in the Antarctic is melting because of greenhouse gases.
Climate modeling is not the only modeling that continues to prove out of whack with the real world: From estimates of use of emergency room facilities to the number of signups by healthier, younger citizens, every assumption of the ObamaCare authors and regulators seems to fail when tested against the real world. The administration keeps lying and obfuscating about the number and nature of the enrollments, but it is clear to any sentient, careful observer that this is a shipwreck for the president and his party. What remains is only for the ship to be smashed into even smaller pieces."
I would agree, but anybody with zero business background, will be told to repeat a learned mistake....over and over, and never realize it’s just not going to work. This is why you need to elect people with real life experience. Saying you did professor work, wannabe legislative stuff, and community services...it’s just not much to brag about. It won’t help you on the resume, and it’s kind of an indicator of you not knowing much.
Big Tech projects????
like destroying the effectiveness of encryption programing used by individual Americans to spy for political purposes under the guise of anti-terrorism. ( Howdaya Know?....look at how Obama uses the IRS to shut down conservative non profits).
We need to get rid of Obama and institute strict judicial oversight on all government domestic surveillance programs.Or else everyone looses their political freedom and every fuuture election will be rigged.
How would your proposal happen?
No survellance within the USA unless there is a search warrant issued with specific time frames of effectiveness, based upon clearly delineated probable cause, SIGNED BY OFFICIALS WHO WANT THE SEARCH, so they can be held responsible if the information is misused by the say, “Obama Campaign.”
What we need is already in place for search warrants as required by the Constitution.We just need to tweak it to make sure that political speech and communication is protected.
And the court record of these warrants needs to be public after 1-2 years of issuance.The alternative is that we will never again have free elections because privacy of communication by any electoral campaign organization will be compromised, and accessed by coercive utopian regimes such as Obama heads right now, and a pox on him and all of his running dogs..
Obama is working on ways to control the internet. This is a smoke screen.
We, already have exactly the proscribed limits on gov’t intrusion. Our Congress does nothing to obey US Constitutional Law. The limiting by exclusion powers, is over. We are in the state of tyranny, by treason against the constitutional Republic of the United States of America. Your demands are simple minded, to say the least. Regardless, still love the premise...
See, it’s always the techs’ fault, never management’s fault.
He knows how to manage large enterprises. He scooped ice cream at Baskin Robbins once upon a time.
We, already have exactly the proscribed limits on govt intrusion.
Not really. Just give statutory standing to any private US citizen to sue based on the dislosure requirement and probable cause.Not a problem.
The alternative is to start shooting in CWII, are you ready for that?
Hey zero, how about taking multiple bids on a contract, instead of using your wife’s college buddies, with a no bid contract?
State and local government have the same authority, as do non-profit research labs and universities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.