My husband is in IT and says there are huge questions

[GMA]

about why it would cost 18 million to develop the WH website. Any IT people out there know anything about this?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Deja Q]

14. That's a little quick to be making accusatory claims.

I will agree, as said below, a proper reference would be nice.

[Narkos]

56. Thanks for your input.

[aikoaiko]

74. This DU rule doesn't seem to be enforced anymore,....

From DU detailed rules:

Do not publicly accuse another member of this message board of being a disruptor, conservative, Republican, FReeper, or troll, or do not otherwise imply they are not welcome on Democratic Underground. If you think someone is a disruptor, click the "Alert" link below their post to let the moderators know.

[hlthe2b]

2. I can't imagine this is just for the website... sounds more like...

a very comprehensive security system for the entire administration or at least those who receive and share more confidential information... as well as for upgrades to technology throughout, which I believe that I'd heard was very outdated throughout the Bush* years....

Still sounds exhorbitant, but I absolutely can not imagine it being website only in its nature.

Sounds very much like a RW meme....:eyes:

[BR_Parkway]

5. Seems like they'd also have to be able to preserve everything

to comply with various laws and have some damn good accountability as to who posted what

[tandot]

3. Thanks for your concern. Please post a link to back up your claim.

[Deja Q]

13. Seconded. Such a link would engender more serious discussion.

I can fathom a certain percentage as to legitimate costs off the bat... but without a half-decent reference, of course the OP won't be believed.

[GMA]

51. It looks like the story goes back to July,

but it just hit my radar, so I'm way behind the curve. The poster who suggested it couldn't be just for web design is right--it looks like the contract for 18 million (half to be spent by January 2010) is to update and upgrade Recovery.gov. The questions first came up in ABC's The Note, and my husband ran across the discussion on Slash.com. Looks like the LA Times chimed in, as well. (He reads well over a hundred sites a day, from news, to professional, to politics, covering pretty much the entire spectrum of left to right.)

I'll post the links. The question came up for me today in connection with the headlines about the inaccurate data and non-existent congressional districts posted on the site about jobs saved/created. Then there seem to be questions about the WH CIO himself, so throw that into the mix. I'd be interested in whatever comments you have.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/07/recoverygov-redesign.html

http://www.propublica.org/ion/stimulus/item/stimulus-transparency-watchdogs-keep-contract-details-a-secret-813

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/12/765622/-Obamas-CIO-appointee-Vivek-Kundra-a-phony-%28No.%29

http://www.cio-weblog.com/50226711/who_says_you_are_a_cio.php

Hope this makes sense. I haven't taken the time to copy snippets, but none of the articles or comments referenced are terribly long. Thanks guys.

[GMA]

53. BTW, the initial info search was from googling:

"18 Million Recovery.gov WTF". It's the initial outlay of 9 million in such a short time that really seemed to raise eyebrows.

[Soylent Brice]

79. see Blogslut's reply:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7032897&mesg_id=7033536

[hughee99]

I have a hunch it would involve a number of

brother-in-laws, cousins, and friend's children doing "consultancy work".

I suppose depending on the content (and how much content they're providing) it could cost that much. If you wanted to record every minute of the presidents life on video, you could buy a couple of petabytes of redundant, remotely backed up storage and that could get pretty expensive.

Edited for spelling

[ret5hd]

20. define "pedabyte"

[hughee99]

25. Sorry, mistyped. Petabyte, 1000 terabytes.

1 million gigabytes.

[ret5hd]

28. I know what a petabyte is. Seemed to be a dig.

[hughee99]

35. It's a pervert who likes little data. n/t

:)

[undeterred]

48. ...

:rofl:

[Capn Sunshine]

57. it's not a badly trained dog?

"Stay away from him, my petabyte you"

[hughee99]

59. Nice!

:-)

[Ikonoklast]

98. Only in Little Italy.

"Keepa you hands offa my dog. I no need a lawsuit over a petabyte."

