Obamacare and Seniors

[Guest]

Just counting the days till we find out that Obama's heathcare is declared unconstitutional. Plan on celebrating another poor idea of his.

Another one of Obama's controversial and dangerous "transformations" of the U.S. found in SECTON 1899A of the ObamaCare bill is the establishment of an
"Independent Medicare Advisory Board" (IMAB) or otherwise referred to as the "death panel"

Let me translate the bill: IMAB is nothing more than a GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED PANEL, that in its quest to cut costs will establish policies to prohibit certain medical procedures.

Lets say your 72 yrs old and need a heart transplant. with it you can probably enjoy another 15 yrs of life or more. The IMAB could DENY seniors
the heart transplant in the name of Fairness since there is only so much money to go around and medical rationing becomes a reality. Instead they give it to the 33 yr old because he is more "productive" in society and the elderly, in their view will have outlived their usefulness.

You think that is far fetched?? On June 13, 2009 in his weekly radio address Obama talked about specifically giving Doctors "incentives" to "avoid unneccessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs. Obama says "Make no mistake : the cost of heath care is a threat to our economy. WAKE UP SENIORS!!! Is this what you really want??

Here's my thought on a cost saving solution: CLOSE EMERGENCY ROOMS to NONCITIZENS!!! That would go a long way to save the healthcare system.

[Guest]

Just counting the days till we find out that Obama's heathcare is declared unconstitutional. Plan on celebrating another poor idea of his.

Another one of Obama's controversial and dangerous "transformations" of the U.S. found in SECTON 1899A of the ObamaCare bill is the establishment of an
"Independent Medicare Advisory Board" (IMAB) or otherwise referred to as the "death panel"

Let me translate the bill: IMAB is nothing more than a GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED PANEL, that in its quest to cut costs will establish policies to prohibit certain medical procedures.

Lets say your 72 yrs old and need a heart transplant. with it you can probably enjoy another 15 yrs of life or more. The IMAB could DENY seniors
the heart transplant in the name of Fairness since there is only so much money to go around and medical rationing becomes a reality. Instead they give it to the 33 yr old because he is more "productive" in society and the elderly, in their view will have outlived their usefulness.

You think that is far fetched?? On June 13, 2009 in his weekly radio address Obama talked about specifically giving Doctors "incentives" to "avoid unneccessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs. Obama says "Make no mistake : the cost of heath care is a threat to our economy. WAKE UP SENIORS!!! Is this what you really want??

Here's my thought on a cost saving solution: CLOSE EMERGENCY ROOMS to NONCITIZENS!!! That would go a long way to save the healthcare system.

This is a moot point because Mitt Romney promises to repeal The Affordable Care Act on day one. On day two, he promises to repeal Medicare as we know it and replace it with a voucher system, al la Paul Ryan Plan. Just pray that no one out there has a pre-existing condition while shopping for health insurance with their voucher.

CLOSING EMERGENCY ROOMS TO OLD PEOPLE would be much more cost effective.

[Guest]

Just counting the days till we find out that Obama's heathcare is declared unconstitutional. Plan on celebrating another poor idea of his.

Another one of Obama's controversial and dangerous "transformations" of the U.S. found in SECTON 1899A of the ObamaCare bill is the establishment of an
"Independent Medicare Advisory Board" (IMAB) or otherwise referred to as the "death panel"

Let me translate the bill: IMAB is nothing more than a GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED PANEL, that in its quest to cut costs will establish policies to prohibit certain medical procedures.

Lets say your 72 yrs old and need a heart transplant. with it you can probably enjoy another 15 yrs of life or more. The IMAB could DENY seniors
the heart transplant in the name of Fairness since there is only so much money to go around and medical rationing becomes a reality. Instead they give it to the 33 yr old because he is more "productive" in society and the elderly, in their view will have outlived their usefulness.

You think that is far fetched?? On June 13, 2009 in his weekly radio address Obama talked about specifically giving Doctors "incentives" to "avoid unneccessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs. Obama says "Make no mistake : the cost of heath care is a threat to our economy. WAKE UP SENIORS!!! Is this what you really want??

Here's my thought on a cost saving solution: CLOSE EMERGENCY ROOMS to NONCITIZENS!!! That would go a long way to save the healthcare system.


There is not now nor ever was a DEATH PANEL in the bill. However, the bill will pay for you to consult a doctor about your end of life issues. I have already done that and have a will, medical power of attorney and my end of life wishes documented. I suggest you should do the same.

