Health care deadlines loom

Area agencies offer help navigating marketplaces
Tom Jackson
Dec 14, 2013


If you want to buy health insurance using one of the new health insurance marketplaces set up by President Obama’s new health care plan, there are several deadlines to keep in mind.

Dec. 23 is the deadline to buy insurance if you want it to go into effect on Jan. 1, said Brad Clark, navigator project director for the Neighborhood Health Association in Toledo.

If you miss that deadline, there’s still plenty of time to buy health insurance, Clark said; open enrollment continues through the end of March.

But keep in mind people must buy insurance before the 15th of the month if they want it to take effect on the first of the next month. So people who enroll on Jan. 14 will get their insurance beginning Feb. 1, but people who enroll Jan. 16 will have to wait until March, Clark said.

Several state organizations are offering “navigators,” people who will help consumers go through their options. Family Health Services of Erie County, located at the south campus of Firelands Regional Medical Center, has an office for a navigator provided by Clark’s group.

That Sandusky navigator, Maria Carrion, also can help people enroll in Medicaid.

Potential customers can also try, the health insurance marketplace website. It has improved since its much-criticized launch, said Clark and Wilson Forney, the executive director of Family Health Services of Erie County.

“Walk into the marketplace and take it one click at a time,” Forney said. “It’s not as bad as the general outcry has been”

Some people buying health insurance from will qualify for federal subsidies to help them pay for it.

A subsidy calculator is available at the Kaiser Family Foundation website, subsidy-calculator, Clark said.

Need help?
• Several Sandusky agencies will help people trying to buy insurance in the new Obama Care health marketplace.
• To reach the navigator at Family Health Services of Erie County, call 419-557-7072.
• To get the navigator offered through the Erie County Health Department, call 419-208-5178.
• To reach a navigator from Ohio’s food banks, call 1-800-648-1176 and press one for Affordable Care Act information.
• See also



Re: "It's not as bad as the general outcry has been."

Oh, it really WAS that bad. And now that it's "working" (assuming you get there at a non-busy time and can access it), you still can't actually buy insurance there because the payment function doesn't work. And insurance companies say that the vast majority of applications they've received contain bad data, not enough data, or aren't received at all. My take? It's STILL that bad. And it's a disservice to anybody who thinks they must use for ANYthing to pretend otherwise.

The Big Dog's back

Being the rush clone that you are, I would expect nothing different from you.

Darwin's choice

Well, jackwagon, when are you going to realize how foolish you actually are?



Okay, have at it, Big Dog. But calling me names doesn't change the facts.

The truth of the matter is (as reported by MOST mainstream media outlets, including your much beloved CNN) is that insurance companies often aren't getting the paperwork properly or at all. The truth is that was shut down AGAIN last night (for "maintenance"). The truth is that there's STILL virtually no security for personal data entered on the sute (again, this has been widely reported). The only amusing aspect of all of this has been the fake success stories touted by the White House. Apparently, desperate times call for desperately ridiculous measures!

Meanwhile, go ahead and keep calling me a Rush Clone. I much prefer it to the OTHER "R" word best used to describe those progressives who think that deny, deny, deny is actually an answer or a solution when problems are brought to their attention!

The New World Czar

When you have to recruit celebrities to tell all "how cool it is to sign up", you know it's going real bad. The revenue from the younger generation that was supposed to sign up (that isn't BTW) was supposed to fund the elderly. This is going to continually snowball into a bigger disaster and then collapse under its own weight...SORT OF LIKE A PONZI SCHEME.


True. And you know what's even worse? As bad as the Website is, it has nothing to do with just how bad Obamacare itself is! You hit the nail on the head when you said problems would escalate and it would eventually collapse under its own weight. That might be good news, except that there will be catastrophic damage done to both the healthcare system and the economy on the way down.


Sham, what is so BAD about Obamacare? Enlighten me!


Re: "what (snip)

And what do you care, you get your ins. free through Medicaid.