[negativenihil]

60. 1024 terabytes to be exact. n/t

[EmilyAnne]

91. Nope. You would be wrong. Nt

[hughee99]

97. Well, now that THAT's cleared up...

[EmilyAnne]

99. Sorry.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7032897&mesg_id=7036600

[quaker bill]

105. I expect it rather depends

on the extent of content offered. I am pretty sure that the website my agency deploys has run into the millions. However, we are rather content rich in that we post every, and I mean every, regulatory document we receive or create to the web. This would run to currently about 65,000 files each with minimum content of around 100 MB and most with considerably more. We may have a at least a gigabyte or more new content going up every day. Given the data prep, mass storage, and server space, I could easily believe millions of dollars are involved.

[monmouth]

4. Perhaps some of those funds will/should be allocated to FreeRepublic

to upgrade their site to at least a 90s version, let alone this century....

[ItNerd4life]

84. rofl, thanks for the laugh! nt

[BeatleBoot]

6. It's to prevent emails from being lost like when Bush and Cheney were in office

Remember how the thousands of torture emails and Valerie Plame leak emails just mysteriously "disappeared"?

[Lance_Boyle]

10. "email" and "website" are two different things

A $18-million website had better make breakfast for the taxpayers, 'cuz it's fucked us. If true, that is.

[supernova]

16. You could run some $$ buying servers and storage

and network security for people who handle secret/sensitive information.

[DireStrike]

17. We have no idea what the OP is talking about

No website can cost 18 million dollars legitimately.

No link, no valid discussion.

[BeatleBoot]

88. No Shit Sherlock

What's your next clue?

[Fresh_Start]

7. Please tell us the name of the websites your husband

developed so that we can assess his judgement?

[Renew Deal]

8. Probably for all the security and accessibility issues.

Government websites require the highest security and full compliance with accessibility standards. They do not want the site hacked. It's too embarrassing. Also, the current website is a ground up rebuild. That costs money.

[rucky]

22. They're also using it to harness data from every project/contract

created from the stimulus. That includes real-time project status, drill-down by company/geography/project type/jobs created, etc..., GIS map-integration, and reporting tools (charts/graphs and whatnot). This is just for the public side - I can only imagine what's happening on the back-end. If this data was coming from multiple agencies before, and was siloed, or if this is all new, then that foundation has to be laid first.

Considering the scope of the stimulus, and all the new things this site is bringing to light, I would guess that 18 mil is not far off.

[EmilyAnne]

93. That is part of the development, but not the reason for the "high" cost. The things you are

mentioning are easy and relatively cheap to deal with.

This price tag is most likely about scope, merging of multiple sites, branding and marketing, content development, information architecture (meaning presentation of the information) and media placement. These make the meat of this contract and, done well, will make the site a true resource for people all around the world.

[LeftHander]

9. GeoCities has free websites.....oh wait....nevermind.

lol

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. my cousins ex-step father thinks 18 million sounds about right. glad we settled that.

[GreenPartyVoter]

33. *snarf*

[Christa]

12. The WH has a website

http://www.whitehouse.gov/


I knew this and I am not even in IT.


I don't understand why your husband said they are getting another one.

[GMA]

68. My miscommunication--sorry.

n/t

[Buzz Clik]

15. Wow. What a penetrating question.

Is your husband too much of a coward to ask his own questions? (My cat asked me to say that)

[HipChick]

18. This is not news,and its not the WH website...and its thru 2014...but freepers love this

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/18m-being-spent-to-redesign-recoverygov-web-site.html

[Hekate]

30. Ha! actual information at the link--thank you!

I tried to copy/paste the info but for some reason could not. I recommend our DUers go there themselves and read it: the salient point is that the RNC has released a web ad mocking the endeavor.

Hekate

[GMA]

54. Didn't see the ad,

but there's some discussion above it.

[csziggy]

86. Think of all the unemployed IT workers who were hired to do these web sites!

After all, isn't that one of the sectors of American business that has been hit hard by not just this recession but that has never recovered from the DotCom bubble burst?

Seriously, if I remember correctly, the computers at the White House had not been updated since Shrub took office, the WhiteHouse.gov site was antiquated, security and adherence to the laws about emails and records were a disgrace, and there was a lot of work that was needed just to bring those elements up to snuff, not to mention all the sites that the Obama administration has tried to get started to implement their transparency policy.

Did you know that the entire George W. Bush White House web site has been archived and is online for access? That had to cost a chunk right there!
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/

[Hekate]

87. Definitely a part of the stimulus then. nt

[Kalyke]

19. As someone who works for the federal contract the president uses

to purchase IT, I keep up with these issues.

