Will this post generate any comments?

I can't wait till Visa or Fedex try this. "We won't be reimbursing merchants for charges made during the last nine days of September because we're moving the master database over to a different vendor." Or "We're not going to be delivering parcels during the last nine days of September because we're installing a new GPS tracking system."

Out in the real world, this sort of excuse would not fly.

Did Halliburton get the contract to put in the new system?

"Out in the real world, this sort of excuse would not fly."

Out in the real world people give this kind of excuse all the time.

it's much better to do it now than to try to make it happen right in the middle of a fiscal year

That does not sound usual. Disruptions at the end of the fiscal year are avoided.

It is routine throughout any government agency I've had dealings with that they try to hurriedly spend all their allocated money proir to the end of the fiscal year.

Credit to Kevin to retract when he knows he made a mistake. On the other hand, it's too bad, like with so many otther BushBashers, he is so quick to lash out without bothering to actually understand what it is he is so upset about.

Where's your outrage that American citizens are forced to give a negative or very low interest loan to fund a government based pyramid scheme Orwellianly called 'social security'?

Well?

For the IT professionals: Have you ever heard of such a thing? A large enterprise shuts down their old system, then 2 weeks later turns on their new system?

I always thought both systems would run in parallel for a period of time to make sure bugs were squashed, then switch from the old to the new.

The original story, I think, wasn't wrong. I'm sure it didn't escape notice that, if there was going to be several days when no checks would go out, scheduling the event at the end of the fiscal year would be convEEENient.

Even better, the fact that the new system has lots more of those megabyte thingies means that everyone is getting even better Medicare than they were in the Middle Ages.

Except for the ones who are in the middle of the donut, of course.

Damn, you're a bunch of gullible gits. Sounds like a bunch of BS to me.

AH, we're, umm, talking about Medicare here. Not a government based pyramid scheme Orwellianly called 'social security'

Fracas_Futile: Kevin was originally outraged that doctors would have to lend money to the government for nine days:

In essence, those doctors, hospitals et al. are making an involuntary loan of nine days' pay without interest.

However, he supports a program of involuntary loans into a pyramid scheme. He's inconsistent.

fracas_futile,

"For the IT professionals: Have you ever heard of such a thing? A large enterprise shuts down their old system, then 2 weeks later turns on their new system?

I always thought both systems would run in parallel for a period of time to make sure bugs were squashed, then switch from the old to the new."

Yes, for most institutions you did run two systems parallel until the new one was completely up and running. I worked for a high-speed data replication software company, one customer was the FAA who used the product to back up blips on the radar screen. What if the FAA decided to upgrade their system, and shut down for two weeks?

"Unless I hear some convincing evidence to the contrary, I'm hereby retracting my earlier outrage and declaring this a nonevent."

Proof that this guy doens't have a republican bone in his body...

You're still not just a little bit suspicious that they'd bring this big, new system on RIGHT BEFORE the end of the FY?

AH, diggin deep there aren't you?

Kevin's original concern was with delaying skyrocketing government spending headlines until after the election.

The involuntary loan of nine days' pay line came from within a quote, within another site.

You're not trying to start a different argument are you?

it's much better to do it now than to try to make it happen right in the middle of a fiscal year

Baloney! The end of the fiscal year is the absolute worst time to swap out a financial system. Come on, Kevin. You are an old IT guy.

AH,
Social Security is closer to auto insurance than it is to a pyramid scheme.

In a typical pyramid scheme there is no product or service. Frequently it will involve getting 8 or 10 people to send money. As there are many people, perhaps including you AH, who do not understand that a mere 10 iterations will mean involving the entire population of India and the 11th will exceed the population on earth, people fall for it. These schemes aren't usually robust enough to function for 70 years.
As for Orwellian language, I'm pretty sure if Orwell were alive today it's not "social security" that would worry him. The "War on Terror" is a conceit that would probably get him going, though.

Fracas-- No, I'm talkiig about Kevin's inconsistency, which happesn to involve a government pyramid scheme.

Ralph-- There is no 'product or service' in social security. If you're lucky, you get some of your own money back, or make an extremely modest profit. That's like a pyramid scheme that works on, "You send me $2, I'll send you $1.50, or $2.01.".

