Why Does the US Government Still Rely on COBOL Despite Its Problems?

2025-02-21

In the modern age of rapid technological advancement,

The Legacy of COBOL and Its Continued Use in Government

COBOL, which stands for Common Business Oriented Language, was created in the 1950s and quickly became the backbone for large-scale business applications. Today, it remains essential to the functioning of major US government departments, especially the Social Security Administration (SSA). The SSA continues to rely on over 60 million lines of COBOL code to process benefits and handle millions of data records, despite the language’s outdated nature and limitations.

One of the quirks of COBOL that has led to misunderstandings in the modern era is its inability to handle dates in a standardized way. For instance, when the SSA receives a claim without a specific birth date, it may assign a placeholder date of May 20, 1875—a date that is rooted in an obscure historical event. This leads to confusion, with some individuals appearing to be centuries old, though the issue is simply a product of the underlying software’s limitations.

The problem goes beyond just Social Security. Key government systems, including those of the IRS and Department of Defense, continue to rely on COBOL-based programs that are often decades old. These programs have become so entrenched that replacing them seems nearly impossible, not only due to the sheer volume of code but also the complexities inherent in their design.

What Undercode Says:

COBOL, while often criticized for being archaic, is far from useless. The language is uniquely adept at handling large amounts of business data and is especially good at batch processing—essential for systems that deal with millions of records, such as those maintained by the SSA and IRS. Its ability to organize and manipulate data efficiently is one of the reasons why it has endured for so long, especially in industries like banking, insurance, and, of course, government.

However, the real problem with COBOL is not the language itself but the outdated infrastructure surrounding it. The government has failed to invest adequately in modernizing its IT systems, leading to a situation where legacy software remains deeply embedded in the country’s critical systems. This lack of investment is a key factor in why COBOL-based systems are still in use today.

There is also the issue of scale. Replacing or even upgrading a single COBOL-based system can be a daunting task. Governments, for example, are notorious for their inefficiency when it comes to large-scale tech projects. The sheer size of the codebases and the complexity of the business logic embedded in them makes a simple migration or upgrade impractical.

One illustrative example is the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which still uses COBOL for some of its most critical operations, including tax filing and processing. Even though the IRS has started to explore more modern technologies, many of its core systems are still COBOL-based. These systems, like the Individual Master File (IMF), have been in place since the 1960s, and they’re written not just in COBOL but also in IBM Assembler—languages that are notoriously difficult to work with today.

The problem of updating these systems is compounded by the fact that the code was often written in a disorganized manner, without proper documentation or standardized practices. This leads to significant hurdles for any modernization efforts. Furthermore, as government budgets for tech improvements are frequently underfunded or redirected, the slow pace of change continues.

Despite these challenges, there are examples of successful transitions away from COBOL. Both the UK’s Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the New York Times managed to migrate away from COBOL-based systems in recent years. These transitions, however, were complex, costly, and time-consuming, requiring years of planning and execution. Such efforts are often out of reach for cash-strapped government agencies, making full migration unrealistic in the near future.

COBOL also remains critical to certain private sector operations, including banking. Approximately 43% of banking systems still rely on COBOL, and 90% of banks use it in some capacity. So, even outside of government, the language is far from obsolete.

In conclusion, the real problem isn’t COBOL itself but the inability (or unwillingness) of institutions to modernize. The language has endured because it performs well in the tasks it was designed for. The solution lies not in abandoning COBOL altogether but in modernizing the systems that rely on it. Until governments and corporations invest in updating their infrastructure, we can expect to continue dealing with these legacy systems for decades to come.

COBOL’s longevity serves as a reminder of the challenges faced by organizations—especially government agencies—that deal with large, complex data systems. The issue isn’t simply a technical one; it’s also one of policy, funding, and long-term planning. Until those issues are addressed, we may continue to see COBOL in our lives far longer than we ever anticipated.

References:

Reported By: https://www.zdnet.com/article/if-cobol-is-so-problematic-why-does-the-us-government-still-use-it/
Extra Source Hub:
https://www.instagram.com
Wikipedia: https://www.wikipedia.org
Undercode AI

Image Source:

OpenAI: https://craiyon.com
Undercode AI DI v2