The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Sam may have her own reasons, I will share mine with you:

1. Method of passage.
A - Who actually read all approximately 3,000 pages and understood (let alone cared about) this bill that voted for it?
B - Why was it rushed through Congress especially on what would become known as the "Lie of the Year"?
C - What happened in incidents like Dennis Kucinich's private ride on Air Force One that changed his mind to vote for it when he was opposed? The Cornhusker Kickback? All these little deals and closed-door meetings.
D - In order to only need one-party support it was injected into a gutted spending bill (similar to how viruses reproduce) and passed a "budget". Why all the partisan, parliamentary trickery for something that was so great?

2. Over-extension of our government.
A - Here we have the Federal government mandating, compelling under financial penalty (tax? who knows?!) private citizens to enter into private contracts with private businesses. Or else. Does this not at all seem like an infringement on private property rights?
B - The Federal government, which is supposed to be beholden to the states, is now compelling the states with requirements and others aspects of this law to perform tasks for the Federal government.
C - Weren't we promised among other things that this would be no worse than budget-neutral? That this law would cost less than a trillion dollars over ten years? Meanwhile the website alone is nearing that figure after only three. Ah, what's another promise broken?
D - This law empowers a group of remote, unknowable people who don't know nor care about you to make decisions about what is best for you on a deeply personal level. Whether it be your private life or your business, instead we have an esoteric enclave of bureaucrats and politicians hundreds if not thousands of miles away from you (with whom you can never hope to communicate) deciding what you are allowed to have in terms of private contracts, medical treatments, or if you are a doctor, how much you will be allowed to make.
E - How many people who voted for this actually sold insurance for a living? How many people who voted for this actually have/had small businesses and aren't million/billionaires who have always either been on the public dole or had their expenses paid for by a lifestyle we can only dream of living?

3. Implementation
A. Website. Enough said.
B. Security. See above. You are giving deeply private personal and financial information to an insecure, incomplete site manned by navigators and others who, unlike licensed insurance agents, have little to no background checks, licensure, or professional training. And if you don't force yourself into participating on time despite the myriad flaws (and if you weren't lucky enough to earn a custom exemption by the President?)...PENALTY TIME! That's right, for being a horrible, terrorist-American and not being compelled into a horrible system you will be punished. It's only fair.
C. Participation. Why aren't more members of Congress bragging that they were the first ones to sign up (and their staff) into these "markets"? Why hasn't the President himself signed up yet, quite possibly giving us the biggest boost of confidence that our own President is willing to risk his info in this system? Why are there exceptions for staff members and groups? Oops, "loopholes".
D. Ever-changing regulations unlawfully made by the Executive branch and not the Legislative. Who gave the President authority to constantly tweak a tax law after it has been passed? Selective enforcement? Favoritism? Whim of the day? Appeasement? How can anyone be expected to plan around such a fundamentally (flawed) game-changing law if it is always being changed?

So there you have it. I am sure there are more things that I have forgotten to mention. There is more bad than good in this law no matter how well-intentioned it was. Is there good? Some. But not nearly enough to cover up the ripe smell coming from the (what are we up to now, 30,000 pages of specifics on a 3,000 page?) other 99% of the tax law. I guess in this case the 1% is actually good?


The bill was passed like all bills and held up by SCOTUS! A lie is any deception of the truth when stated. How was he to know how insurance companies would respond? Bills like this have been passed this way for decades yet all of a sudden we hold this President and Congress to a different standard. Why? Why do you have a problem with requiring people to get healthcare? What ever happened to "personal responsibility"? Hero, for an intelligent man most of your post seems nit picky. Your only real complaint should be how the law effects you in a negative way. Neither of us have ANY control how things are done in Congress so why worry about something you can't change? No law is perfect and most need some tweaking but why the constant hating? I just don't get it! I am so tired of hearing why didn't the President sign up for it or why didn't he kill bin Laden himself or why didn't he go deep sea diving and plug the BP oil spill leak himself, or why didn't he send drones into Benghazi and on and on and on. It never stops and that is why the haters of this law and this President have lost all credibility. Any one can spend their time focusing on all the things about the law they don't like but have no problem with their kids staying on their insurance or knowing that their sick child won't max out or be denied coverage based on a pre existing condition. Everyone complains about all the unnecessary ER visits and this law attempts to address that. Americans are so smart but have an issue when it comes to reading anything longer than a text message. Has your business been effected in a negative way? Do you even have 50 employees? The law is not going away so the only REAL option is to help make it work. I also don't get why it was okay when it was a Republican idea and was implemented by a Republican Governor but now it has been compared to slavery. BTW, it is working great in Mass. Give the law a chance!