Shutting down for 9 days can't be for system reasons. No way. I've been involved with big bang implementations on the same scale and the systems don't take 9 days. It may be required for administrative reasons, or for cost, or a bad implementation history (incompetence) requiring planning for backouts and reimplementations, but can't imagine actual systems constraints. When companies or agencies announce outages or business stoppage due to system changes you know those people are either lying or need to be replaced.

Anyway, who really thinks that cutting the deficit by a puny $5 billion is really going to change Bush's image as a big deficit spender?

Actually, I agree that the end of the fiscal year doesn't seem like a good time to swap out an old system. Certainly a private company would never do this. However, government organizations might work differently and have different priorities.

Basically, I don't know. And yes, just shutting down the system for nine days seems pretty odd, government or not. Still, the explanation struck me as plausible. I'm willing to go with it for now unless someone provides additional sinister information.

American Hawk wrote "Where's your outrage that American citizens are forced to give a negative or very low interest loan to fund a government based pyramid scheme Orwellianly called 'social security'?"

American Hawk's comment contains a contradiction. If Social Security pays out to typical beneficiaries more than what they paid in with interest, it's not a system of low interest loans to the government. If it were a system of low-interest loans to the government, then it would be a profit center, just as a bank pays depositors a lower rate of interest than it charges borrowers, to generate a profit. But if it were a profit center, it wouldn't be a pyramid scheme: it would be self-financing.

American Hawk's analysis is, of course, entirely beside the point. Social Security exists because the American people insist on it. We are not willing to allow people to become destitute at the end of their working lives because their pensions and investments fail for whatever reason. So we require all workers to pay into a system that assures a retirement income no matter what. And the system has been calibrated so that in all probability it can keep on running without changing tax rates or benefit levels for the next 500 years. That is hardly a pyramid scheme.

Hold on here...the bill which caused this was passed long before the modernization was "decided back in March" (2/8/2006: Became Public Law No: 109-171.) And the law is called the "Deficit Reduction Act of 2005". This is still very fishy.

However, he supports a program of involuntary loans into a pyramid scheme. He's inconsistent.
Posted by: American Hawk on August 29, 2006 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK

It's not involuntary.
One could always choose to run for congress, and get their sweet Pension, and be exempt from Social Security contribution.

Or, one could choose to become a scion of wealth, and earn all one's money from investments, thus skirting the Social Security contributions as well. If one's daddy got one a "consulting" job at some posh Conservative Think Tank (TM), then one would presumably have to pay SS, but only on the first $88K, right, which is chump change.

See? It's not "involuntary" - just like Drug Tests in the work place aren't involuntary, because one can always choose to go work somewhere else.

Are you channeling Gilda Radner's Emily Litella character, Kevin?

bobinnv: On the other hand, it's too bad, like with so many otther BushBashers, he is so quick to lash out without bothering to actually understand what it is he is so upset about.

Damn straight. That kind of underinformed lashing out could lead to really bad stuff, like invading countries that didn't attack us, and shit like that.

kck >"...When companies or agencies announce outages or business stoppage due to system changes you know those people are either lying or need to be replaced."

Both

These sort of transitions were once labeled "Resume Transitions" because everyone involved would have their resumes in circulation while the transition took place so they would have a job to jump to when the roof fell in (the new system failed to function properly & brough unwanted atttention to the MIS department, heads began to roll etc)

This is just more signs of ReThuglican ignorance

"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact....Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - newshog@gmail.com

This sounds disturbingly plausible.

While it is perhaps remotely (and disturbingly) plausible that HHS is incompetent enough to think that the best way to transition to a new fiscal system is to shut down entirely right before the end of a fiscal year rather than starting using it with transactions for a new fiscal year, its a lot more plausible that its political manipulation.

And even moreso given the facts MLE notes.

But even without that, first, a new system should be tested while an old system is online, and the cut-over should be planned to be essentially seemless from an external perspective (disruptions can and do happen, but when they do, it should be because something went horribly wrong, not because of planning to fail), and there is almost no excuse other than an external mandate from a higher authority (either ill-considered, or with a different fiscal year) to implement a new fiscal system mid-year rather than to start handling data with a new system with a new fiscal year. And that single exceptional excuse simply doesn't apply to HHS.

Certainly a private company would never do this. However, government organizations might work differently and have different priorities.

