It's 2013 and there are tons of technologies that allow this type of system to be set up fast and scalable. The fact that I can't even login (with a registration I made a month ago) and that it doesn't even give me an error message, and that support (phone and chat) just say "it's experiencing problems right now" is inexcusable when you consider that they had half a billion dollars to work with.
Is a secure registration and login system that at least gets people started on the site too much to ask?
Evidently so, even given 3 and a half years after passage of the bill that's this Administration's signature accomplishment to date. While it's hardly unknown in other sectors, I've read one of the problems was HHS/Sebelius making important decisions way late in the process, and I think I recall the usual required changes as well.
But unless the signup process hooks into outside live databases for verification or what have you there's as you note no excuse, especially since disallowing window shopping is one of the biggest modern UI hindrances, something pointed out to the people doing this (some information gathering is needed to offer the right plans, but others and I have compared it to the medicare.gov Part D sub-site, which collects that but doesn't require giving all your information prior to you officially selecting a plan, after which the site informs the chosen provider).
Anyway, I am a "right-winger" who's upfront about wanting to ... eliminate many parts of government, and just from memory I can point out several massive and notorious IT procurement failures that would kill or cripple most private concerns. E.g. last time I checked (which is some years ago):
The FAA is still using their 1940s (sic) techniques, and every attempt to really modernize the initial system architecture that automated it has failed. (They famously hired a couple of retired IBM engineers to make microcode patches for some of their old machines for Y2K). This one has really serious economic consequences.
Every comprehensive attempt to upgrade the IRS following their very first system has failed. They're still using code for the 1959 IBM 1401 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_1401) in their front end processes.
The FBI is legendary for their failures to ditch paper. I remember at least one failed attempt pre-9/11, there's one acknowledged failure after it, and I don't know if they're really using the Sentinel system as they claim as of 2012, after 7 (!) years of troubled development.
These are the really big ones that come to mind. Which of course is not to say the government is always incompetent. The Census Bureau was famously cutting edge, using punched cards in 1890 (sic), buying a UNIVAC I in 1951 (sic), and when I talked to some of their people in the mid-90s I got a sense of serious competence.
As noted in previous discussions, the same contractor operations CMS.gov and Medicare.gov, and I can attest that the latter site, while a bit clunky, works just fine. CMS's backends seem to work as well.
Off the top of my head, the CDC and FDA do well in getting out timely info. The DoJ's statistics sections are good, the NIH's sites are stellar. Heck, the BATF has a nice web page where you can type in some of the numbers of an FFL (firearms dealer, gunsmith, etc.) and confirm it is legitimate and still valid. Etc.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/09/ec...
And on universal health care they're generally on the left.