Re: "How was he to know how insurance companies would respond?"

"I was not informed directly that the website would not be working the way it was supposed to. Had I been informed, I wouldn't be going out saying, 'Boy, this is going to be great,'"

"I'm accused of a lot of things, but I don't think I'm stupid enough to go around saying this is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity a week before the website opened if I thought it wasn't going to work."

- Pres. Obama

Yea, incompetents tend to get blindsighted a lot. :)


Re: "The law is not going away so the only REAL option is to help make it work."

The business model is poor and the execution is even worse.

It ain't gonna work as advertised, no matter how many billions of dollars ya throw at it.


"A lie is any deception of the truth when stated."
"The White House argued on Friday that the individual mandate at the heart of Obamacare is a penalty, not a tax."
"The mandate has been upheld as a tax, with Chief Justice John Roberts, a Bush appointee, joining the liberal wing of the court to save the law."
It is fun to watch the liberals spin stuff, Even they get confused with all the lies and deceptions going on. The admin knew about the problems yet went on anyways knowing there were supporters who would throw themselves willingly under the bus to defend the admin.
It is either they knew or lied about it or they did not know and are clueless about what they signed into being.Take your pick, Either way they need removed from office and switched out with non-liars and knowledgeable people.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

That is just the kind of passive "well, it can't be helped" that allows the little things to become the big things. The bridge of soft tyranny. But I will address your questions because it is only fair!

1. This bill was NOT passed like all bills. It was inserted into a gutted "budget" item floated by the House to the Senate so that it could be snuck through with only a simple majority instead of the traditional 2/3s. This, I presume, is one reason why this was (imho wrongly) called a "tax" by the Supreme Court's majority. You are correct that this tactic has been done before. It is wrong. Unless you and I call out these people on this, it will only continue and the sly sneaking becomes the standard because we passively sit by going "what can we do?" while our thumbs are erstwhile indisposed.

2. My problem is requiring people to get healthcare is because they are REQUIRED to get healthcare. This is not a function of government and to have a public entity punishing you for NOT entering into a PRIVATE contract with a PRIVATE business as a PRIVATE citizen...what do you see there? What's next? What else will we be REQUIRED to do? To buy? To say? If being REQUIRED to get healthcare is so important why isn't our government going door to door (or through agencies) and requiring everyone who gets one benefit to get them all? It's for their own good, after all. Since our health is an enforceable requirement why don't we all have babysitters making sure we eat broccoli and exercising an hour a day? If we don't? We owe a tax because we failed the government's expectation of us.

"Permission to pee, government?"
"Permission to pee there, citizen."

3. Again your resigning of "what can we do" about Congress is disappointing. Just let them pass whatever they want because they know better than you, do they? Because they are perfect angels, are they? You are allowing them with that attitude to do whatever they feel they can and toss you the results saying "IT'S YOUR PROBLEM NOW SUCKER! HAHAHA!"

4. Why the constant hating? This isn't an adjustment to something already around. This isn't something like "do we fund X or Y?". This fundamentally impacts EVERY-SINGLE-PERSON, their very lives, and it is supposed to be a hands off, passive acceptance of whatever ONE PARTY thinks is right for three hundred and ten plus million people? This is YOUR life. This is MY life. These are the lives of your current and my future children! So what's wrong with a few flaws in something that, literally, peoples' lives depend on? What's a glitch here and there, eh? What's wrong with passing thousands-pages long omnibus bills that can't hope to address the minutae of a formerly private contract between millions of individuals and a great amount of companies?

5. I never expected the President to kill Osama himself. I never expected him to plug the oil spill himself. He doesn't have the skill to do either let alone the fact it is dangerous work requiring specialized training. But to use a website to sign up for the law he himself is betting his entire legacy on? That, supposedly, requires no risk nor skill since it is mandated under penalty that every American use this service. Why doesn't he want his and his family memebers' private health and financial info in this database? Wouldn't it do much to assuage the fears "nitpickers" like me have if he risks his own info on this incomplete, insecure site he is benevolently forcing everyone else to use? That is something he is capable of doing. Comparing it to your other examples is ridiculous and an expectation I never would have of him.