Well, yes, that does explain it, but the relevant "different priorities" of government that would explain this have to do with manipulating numbers in an election year.

There really isn't any other plausible priority that justifies this. (Extreme incompetence is a plausible explanation, as well, but isn't a "priority".)

Kevin--

I'd say there is probably a little of column A and a little of column B. That is to say, it isn't at all unusual for government agencies to do this sort of thing. But that doesn't mean there ISN'T an absurd slight-of-hand at work, either, or that it is a good way of running an agency.

This kind of thing is very common: agencies usually freeze hiring during certain periods, even when qualified candidates show up. This is harmful in the long run, but it looks good on paper, because you don't want to go over your fiscal year budget.

Budgets are approved on a yearly basis, even when this doesn't make sense. Agencies have every incentive to pass costs off into the future.

"For the IT professionals: Have you ever heard of such a thing? A large enterprise shuts down their old system, then 2 weeks later turns on their new system?"

No, never. This is always done parallel, you start the new system while the old one is still running, and you arange it that all new entires from that date will go into the new system. If you run into problems, you always can switch back. The method described here is gambling, this isn't a professional approach. Who is developing this system for HHS, are there any statements from the responsible company?

The reason is plausible. The decision to do it at the close of the fiscal year is what's interesting. Doing the cutover right AFTER the close would make more sense. If the normal pay date is the end of the month, make the payments, cut over, and strive to meet the end of month commitment.

But, as Kevin says, this is standard practice in the private sector--even among little one or two man operations, or even among regular old individuals. In the case of individuals, the motivation for shifting expenses to year 1 and income to year 2 is to minimize taxes. For businesses, well, pretty much the same thing. Good years, you want the expenses all paid out. Bad years, you want to shift the expenses.

Our government, however, should not work that way. It does, ime, at all levels. Budgets get spent on non-essential items in the last month of the financial year. The fact that the practice is widespread doesn't make it right at any level.

"The reason is plausible."

Jay, do you have any insight into how IT projects like this one are planned and executed? I worked in a mayor year 2000 program, which IBM managed for a german bank with hundreds of subsidiaries. Friends and relatives work or worked for banks, insurances, health insurance companies, computer manufacturers, the software business, the industry and a mayor internet company. Furthermore, I kept up to date on news from the IT world. I never heard of a system switch in a mayor business where the old system was shut down while the new one wasn't already up. No real professional would risk his job in such a gamble. You always look to have a backup position. And even though I didn't count the incidences, I would say, in about 20% of the projects it's the carreer saver to be able to switch back to the working sytem, even if only temporarily.

Gray,

I could tell you some stories.....

Major Fortune 500 firm. Cut over their payroll system on the first of the calendar year. Their test criterion? Did the top 100 checks calculate correctly.

Disturbingly plausible, just like it was a plausible coincidence that the Enron 401k was shut down for a month at the exact time that the stock fell through the floor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Major Fortune 500 firm. Cut over their payroll system on the first of the calendar year. Their test criterion? Did the top 100 checks calculate correctly."

O.M.G.
I almost can't believe this. Are they still in business?
K, maybe it's a cultural difference. What I wanted to say is, no GERMAN IT professional would handle a system switch that way...

Anyone familiar with the Medicare computer systems will immediately point out that they are still mostly on IBM 360's running COBOL - and that's the COBOL designed before structured programming in the late 60's and early 70's. Can you say "Spaghetti Code?"

This with the associated Social Security system was the largest single computer system in the world in the 80's, and they have been trying to update both since then. As has the IRS who installed their system in 1965 and didn't get it working right until 1975.

People may have noticed that the IRS has failed either three or four times since then as they contracted for a replacement or better system. The contractors simply don't recognize the kinds of problems juat the size of those systems permit.

The winning bidder for the IRS has always underbid mostly out of ignorance. After about $100 million gets spent, the contract is cancelled. The size of the overall system, the massive amounts of input and output and the requirement for reliability all compete with each other for top priority, and the tolerences are quite tight. Plus, when you are a year into the revision, Congress changes the law and the requirements have to be totally reviewed.

If Medicare has gotten all the ducks in a row to where shutting the existing system down for a mere nine days will actually get a new system on line ~and working~ they have performed a minor miracle. The timing (end of the fiscal year) suggests to me that they got Congress to refrain from changing anything significant for six months or so, and what changes Congress mandated before that were all for the new fiscal year.

