Doctors leaving AMA over endorsement of ObummerCare

July 22, 2009
By 3 comments

Can’t say I blame them.

The American Medical Association — the nation’s largest physician organization with nearly 250,000 members — initially opposed the president’s plan, but backed the House Democrats’ version of the bill last week. That has led to an internal dispute that has resulted in some physicians leaving the nation’s largest doctors’ association.

Some doctors charge the bill will lead to inferior patient care as physician offices around the country triple their patient lists and become forced to ration care.

“This is war,” Dr. George Watson, a Kansas physician and president-elect of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, told FOXNews.com Thursday. “This is a bureaucratic boondoggle to grab control of health care. Everything that has been proposed in the 1,018 page bill will contribute to the ruination of medicine.”

Watson said the president’s reform bill is loaded with rules and regulations that will ultimately result in shoddy patient care and long waiting lines. He blasted the bill as “insidious” by forcing doctors contracted with Medicare into the nationalized plan — a “trap” he described as “involuntary servitude.” Read full story at Fox News.

Since when does one individual have the right to the service, or earnings, of another individual? It’s just wrong, no matter how you package it or how many living Americans testify about financial problems caused by paying for medical treatment.

vaso link

3 Responses to Doctors leaving AMA over endorsement of ObummerCare

  1. Had Enough on July 22, 2009 at 6:02 pm

    Communism on the march. Wait til they start to tell you who can be a doctor and who has to be a factory worker.Thanks morons for voting these idiots in power.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  2. henry on July 25, 2009 at 4:38 pm

    this is affirmative action all the way. this is white retribution for whitey power. just ask gates and obama.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Laurie L on August 2, 2009 at 3:51 pm

    Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman said that if we had a free market in health care, we would pay about half of what we do now. LASIK and plastic surgery prices have gone down—these are real surgical procedures with the risk of death, complications, and lawsuits, but the majority are paid for by the people using the service instead of third party payers including the government, so costs have fallen.

    The government programs Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP, are not paying for themselves and are not satisfactory to many on them. Three-quarters of those on Medicare have to shell out $5K or more a year in out-of-pocket expenses. One-third of doctors won’t take them; and about two-thirds won’t treat Medicaid patients.

    http://www.modernconservative.com/freeandfair.php
    There is a legitimate solution. It puts those three government programs at the state level into one State Medical plan that is open to all legal residents. The plan is means-tested. It is catastrophic care, which is the most cost-effective and best insurance because it inherently rewards healthy behaviors. The prevention focus provides enrollees with a physical with follow-up visit each year so that problems can be found early and treated for less which is compassionate and cost-effective. One ER visit if needed per year and you’ve taken care of all the health care needs of the majority of the public. Then, unless and until, a person hits HIS catastrophic expense level, he pays his own way. The plan also gets a price reduction on prescription medications through bulk buying and negotiations because pharmaceutical companies need to earn a profit to continue.

    Every provider is automatically on the plan. The plan will operate a State Medical Insurance database listing all providers (doctors, hospitals, etc.) and listing every service offered and what the fee is for that service. People will be able to compare costs and competition will lower prices (see Friedman and LASIK). Patients will see infection rates and successful malpractice suits. Funding (no new taxes for people or employers who are not mandated to provide insurance) and reimbursement is addressed. The State plan, however, is to be PHASED OUT in favor of private insurance, which is also reformed.

    Unnecessary regulations for private plans are removed—plans must do what they say but may be as bare bones as the market will allow. Insurance companies that provide plans for the poor (means-tested) or the sick (pre-existing conditions) will receive TAX CREDITS. This is money they would have had to pay, but now can use to provide for the poor/ill. The government saves because the people on the private plan would have been on a government program or uninsured and possibly using the ER unnecessarily.

    We will increase the number of doctors and nurses substantially with no loss of quality and without bankrupting states or students in the process.

    Malpractice suits are reformed by limiting what attorneys can make, just as Social Security attorneys fees are capped. The “provider discount” is eliminated so there is no unfairness to those who choose to remain uninsured and so that smaller insurers can afford to compete against larger ones. There are fraud penalties as well and more to see.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0


Advertise Here!


blog advertising is good for you

Make a Blogger Smile

Blogs4Mitt.com

Sponsor

Shop Target!

Shop Daily Deals at Target.com. Always Free Shipping.

Advertise Here!


blog advertising is good for you

Archives

My Latest Tweets

Posting tweet...

Powered by Twitter Tools

stat counter

Zilla Award Winner

Larwyn’s Linx

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

Review this blog

Review http://lonelyconservative.com on alexa.com

Visit the Finger Lakes

fingerlakes rentals

Thanks for Voting! 1st Place!

Memeorandum

Top Economics Sites

Page optimized by WP Minify WordPress Plugin