6. The two minor examples you provide of a rather bipartisanly-uncontested part of the law don't cover up the rest of the massive flaws, risks, and seals that it breaks. Why couldn't those two, small, innocuous things have been passed in separate bills? That way they aren't at risk? Instead, everyone is being held hostage over two things that aren't even the main arguments against this tax? But no, it had to be all or nothing and if someone doesn't like at least ONE thing about the bill we apparently care not a shred about humanity. Insulting, whether you meant it or not, that is how it is taken. I don't expect you to listen to conservative outlets, but as someone who does (and with my own grain of salt at that) I assure you the two examples you provided are NOT a part of their laments/complaints/nitpicking. Perhaps a bit about the preexisting condition, but the reference is in how foolish it is for politicians to tell you that by allowing such a thing that premiums will go down. The commentators aren't even necessarily against the conditions being a disqualification.

7. Attempt does not equal actually doing so. The war on poverty has been fought longer than the war on drugs and they seem to both be about as effective. Yet, who is willing to look at WHY? Why, despite trillions of dollars spent on public, legitimate welfare do we still have poor people? It's as if these programs actually don't work. But instead of looking at it critically it is always "we need more, more!". You will always need more. So that premise alone (and I am not against safety nets nor those who actually need them) isn't enough. Again, it's that passive "what can we do? Oh well!"

8. I don't have 50 employees, but places that my customers go to shop or work at do. So in a way I have been directly affected because my customers have seen reduced hours. Have you heard of the 29/49 Rule? Cedar Point has reduced staff hours. Others have. I personally have had a dropoff in business as others are working more jobs or aren't making as much. So am I affected? Yes.

9. Why was it ok in Mass. and not nationally? Because that is 1/50th of the sovereign territories of the United States. If that plan fails only that small portion of the population is affected. On top of that because it was a state plan the control, responsibility, and communication are much more "local". The more-homogenous population of that state was able to control their own population's laws. But this? We ALL go down with it. This plan imposed on three hundred and ten million people was extrapolated from a law that was only meant to (and has its own flaws and problems) address 6.6 million people. It's absurd to think that a policy meant to control 1/50th of the population won't work when forcing it on everyone else. That is why the hopes of a single payer system in in the U.S. are just as fantastic. What other country with our population, geography, diversity, etc. has been able to successfully implement a nationalized, single-payer system? We can't even get this right and there are those who want to give the government MORE power and control over THEIR OWN lives. One party in one city in one year single-handedly dictated what everyone else must do and condemn them to go down with the ship whether they like it or not.


The law is working and doing what it was designed to do! PERIOD! You can't blame Obamacare because your business dropped because someone's hours got cut even though Obamacare had not been implemented or effected their business if it had. People do not have less money because of Obamacare. If you use that logic your business had to increase when people got tax cuts. What may seem minor to you may be a MAJOR factor to others. This is NOT about government control or government taking over your life. You are grossly overstating what's happening here. Life will continue as we know it if not just a bit better for some. You are free to do all the things you always were free to do, you are just being made to be more responsible for your health.


So the law was designed to kick millions off their insurance and force people into signing up with a broken system? Seems legit from the Liberals.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

You are free to do all the things you always were free to do, you are just being made to be more responsible for your health.

you are just being made to be more responsible for your health.

just being made to be more responsible for your health.

just being made to be more responsible

just being made to be

being made


Higher premiums. MUCH higher deductibles. Higher co-pays. Unneeded and unwanted coverages. Lack of providers considered to be "in network." Forcible termination of extant plans with which policyholders were satisfied. "Death panels" (there's an actually official name for them under Obamacare, but I don't remember the Orwellian label and "Death Panels" is an accurate descriptor).

Tell me this, Deertracker, if Obamacare ISN'T so bad, why is the White House being petitioned for (and granting) so many exemptions?


Ask the admin, They are the ones "Tweeking" and delaying the new tax over and over again. If it is such a good bill please explain why they have to give exemptions and delay entire passages of the bill till after the mid-terms, Why can't they just let it ride and show the citizens what is being forced upon them before the midterms? Afraid of what the citizens will see is my guess.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

The law's biggest celebrity, the President, has yet to sign up for his own supposedly-legacy-defining law. I wonder why?