If it works, maybe they can show the IRS how to do it.

Then they may start on the basic Social Security system. God Forbid!

The very scale of the overall system makes this a change more complex than the attempt to land on the moon.

"IBM 360's running COBOL"

I rememember they brought back retired COBOL coders in '99 to ensure that those fossil programs were checked on year 2000 issues and updated, if necessary...

But, Rick, after these catastrophic experiences, is it plausible that they shut down the old system before powering up the new one? Hard to believe...

"IBM 360's"

Btw, I don't think they still run the software on these machines. Afaik IBM has a migration path to run 360 programs on virtual machines on modern hardware...

I'm Supposed To Believe That...?

I’m supposed to believe that the man who sat in a classroom reading a kids’ book for seven minutes AFTER he was told the country was under attack, who was warned repeatedly about imminent threats against the country and chose to ignore them, who has traipsed off on vacation every time there is a domestic or international disaster, is a decisive man-of-action with the fortitude to run a nation.

I am supposed to believe that God himself chooses my nation’s leaders and that, in His infinite wisdom, he chose a lying, thieving, self-absorbed, pro-torture, pro-war, lazy frat-boy jerk like George W. Bush.

I am supposed to believe that the same man who used family money and influence to duck military duty, who has failed at every business venture he ever tried, who never did an honest day’s work or accomplished anything of value in his entire life, is fit to be Commander-in-Chief.

I am supposed to believe that a man who ignores the Constitution he swore to uphold, breaks the law with abandon, repeatedly lied about the reasons for going to war, its cost, its duration, and even its goals, is honest and trustworthy.

I am supposed to believe that the escalating violence, chaos and deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan are a sign of progress.

I am supposed to believe that a man who, by his own admission, does not read newspapers, who only meets with and listens to ‘yes’ men, who refuses to speak before any group that is not hand-picked from his staunchest supporters, is in touch with the realities of the world.

I am supposed to believe that sending US soldiers into combat without proper equipment or a viable military strategy, while decreasing their pensions and their benefits, is a patriotic display of supporting the troops.

I am supposed to believe that gutting the funding of social programs aimed at assisting the poor, the sick, the hungry and the homeless is the outcome of good Christians being in office, and that torturing, maiming and killing innocent civilians is “doing the Lord’s work”.

Oh, don’t go anywhere, because I haven’t even gotten started yet …

I am supposed to believe that a president who acts like an ill-mannered, oafish, mindless buffoon in public, both at home and in international settings, and a vice president who tells a colleague to go f*ck himself in the course of conducting the country’s business, are both deserving of respect.

I am supposed to believe that spying on US citizens, quashing free speech, and suspending laws that govern detention and confinement without just cause is preserving the tenets of democracy.

I am supposed to believe that alienating our allies, isolating ourselves from the world, refusing to use diplomacy instead of aggression, and causing people around the globe to hate us is the best way to protect my country from violent attack.

I am supposed to believe that no-bid contracts awarded to companies owned by members of this Administration, its families and its cronies is pure coincidence, and that secret meetings resulting in policies that enrich their supporters to the detriment of hard-working Americans is good and honest government.

Hold on, because there’s MORE of this crap ...

I am supposed to believe that outsourcing American jobs, under-funding our educational system, and plunging the country deeper into debt with every passing day will lead to a stronger, more competitive nation in the years to come.

I am supposed to believe that the same people who left NOLA to drown, who refuse to secure our borders, who refuse to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, and who initiate policies that incite anger and violence the world over are protecting my country from harm.

I am supposed to believe that an Administration whose policies make basic medical care and life-saving drugs unaffordable for millions of Americans is pro-life.

I am supposed to believe that elected representatives who voted for the Bankruptcy Bill, tax breaks for wealthy individuals, and tax subsidies for multi-billion dollar corporations are looking out for their constituents.

Along with all of the above, I am also supposed to believe that selling authority over our ports to foreign nations, selling our national lands to private interests, and selling our children’s future by burdening them with debt for decades to come is in the best interests of our country.

Drum roll, please -- here's the BIG FINALE ...