It was migrated from the old proprietory Bush crappola to Drupal and uses Sharepoint to function:

Although programmers will normally tell you they'd rather build a custom solution than use an off the shelf product, with only 11 weeks to develop Recovery.gov, the engineers needed a robust solution that could meet all of the government's security and governance requirements and still be flexible and scalable enough to meet the needs of an entire U.S. population.

"It made sense to use an out of the box product," Turim said, and SharePoint is "one of the most flexible platforms out there and the government already pays for it."

Development time that would have otherwise been spent building a custom 60% solution was freed up by the decision to use SharePoint, and that allowed the team to address other key business problems, such as how to get data from hundreds of disparate sources. And while Microsoft has long been viewed with disdain for their near monopoly on corporate business platforms, this time, it saved taxpayers a good sum of money.

Not well known outside the enterprise market, SharePoint is a collection of products and software elements that can be used to host web sites that access shared workspaces, information stores and documents, as well as host defined applications such as wikis, podcasts, blogs, widgets, gadgets, pipes and microblogs. At its core, SharePoint has built-in integration for reporting, collaboration, social networking, and other capabilities that can greatly improve how the public interacts with the government and how government interacts with itself.

And they're hoping to move into the social networking side of things, another reason for the cost:

By "improvements" Turim means social networking capabilities, which he says are an inevitable and desirable next step. What might this look like? At a basic level, data from Recovery.gov could be made readily available through platforms like Facebook and MySpace. More advanced features could allow users to note errors in the data, interact with the data to construct new data sets and mashups, upload videos using the data to the site, and integrate various localized feeds from Twitter about data using static IP tracking. That way, a user in New York looking up information about her state would be able to see tweets from other New Yorkers talking about the state's funding. Of course, these are ideas the design team has that the government hasn't quite signed off on.

Read the story here: http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2009/10/23/Recovery-gov-revamped-with-an-unexpected-helper-SharePoint.aspx

[GreenPartyVoter]

34. +10 for real information. Hope the OP drops back by and reads it.

[GMA]

62. I did,

and thanks.

[change_notfinetuning]

21. It's the Chicago Way. As long as it works, be happy. Most of Chicago doesn't.

Oh, and by next spring, it'll probably be privatized.

[HipChick]

26. Most of it is contracted out..

[change_notfinetuning]

39. My next question is to whom? I see who is working on the anti-hacking of

government web sites and overall computer security, and I don't care what the cost is. I can only cringe, and fear the worst.

[HipChick]

50. multiple bids by contract/consulting companies..

[NYCGirl]

45. Thanks for bringing that right wing meme here. Saves a lot of time.

:eyes:

[GMA]

63. You're welcome...

I'm all about saving other people's time. And money, where possible.

[NYCGirl]

83. Now we all know what they're saying at FR. NT

[EmilyAnne]

95. Nope. But it sure is funny to see people discuss something they have absolutely NO CLUE about.

I mean, no clue at all.
None whatsoever.
Zero.
Zilch.
Nada.

[HipChick]

23. the majority of goverment IT needs upgrading..

The IRS did a major upgrade, and they are still way behind

[Kalyke]

29. They're doing that.

Trust me... I get the bid requests.

[HipChick]

49. yep.. I work on them..

[ET Awful]

24. I'm in IT, and I've never met your husband. I doubt the veracity of your claim.

:evilgrin:

[GMA]

64. lol!

I doubt he's met your cats, either!

[Fleshdancer]

27. What does your husband do in IT? n/t

[GMA]

66. His degree is in Computer Science,

but he's done just about everything from teaching to startups to game design. He's been an independent consultant for about eight years now, since leaving PWC in Washington DC, working mostly on IT litigation and failed IT projects.

[Statistical]

31. Here is the source. 18 mil seems little high BUT...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/18m-being-spent-to-redesign-recoverygov-web-site.html

18 mil is for 5 years. So thats 3.6 million per year. Depending on the visitor load it might require some substantial hardware and bandwidth.

18 mil IMHO seems a little high but it isn't like you could build, maintain, and run it for $100K.