Re: "I wonder why?"

Fearful of the security leaks or the website was down? :)


The WH is bringing in Dem hacks John Podesta & Katie Beirne Fallon as lead propagandists.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull."

- W. C. Fields


The goal was to have over 7 million people signed up by this point and only 365k have by December 11th, in addition 5.9 million have lost their insurance due to them being deemed inadequate. I'm all for everyone having insurance, but this turning into another bloated government boondoggle. I personally believe the correct way to do this was to allow insurance to be purchased across state lines to reduce cost due to competition and to set up state risk pools to allow those with pre-existing conditions to get insurance. Lastly, tort reform to get the friggin' lawyers our of the doctor's office, but that would be too much to ask from the bunch of lawyers that are currently our elected officials.


Sorry, Fromthe419, but your ideas never had a snowball's chance. You see, you're actually making sense and suggesting something that would

a) actually work, but which

b) WOULDN'T grant the feds additional powers.

Tut, tut, tut!


"Haircut Deficit: Kids Living in Basements a Drag on U.S. Services Spending":

"Millennials -- adults aged 18 to 32 -- are still slow to set out on their own more than four years after the recession ended, according to an Oct. 18 report by the Pew Research Center in Washington.

Just over one in three head their own households, close to a 38-year low set in 2010."

And these are some of the "Invincibles" that the progressive-socialists expect to purchase health ins. in order to help offset the costs of those with pre-ex.?

Where the h*ll are they gonna get the money? Mommy and daddy?

The Big Dog's back

Since Corporate "Capitalist" America is taking all the money, how do you expect people to earn a decent living? When you have the fat pig rush calling the Pope a Marxist, this country will remain divided.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Big Dog, this law compels forced corporatism. Our government will punish you for NOT purchasing a product from corporations. Our government is forcing you to give your money to a corporation. And if you don't buy? They will take your money for not spending it on what they tell you! "Subsidized" insurance? Corporate welfare! Cronyism! Why aren't you angry beyond words at this?

I am, and I'm a filthy, capitalist pig-dog!

Darwin's choice


Erie County Resident

@ Hero, you'll never convince doggie otherwise.
He was out in the cold garage eating his kibble and drank up a gallon of anti-freeze. Explains the dead brain function of reasoning on his part.

The Big Dog's back

It was a CONservative idea to keep the insurance companies in the game. I'm angry all right because we didn't get Medicare for all.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

You should stand with we evil denizens on the conservative side of the coin and demand a repeal and replace. If Congress actually saw bipartisan support of "we can do better than what you shoved on us" they may actually consider ideas like yours or others. But then we would have a great chance to debate, compare, and learn from the massive failures and mistakes that have been made over recent years. Everyone wins, not just one party!

The Big Dog's back

sappy, the CONS still, still haven't come up with a plan.


So the fact that the insurance companies will be required to spend your premiums on your health or refund you means nothing?

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

You should theoretically owe 100% of your assigned tax bracket to the government. But do you pay that? Oh, there's those "loopholes" of legal tax deductions and other circumstances that actually make it so you can pay nothing at all. Do you think that that kind of requirement is airtight with insurance companies? Do you trust our immaculate Congress (I mean this was passed by only one party inside it, but we'll include those right-leaning devils too) to account for every minute possibility that can arise? Even if it is a host of angels, who gets to decide how much a company is allowed to make? Seems like a stinky investment for anyone interested since there is hardly any capacity for growth. Let's force McDonald's to only be allowed to make $1M every year. That's more than enough profit for a company. Everything else the government gets because it can do much better with money than a company. I mean just look at their illustrious reco-. Hmm. Ok better not.

I am sure there are many things that can be considered "my health" that will be written off in order for that company to get around your concept of fair business where the government allows you to keep the meager scraps of money left over from what you charge compared to what you spend. Each of these things you may disagree with but will be perfectly legal. Please look at the "29/49 Rule" for example. Every time Congress tries to close a door they either purposely or inadvertently (and often sneakily) open several windows.

P.S. - I appreciate our dialog, deertracker.

The Big Dog's back

It's all Gov's fault, right sappy?