I am supposed to believe it is safe to board an airplane with a hold full of uninspected cargo as long as no passengers are in possession of baby formula, that a group of men in Britain were about to take down ten airliners without tickets or passports, that seven men in Miami were going to blow up buildings in cities they didn’t have the money to get to, that one lone guy in New York was going to take down the Brooklyn Bridge with a blow-torch, that if we leave Iraq every terrorist in the world is going to come to the US and fight us in the malls and the supermarkets, that the ‘Liberal media’ simply forgets to cover the lies, cover-ups and corruption of this Administration and its party members, that voting for a Democrat in Connecticut sends shockwaves of unbridled encouragement throughout the Muslim world, that a bunch of PNAC members whose predictions have been proven totally wrong in every instance should be dictating policy to my government, that our military isn’t stretched too thin and they are just recalling those who have already fulfilled their duty because they’ve got too much time on their hands, and that George W. Bush spends his summers reading CAMUS and SHAKESPEARE.

Oh, if only I were GULLIBLE, ILL-INFORMED, EASILY LED and TOTALLY STUPID – what a FINE Bush supporter I would have made!

O.M.G.
I almost can't believe this. Are they still in business?

Yes. There were some scandals in other areas, but, yes, still operating fine. I should note that the company's in the upper quartile of the 500, and quite well known.

The following year was a nightmare for the benefits staff.

There was a senior management decision to "cut over and bleed" rather than miss the date.

I do agree, though, this is not a best practice. But I think you underestimate how frequently management overrides sound IT decision-making and planning. And, on the flip-side, how risk averse IT management can lose credibility over time when insisting on expensive, drawn-out implementations that never seem to happen.

In this case, it's entirely plausible to me that the political appointees would use this system cutover to justify moving money from one fiscal to another.

And, as I said, you see this all the time. One of my most nightmarish customer experiences was a small manufacturer (30 million in revenue, or so) whose inventory system we'd designed. Decemeber was the time of both the physical inventory, of the bank confirming the accuracy of the reported real time inventory, and the desire to push as much product out the door before 12/31. So we've accountants trying to count goods that aren't supposed to be moving. Sales department sneaking (literally) goods out onto trucks without getting scanned. And the chief executive pretending he didn't know what was happening.

Gray, I doubt that they are waiting until nine days before the end of the FY to start up the new system. I'd of had the the new system going for a couple of months, with feedback to the people who input data to make sure it was working.

Then I'd bet they have planned for a two-day switch-over, and were able to convince the political masters that nine days were needed. That would give time to solve the unexpected glitches. Frankly the very size of this system and the number of transactions handled daily makes this really experimental. You plan for everything you can forsee, then recognize that the environment is so unusual that no one can foresee everything and build in some slack.

It seems to me that doing it at the end of the FY also permits a few days into the new year if things really go south on them.

When I worked for Social Security in the 70's I had a claims manual that was a dozen three-inch binders and I could't keep up with the daily changes to the binders. Medicare today is nearly as bad. The number of transactions is massive, the number of changes in the laws and regulations is worse, and the number of exceptions is unknown. After this changeover, there will be errors. Want to write an article about how inefficient the government is? Look for the errors that occur in the new FY if everything works. Even most systems people don't believe how really complex this changeover will be.

The Medicare system is large enough that the basic rules of what is really important change. And the IRS and Social Security systems are even larger. I'll be surprised and delighted if they get it even close to right.

I'm not buying it.

'nonplussed' posted:

"Baloney! The end of the fiscal year is the absolute worst time to swap out a financial system."

Agreed.

The best time would likely be just before Christmas and through to New Years.

More Rovian spin.
.

this is bullshit. it is axiomatic for anyone with brains and experience (granted, two things that DO rule our republican involvement) that you do not plan 2 disrupptions at the same time: in this case, end of year closeout/new year startup, AND a new financial system. Yea it was planned alright.
.

I think you should apologize, Kevin.

Go back are re-read the sneering attack of your first post on this issue. "These guys are puerile" etc etc etc.

It shows what puny man you are that you don't apologize, you "retract your earlier outrage."

I was working for Social Security during the 70's when Congress eliminated three welfare programs (Aid to the Aged, Aid to the Totally Disabled, and Aid to the Blind.) and turned them over to Social Security to turn into what is now known as Supplemental Security Income. Congress gave the Social Security Administration six months to gether the information of benefits actually being paid (from County level in most states) recompute the benefits and pay the first checks in January (1974? 1975? I forget which.) We had no computer system in place and had to create it.