[Renew Deal]

36. More info

http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2009/10/23/Recovery-gov-revamped-with-an-unexpected-helper-SharePoint.aspx

[Ms. Toad]

37. Proably a bargain compared to whatever the cost was

for implementing the color coded terra alert scheme. :evilgrin:

[DireStrike]

41. Recovery.gov is very slow

Hard to pull up data. I'll reserve judgment for a while but it had better improve for over $3m a year.

[FormerDittoHead]

47. Also: Smartronix was probably the lowest bidder... (links)

The money's going to Smartronix a BUSINESS

Here's the press release (Dated in JULY, btw):
http://www.smartronix.com/Portals/0/pdf_files/Recovery_gov_Press_Release.pdf

(oh no! What if we HIRED computer people? What would they DO???)

[GMA]

67. The question didn't seem to be the 18 million

as much as the 9 million in initial expenses, but some other posts seemed to have covered that.

[Oregone]

78. "but it isn't like you could build, maintain, and run it for $100K"

100K a year? Id take that challenge. :)

Hardware is cheap these days.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[akbacchus_BC]

104. Dear Grovelbot, we will. Now stop begging, OK!

[blueworld]

38. It isn't the WH website, it's the Recovery.gov website

I also was in DP (disclaimer) for centuries - or at least decades:) Anyway, here's an ABC news link from 7/8/09:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/18m-being-spent-to-redesign-recoverygov-web-site/comments/page/2/

Only 8 million will be spent initially, with another 10 million possible by 2014. The hysteria, as always, is from the freepers & company - do a google & you'll see what I mean. Most of the outrage is from people who are nuttier than my Aunt Bertha's fruitcake, IMHO.

Anyway, they opened up the WH website to open source which will SAVE them a bundle over the years. I didn't see any freepers mention that. Don't fret when the freepers freak. :)

[alfredo]

40. The $18 million was not just for making a website, it is for a multi year contract

for upkeep of the site and systems related to the site. This site (Recovery.gov) will also accomodate smart phones.
Remember, this isn't some real estate company in Topeka, it is one of the largest organizations in the world. Securing the site will be a full time job. That was probably a big cost in the contract.

Obama has also encouraged the use of open source software.

[havocmom]

42. Gee, sorry to hear your husband didn't get the job (n/t)

[Dr Robert]

43. pizza, anyone??

[akbacchus_BC]

103. No pepperoni, thank you!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

44. K&U

There's real info in the replies. This is drive-by trolling.

[FormerDittoHead]

46. Is THIS where those HUGH questions came from? (link to RNC Ad on YouTube)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMuQZTgciNE

BTW: I'm SURE ( :sarcasm: ) that these quotes weren't taken out of context!

[GMA]

55. No, hadn't seen this.

n/t

[madrchsod]

52. this would be a lot cheaper

go daddy is a lot cheaper than 18 million...plus they have cool advertising.

[SteelPenguin]

58. Meaningless Number Without More Data

You want a website based on open source software, where you do everything yourself, domain registration, server space on a virtual server, using only open source software to create the site, that won't really receive much traffic, or handle many emails...You're looking at something along the lines of $65 bucks for a year.

You want your own server that you don't have to share with anyone else that has reasonable support through a third party? You're closer to $4000 for a year.

Need massive bandwidth, backup servers, the ability to handle thousands upon thousands of emails, backup servers, exchange mail servers, private space to maintain those servers, and the various other infrastructure involved you're looking at six figures for a year. Heck a liscense for an Exchange server is what? $15,000 a year alone? I haven't priced them recently. It might be higher.

Not to mention that on top of all that infrastructure you'd need a whole IT staff. An IT Manager, a couple of peons to do the heavy lifting, maybe an Exchange expert on staff depending on their communciations load. You're looking at maybe $200,000 or more in salary and benefits for just the people to maintain the site.

So my absolutely rough guestimate says that just to have the infrastructure and manpower to simply maintain the site we're looking at closer to a half million dollars a year.

Of course that doesn't include ANY development or design of the site, and sounds like that whole thing had to be initially developed in 11 weeks. I'd normally say a project like that woudl need a few months in prep, usability, information architecture, and other stuff before development would even start, but they did the whole thing in 11 weeks. That's pretty crazy.