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

What is "all"? Is that referring to the ACA? Then...yes, whose else would it be? Did someone else ram through this legislation? Did someone else give a no-bid contract to a company that failed to make a website for now approaching a trillion dollars? Did I fail to see who is writing, rewriting, and exempting people from this law on a whim? Let me attem, let me attem!

To whom, if not the government, shall I point my finger and shout, "j'accuse!"?

Also I will kindly ask you not call me "sappy" as that is nonsensical and not even a clever play on my username here. If anything you may address me as "filthy, capitalist pig-dog". You have my permission. I won't report you for name-calling if you address me like that every time. I promise.


Re: "Since,"

Not to worry doggie; with progressive-socialist single payer, health care in America will be just like France, free with the country goin' broke.

Guess what awesome new Idea is being bounced around now?


The U.S. is broke and our healthcare is not free and is not even that good! Your point?


The point is even with 71% tax hikes being kicked around the left still considers more spending is the answer. Just think, There were more people WITH insurance before the program took effect.

Darwin's choice

From the most "transparent" administration:

The Committee on Oversight and Reform issued the following statement today:
WASHINGTON – contractor Creative Computing Solutions, Inc. (CCSi) has rejected an unlawful request from the Department of Health and Human Services to withhold documents subpoenaed by the Oversight Committee. In a letter to HHS Office of Acquisition and Grants Management Director Daniel Kane CCSi Senior Vice President wrote:
“CCSi takes [its] contractual compliance and customer relations extremely seriously. To that end, CCSi has concluded, after consulting legal counsel, that the enclosed subpoena compels production of the documents requested and, therefore, falls outside the above-referenced contract clause and guidance letter from your office. A validly-issued congressional subpoena compelling the production of documents that are within CCSi’s possession is neither a ‘request’ for documents nor an ‘unauthorized’ disclosure of such documents.”

The letter responds to a December 6, 2013 letter from HHS to CSSi that demanded, “As it relates to your contract with CMS, you are required to inform me, as Director of the Office of Acquisition and Grants Management, of any requests for ST&E information that you receive from any party, and you may not release documents without authorization from CMS. If you receive a request for this information from Congress, CMS will respond directly to the requestor and will work with the requestor to address its interests in this information.”Documents subpoenaed by the Oversight Committee relate to security vulnerabilities present in the website that pose a risk to sensitive personal information submitted by applicants seeking coverage. The Committee has reviewed, but not been allowed to have copies or retain notes of documents, suggesting that HHS officials decided against addressing security vulnerabilities with the site that would have required a delay of the October 1 launch.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., issued the following statement on CCSi’s decision to comply with the lawful subpoena it received from Congress:
“Americans should be disturbed that this Administration is trying to stop government contractors from providing Congress with documents related to the decision to launch 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.
“The Committee has told HHS that it will make needed consultations with security experts to ensure the protection of sensitive information. The Administration’s remaining objections are a specious effort to hide serious problems and reckless decision making by officials.”

Another contractor, MITRE, subpoenaed by the Oversight Committee has not yet indicated if it intends to comply with the subpoena issued by the Oversight Committee.

Why is this information needed by CONgress?

Go ahead, sign up! Then put your life out there for all....


"Please keep your arms and legs inside the ride at all times and enjoy your day in the good, ole' USA!"

Dr. Information

Hardly anyone has signed up let alone paid. Let's see the staggering low numbers when people have to start paying.

Millions lost their plans due to Obama and now are faced with higher premiums and deductibles with new plans.

The young pups aren't signing up and they were needed to fund this mess.

Just more lies from the great divider Obama. Same "I didn't know card" used again. What a joke he has turned out to be.


"Poll: Health care law seen as eroding insurance coverage"

"In the survey, nearly half of those with job-based or other private coverage say their policies will be changing next year — mostly for the worse."

So far, it's been the tip of the iceberg. Just WAIT when the employer mandate starts kicking in on this cluster (bleep) and the screaming reaches epic proportions.

What's Pres. Obama gonna say (again): Nobody told me?

Or: It's your employers' fault?


After 4 years and 10 months 3 weeks and 4 days, I have only one question that seems to cover it all.

How is that hopey changey thing workin out for ya?