We paid the first benefits in January, and had a way to add new people. The system had no procedure to change a benefit (Too much? Too Little? Change in circumstances?) until sometime the next Summer. We are talking about paying out Billions of dollars each month in relatively small amounts. Address changes alone are a massive program subroutine.

Yes, as someone above pointed out IBM provided more modern hardware to run the 360 programs. Of course, no one else was still running 360 programs in unstructured COBOL, so it may have been faster, but there was no outside experience to learn from.

My mother worked for IRS from 1962 until the late 70's. IRS started their computerized system on 360's in unstructured COBOL in 1965 and it didn't work correctly until 1975. Spaghetti code, of course. They depend on it, and they depend on it to be correct. Three or four efforts to replace it, and they haven't succeeded. Debugging spaghetti code is a bitch. New hardware won't run it with the new modes of input and output. Something about totally different architectures.

If you tried to run the old code in the new architectures, the problems of security are literally unimaginable. But someone outside the system would figure it out and gather the information. Medicare - IRS - Social Security? Tell me - which can create a massive system with unknown security holes all through it?

How long would it take to recreate a legacy spaghetti code COBOL system that now has input and output access all over the nation with reliability of the program of 99.99% accuracy with no security holes?

Hell, how many people are still capable if converting a legacy code unstructured COBOL code system to a modern system?

If Medicare can make the shift to a new system with a shutdown of only nine days, I will be really, really surprised. Double that time and you will still be seeing a miracle in programming and program management.

I'm not a systems guy but looking at the HHS website, I see nothing indicating why this system would or should be brought on line at the end of the FY.

From the website it sounds like the project is customization of Oracle (U.S. Federal) Financials and Oracle Projects. Can anyone verify how these products are typically implemented?

http://www.hhs.gov/ufms/

None of the details though change the fact that the end of the FY is the worst time to do this. I don't know what reporting requirements Congress imposes, but there is no way a publicly traded company would try to implement a major system switch that required shutting down the general ledger for nine days. That's insane. It is the one time of year you could implement a shut down and have it impact the bottom line. And they decided to do this only 5 months ago even though the project is four years old.

Nothing I have read makes this decision less fishy.

Kevin Drum has lost his credibility. Thousands of Plame/Rove posts, a bunch of Conspiracy Theory posts after Cheney's hunting accident, breathless predictions about dozens of Abramoff/Bush White House pictures that will be released any day (NOT), and hundreds of pathetic posts about how Bush/Cheney/Halliburton are cynically lining their pockets at the very time they are wrecking the country.

Kevin Drum is The Boy Who Cried Hitler.

(Can anybody point me to readership logs? I have a hunch Kevin Drum is slipping WAY behind the competition.)

no one EVER touches a financial system at the end of a cycle. You pick the quietest time of activity to mess with anything, and you have a fool-proof backout plan before you touch anything.
.

Hmm, 64 hits for '"Department of Health and Human Service" september' in google news search and none covering this mayor event? 37 for 'hhs september' and the same negative result? Isn't this a bit strange, this total lack of interest by the media? Or does the Bush administration want to keep this milestone in modernizing HHS secret?