So we're talking a massive staff, working round the clock for 11 weeks at very high hourly rates because of the rush. maybe at team of 20 designers and developers for 11 weeks. That's another quarter million minimum in basic salaries, for 11 weeks, probably a million across a full year for design and development staff, doing continuing maintenance, development, design.

So bigger office space for now a staff reaching maybe 30 people of pure workers, say 10 managers above them coordinating, etc. Probably need at least what...4000 square feet minimum? Depending on where they are to get enough good staff you're probably paying minimum 10 bucks a square foot per month, so 40 grand a month on space. Another half million a year just for the space.

I forget where I'm at now...what...half million a year for infrastructure, half million for space, million for salaries at least, Plus other crap that adds up....elecricity, utilties, janitorial fees, benefits, receptionists, software licenses, desks, chairs, computers for the workers...Tag on another half million for all sorts of other crap.

I'm already roughly up to 2.5 million a year. Figure they want a 20% profit on the contract and you're looking at they probably factored for about a million in profit per year on the contract, and we're at 3.5.

As an owner of a software company just spitballing this shit, it seems pretty reasonable to me.

But hell what do I know.

[GMA]

61. Thanks for spitballing!

Amazing how fast money can be thrown around.

[blogslut]

65. Your husband is misinformed

The site is http://recovery.gov">recovery.gov - not the White House website. The cost is $9 million for initial development plus an additional, projected nine million to be spent on the site through 2014.

Recovery.gov enables American citizens to track where, when and how their tax dollars are being spent. I would imagine the new site will receive hundreds of thousands of visitors per day, not to mention will be the target of hackers, worldwide. The security, maintenance and server loads are factored into the cost. This isn't a matter of design/developement alone.

[GMA]

69. My mistake--sorry.

He knew what he was talking about. I didn't.

[Soylent Brice]

81. ^^^^^^^

thank you.

[Greyhound]

70. The cost figures your husband quoted are inaccurate but the basic issue is that both

this and previous administrations have absolutely no concern about either wasting taxpayer money or supporting small businesses.

The bulk of the money is going to IBM and the attendant consultants at enormously inflated prices, but there's nothing unusual about that. Just look at how many millions the _shrub Whitehouse poured into to his criminal brother's software company as part of his NCLB pork barrel.

[HipChick]

71. When Bush was in power, there were many more expensive $$ projects approved..

IBM and the like are still feeding off them..

[Oregone]

72. Ive built sites that gross that much a year

I never charged over $50 grand for em. Go figure

I don't know. I wish I scored that contract

[EmilyAnne]

94. The money isn't going to HTML. A person in Bangalore could make a website for 4 bucks an hour.

Everyone is looking at this as a purely technical job. That is so far from where most of the money will go.

[ikri]

73. $18m over how long?

You can't really compare running a .gov site to running your run-of-the-mill website. You're going to need a cluster of servers for redundancy, a lot of bandwidth, security & people.

Add all of that together over 4-5 years and $18m isn't that unreasonable.

[Oregone]

76. Creating a scalable redundant cluster of servers isn't that difficult whatsoever

And its actually not that expensive to be honest.

Once a "run of the mill" site passes a certain threshold of traffic/threats, you can start looking at similar approaches that only differ in size. If designed properly, adding an additional web slave and data server would be no more difficult and time consuming than adding 20 of each. With the proper implementation, meeting load requirments becomes procedural.

[haele]

75. It's not just the website, it's most likely also all the security and network interoperability -

required for a SOA or web-based system.
I'm editing this as I had just answered in general terms to the OP. Reading on, it looks as if this is Recovery.gov, and it's got it's some different issues than Whitehouse.gov, but the basic premis I wrote below should still cover some of the issues -
Any Web based network or web-based entry into a service network require Firewalls, Routers, Virus and DOS attack protection, 24/7 real time and manned security. Network upgrade. Interconnectivity with other networks between agencies that are linked to the White-House web site; ones who are probably all using their own legacy systems. Not to mention interconnectivity with most visitor's OS.
And it should include other network upgrades within the Whitehouse - expanded servers, routers, modems; bandwidth, ISDN and MPOE cabinet services, which all involving running cable, or removal of existing cable and and the cost of disposal, as well as any structural work that will be needed when dealing with electronic upgrades in historic buildings. Heck, you could even be running in between buildings, which might require grounds services; street work, digging trenches, sounding piping, landscaping removal and replacement...
There's the cost of overseeing the work; GAO, auditors, contracts negotiators, supervisors, and project managers. Close to half a million a year right there. Oh, and then there's the cost of the contractors that are going to be in every facet of the development. Because it's sooo much cheaper to have private businesses and middlemen actually do the work than it would be to have onsite IT development and installation team do the work. There's a good 6 million or so in costs over two/three years. If you add in up to to a 15% award fee just for doing business (contract speak for guaranteed profit if you do what you're supposed to) as is usual, and they get the contract type they want you can run a few more million in costs to the government right there.

