“High findings,” the highest level of identified security vulnerabilities, are still being found in HealthCare.gov, according to the top security expert at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
“The full context of MITRE’s assessment, which the Department had in its possession prior to the October 1 launch date, shows that CMS and HHS knew that HealthCare.gov was vulnerable yet your statements have not given the American people a fair and accurate assessment of known risks,” Issa writes.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee today released a new staff report on the Obama Administration’s Navigator and Assister program in conjunction with today’s field hearing in Dallas, Texas.
“MITRE’s decision is a rejection of efforts by the White House to obstruct oversight,” Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said. “The American people deserve an honest assessment of decisions by the Administration to proceed with the October 1 launch of HealthCare.gov despite warnings about security vulnerabilities. When we have released information on sensitive topics, we have exercised great care to ensure that there are not unintended consequences. Most often, these releases shed light on false and misleading public statements, whether they are made by the Administration or others. In reviewing the documents lawfully provided by MITRE, we intend to consult carefully with non-conflicted experts to ensure no information is released that could further jeopardize the website’s security.”
“While the President and other allies of the Affordable Care Act continue to propagate their case for enrollment, they have done too little to address broken promises and serious concerns about the flawed navigator program and inadequate consumer privacy provisions,” said Chairman Issa. “This hearing, as part of a series being held across the country, will help fill this void of accountability.”
“Americans should be disturbed that this Administration is trying to stop government contractors from providing Congress with documents related to the decision to launch HealthCare.gov while known and serious security vulnerabilities were and still may be present. CCSi’s analysis of the law is correct and its decision to comply protects its executives, investors, and customers from the risk of criminal prosecution for contempt of Congress.
“Federal employees will continue to enjoy retirement benefits more generous than the vast majority of Americans. No current federal employee will be affected by this legislation, but new employees will be asked to contribute more to secure long-term funding of these benefits. While the budget agreement does not solve our spending problem, the changes it makes to federal retirement will build over time and result in billions and billions of dollars of real savings for the American people.”
“As technology advances, the Canadian people are changing the way they use paper mail. Canada Post has recognized this reality and responded to it. The Canadian government is supportive of its decision to modernize,” said Chairman Issa. “The American people have also changed the way they use paper mail and the cash-strapped United States Postal Service must respond accordingly. Likewise, Congress and the Administration need to grant USPS the flexibility to modernize its mail delivery and eliminate unnecessary costs.”
“The Department’s hostility toward questions from Congress and the media about the implementation of ObamaCare is well known,” Chairman Issa writes. “The Department’s most recent effort to stonewall, however, has morphed from mere obstinacy into criminal obstruction of a congressional investigation.”
“The Administration tries to sugarcoat the fact that it lost billions of taxpayer dollars in the GM bailout, but Secretary Lew’s praise for President Obama’s leadership ignores the dangerous precedent this sets for the future. President Obama’s extraordinary intervention in GM means that big corporations who make bad decisions can turn to Uncle Sam for a huge injection of taxpayer cash. Big corporations can apparently avoid the transparent judicial processes where all stakeholders have rights, just as long as they are willing to let government bureaucrats pick winners and losers in closed door meetings.”