The White House has issued statements expressing displeasure over a House effort to require reporting and transparency on ObamaCare, calling the requirements “unfunded, unprecedented, and unnecessary,” as well as “unrealistic and costly” and “administratively burdensome.” Gee, that sounds a lot like … ObamaCare. It takes a special degree of chutzpah for the administration to whine about such things when Democrats foisted ObamaCare on the country with its unfunded, unprecedented, unnecessary, unrealistic and costly mandates, taxes and regulations.

At issue is getting the administration to report weekly instead of monthly on enrollment data and within two days of any occurrence of security breaches in the Healthcare.gov website involving citizens’ personal data. Currently, the government doesn’t have to notify people at all, but no doubt those whose information has been compromised find it to be “administratively burdensome.” Even many Democrats found White House opposition hard to swallow, as some 67 of them voted for the House’s Health Exchange Security and Transparency Act.

Meanwhile, in the latest episode of Profiles in Accountability, the government terminated its contract with CGI Federal, the contractor that built Healthcare.gov, a couple of weeks before it expired anyway. The administration is planning to sign a 12-month contract worth roughly $90 million with Accenture, another web firm, to fix the website. Whatever happened to the White House announcement in December that “all is well”? Of course, as we reported at the time, all was not well. On top of that, the website has already cost roughly a billion dollars. Will Accenture actually get it to work? Don’t hold your breath.

Finally, it bears repeating that the fundamental problem isn’t the website. Indeed, you know things are bad when even The New York Times runs an exposé on how badly ObamaCare has mucked up the health system.