In my experience, just to make a minor network upgrade on a government (local, state, or federal) can cost over a million with all the development, testing, security, maturity level evaluations, etc, etc. - that you as a taxpayer should demand to be done to get the best system for the best price. It's also going to take a few years to actually make the upgrade.

Any hardware or protocol changes involved, and it could go into the millions very quickly if it's going to be done right. 18 million might seem - heck, it might be a bit high, but if you're the White House, you're not getting the in-house IT skivvy to go out and buy off the shelf at Best Buy or checking out CNET for the latest halfway decent internet program like Joe's Motorcycle Design, Fabrication and Chicago-style Pizzaria Emporium is going to get to attract customers making Google searches.

Haele

[spanone]

77. iraq war over 700 Million a day...18m seems like a good deal for white house security

[Soylent Brice]

80. it's amazing

to see how many people fall for flamebait.

:popcorn:

[Irreverend IX]

82. $18 million is a ludicrous price...

For any informational website less complex than Wikipedia. A CMS-based site is not that complicated to build, and secure hosting and redundancy are expensive but not several million dollars' worth. Incredible websites are built all the time for less than $10,000, and $1 million should be more than enough to run any high-security government site for at least a couple years. This contract is corruption in the same vein as the $500 Pentagon toilet seats and the $100 Halliburton laundry loads.

[EmilyAnne]

90. Engineering is not where the money will go. Its not about 18 million in HTML and security.

That stuff is trivial.

[Indenturedebtor]

100. Oh please. As someone who works in integrating databases with apps and websites

18m is a drop in the bucket.

This "website" will not just have a little access database taking people's beanie baby orders... you're talking about pulling together disparate sources of information, mapping them, maintaining them, reporting from them in multiple ways, building triggers, etc etc etc.

Anyone who thinks this is unreasonable doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.

And ffs - starting an online MUSIC database costs tens of millions of dollars :rofl: This is MUCH bigger than that. 18m is a STEAL.

[ItNerd4life]

85. If it makes government more accountable, it's money well spent.

Considering the high level goals/objectives they are setting and not knowing what the database(s) are that they
will be pulling from. It's hard to say whether it's too much or not enough. A person would have to look
at the project charter and the project plan.

However, if the objectives are met it could more than pay for itself because now there will be more accountability
within the government and hopefully reduction of fraud,abuse, and pork.

[EmilyAnne]

89. Well there are a number of dimensions to consider.

Most likely, your husband is considering the technical implication of developing the website ... the html, server infrastructure, etc.
My guess is that this aspect of the investment is likely a small percentage of the overall budget.
The other dimensions to consider are:

What is the scope of the project?

Did this project combine a number of pre-existing websites?

How much of the budget is allocated towards future or further development and maintenance?

A very, very important part of the investment likely went to the design and development of the content and messaging ... the brand if you will.
Consider the fact that when a company releases a new product, say a new mouthwash, it will invest literally millions of dollars in the development of the branding, messaging, media placement, etc of it. In the case of the White House website, think about how critical it is that the site effectively communicate the "brand" of the United States and the Obama White House to the rest of the world.
This is critical to both the government for political considerations as well as to business in the U.S.
The White House website is a primary resource for people around the world to consume information about the United States, the Obama Presidency, our political processes, etc... it is not as simple as a new mouthwash, if you will.

[nadinbrzezinski]

92. THrough 2014

and they have to add all that security ...

:banghead:

[treestar]

96. Oh please

Is this the latest? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[akbacchus_BC]

101. It would be nice if you or your husband can post a link for this. Thank you!

[Luciferous]

102. I was wondering that myself nt