免费铃声下载 手机铃声免费下载 mp3铃声 免费手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 三星手机铃声 三星铃声 诺基亚铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 移动铃声下载 nokia铃声 波导手机铃声 手机游戏免费下载 免费手机游戏 手机小游戏 诺基亚手机游戏 三星手机游戏下载 nokia手机游戏 摩托罗拉手机游戏 手机小电影 mp4手机电影下载 手机看电影 免费手机电影 手机视频下载 nec手机铃声 联想手机铃声 摩托罗拉铃声 amr铃声 手机彩铃下载 移动彩铃 免费彩铃 炫铃 移动炫铃 手机酷铃 手机电影 夏新手机铃声 联通铃声下载 联通手机铃声 联通彩铃下载 联通炫铃下载 特效铃声 midi铃声 和弦铃声 搞笑铃声 原唱铃声 mid铃声 cect手机铃声 和炫和旋铃声 海尔手机铃声 索爱手机铃声 飞利浦手机铃声 康佳手机铃声 真人真唱铃声 mmf铃声下载 lg手机铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 短信铃声 来电铃声 西门子铃声 小灵通铃声下载 tcl手机铃声 手机图片 手机铃音 手机动画 图铃下载 手机游戏 手机炫铃下载 手机彩信 手机铃声图片 免费黄色电影 最新电影 成人性爱电影 免费小电影 免费性电影 免费成人电影 免费电影在线观看 宽带电影 经典电影 恐怖电影 免费影片 免费影院 最新大片 十八电影网 美女写真 免费电影下载 两性生活 性教育片 两性知识 性爱图片 激情电影 免费电影下载 免费在线电影 看免费电影 免费电影网站 韩国电影 人体艺术 美女图片 美女走光 美腿图片 三级片 强奸电影 美女祼体图片 美女自拍 黄色电影下载 免费色情电影 激情图片 激情小电影 性感美女图片 漂亮妹妹图片 做爱图片 美少女图片 日本av女优 情色电影 同志电影 激情视频下载 明星露点图片 写真电影 阴部图片 乳房图片 明星裸照 性爱视频 偷拍图片 美眉图片 泳装美女 美女内裤 性爱贴图 情趣内衣图片 性生活图片 作爱图片 艳情小说 性交姿势 做爱电影 性福联盟 人体摄影 明星裸照 裸女图片 黄色小说 成人小说 乱伦小说 强暴电影 轮奸视频 性虐待电影 迷奸图片 妓女日记 写真集 全裸美女 淫荡小说 淫乱小说 淫书 舒淇写真 美女脱衣图片 裸体女人图片 人体写真 女性手淫电影 美女波霸 美女淫水 阴户阴道阴毛屁股 美女图库 口交肛交图片

Kevin, your source has it wrong... from the CMS press release:

In essence, no payments on claims will be made from September 22-30, 2006. Providers need to be aware of these payment delays, which are mandated by section 5203 of the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2006.

Kevin Drum has lost his credibility.
Posted by: Down goes Frazier on August 29, 2006 at 9:43 PM | PERMALINK

. . . yet, still ranks far above DGF in that department.

"disturbingly" is right. This is a major government accounting system, right? But the excuse is that a system changeover will cause a major accounting error? This is a badly run government agency. There are ways to have accomplished this software upgrade without the accounting error. The source who said "unavoidable unless we wanted to keep the old financial systems forever," is either a liar or unqualified to comment on this subject.

Garrison Keilor:

I think we must bite the bullet and say no more healthcare for card-carrying Republicans. It just doesn't make sense to invest in longevity for people who don't believe in the future. Let them try faith-based medicine, let them pray for their arteries to be reamed and their hips to be restored, and leave science to the rest of us.

Cutting out healthcare for one-third of the population -- the folks with Bush-Cheney bumper stickers, who still believe the man is doing a heckuva job -- will save enough money to pay off the national debt, not a bad legacy for Republicans. As Scrooge said, let them die and reduce the surplus population. In return, we can offer them a reduction in the estate tax. All in favor, blow your nose.

The Conservative Deflator:

If you're going to rant, your ranting should approximate reality. And yours does.

Garrison Keilor: I wonder if his voice would still lull me to sleep when he's being shrill.

Have doctors considered the possibility of all going on vacation simultaneously. They could hold a a fiscalyearapalooza in a tropical country with universal healthcare.

"Consider my outrage back in force. These guys are idiots."

Think its bad now, wait until your nirvana of universal coverage comes about, and ALL the funding will be subject to this kind of political fun and games.

lu, consider throwing the cheating, lieing bums out, elect some resposible folks. Just because the R's are corrupt, it does not mean government is.

I don't know if anyone else already commented on this observation, but Kevin's initial reaction is a perfect example of the moderate mind in action: Give the scumbuckets and their "plausible excuses" the benefit of the doubt, then realize in horror much later that you were a rube whose trusting nature was taken advantage of.

Skeptical is the only way to go with these bastards. Ever.

--
HRlaughed

Holbrooke is a guy with a ton of credibility. When he says that diplomacy has to be backed up by a credible threat of force, he obviously means it: he recommended military action twice in the Balkans during the 90s. At the same time, when he says it should be a last resort, he obviously means that too: he devoted uncounted thousands of hours to serious, toughminded diplomacy during the same perio