You may not like Obama Care but for me it will be helpful as my company has pulled the retiree healthcare we had been promised for, in my case, 23 years and COBRA only lasts for 18 months. (Not to mention they also pulled our retirement plan)

I have worked in hospital for all of my adult life and still do. If you don't think there is fraud and misuse of medical resources you must lead a very sheltered life.

Just saying.....

[Guest]

Hula,hope you don't have a pre-existing condition.

[Guest]

There is not now nor ever was a DEATH PANEL in the bill. However, the bill will pay for you to consult a doctor about your end of life issues. I have already done that and have a will, medical power of attorney and my end of life wishes documented. I suggest you should do the same.

You may not like Obama Care but for me it will be helpful as my company has pulled the retiree healthcare we had been promised for, in my case, 23 years and COBRA only lasts for 18 months. (Not to mention they also pulled our retirement plan)

I have worked in hospital for all of my adult life and still do. If you don't think there is fraud and misuse of medical resources you must lead a very sheltered life.

Just saying.....

Government controlled healthcare inevitably leads to some sort of rationing due to shortages of services and financing.

If you don't believe that the logical place for that rationing to occur here in the good ol' USA, as in all other nations who have national healthcare, is on the doorsteps of the elderly and those who have a negligible chance of full recovery, you'd have to be a bit naive.

[Guest]

Government controlled healthcare inevitably leads to some sort of rationing due to shortages of services and financing.

If you don't believe that the logical place for that rationing to occur here in the good ol' USA, as in all other nations who have national healthcare, is on the doorsteps of the elderly and those who have a negligible chance of full recovery, you'd have to be a bit naive.

Richie...you are worried about rationing and I am worried about NOT having any healthcare at all.

We have rationing now...most drug plans only allow generic drugs, mine sure does that. I am trying to get into see a specialist and can't get an appointment for months.

We, as a nation, cannot sustain the current "free market" model of healthcare.

Release the hounds!!! She attacks the "free market".

[Guest]

Richie...you are worried about rationing and I am worried about NOT having any healthcare at all.

We have rationing now...most drug plans only allow generic drugs, mine sure does that. I am trying to get into see a specialist any can't get an appointment for months.

We, as a nation, cannot sustain the current "free market" model of healthcare.

Release the hounds!!! She attacks the "free market".

COLOGAL,

With all due respect, I have been blessed thus far with good health and am old enough on the other hand that this bill probably will never influence me in any way but I would like to ask two questions simply because I do not know and is not meant to be argumentative..

1. Are there not drug plans that you can get that use NON generic drugs ?

2. Is the reason for your inability to see the specialist one of the specialist himself and being popular and/or your choice of a specific specialist ?

The reason I am asking is that this would not be a rationing but in fact, good examples of free market, in that you CAN get both, but it is a cost issue !!!!

Again, not meant to be argumentative but if I am correct and I hope you will correct me if I am, THAT is one of my many beefs with this particular bill....it does not in anyway, AS PROMISED, address health costs in anyway !

Thanks

[Guest]

This is a moot point because Mitt Romney promises to repeal The Affordable Care Act on day one. On day two, he promises to repeal Medicare as we know it and replace it with a voucher system, al la Paul Ryan Plan. Just pray that no one out there has a pre-existing condition while shopping for health insurance with their voucher.

CLOSING EMERGENCY ROOMS TO OLD PEOPLE would be much more cost effective.


Given the point of the lawsuit against the Affordable Healthcare Act is requiring everyone to sign up. Then if the Supreme Court overturns then no one without Healthcare Insurance should be treated at all!

That would free up the system...we, the ones with healthcare, are paying for the ones that don't.

[Guest]

Just counting the days till we find out that Obama's heathcare is declared unconstitutional. Plan on celebrating another poor idea of his.

Another one of Obama's controversial and dangerous "transformations" of the U.S. found in SECTON 1899A of the ObamaCare bill is the establishment of an
"Independent Medicare Advisory Board" (IMAB) or otherwise referred to as the "death panel"

Let me translate the bill: IMAB is nothing more than a GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED PANEL, that in its quest to cut costs will establish policies to prohibit certain medical procedures.

Lets say your 72 yrs old and need a heart transplant. with it you can probably enjoy another 15 yrs of life or more. The IMAB could DENY seniors
the heart transplant in the name of Fairness since there is only so much money to go around and medical rationing becomes a reality. Instead they give it to the 33 yr old because he is more "productive" in society and the elderly, in their view will have outlived their usefulness.

You think that is far fetched?? On June 13, 2009 in his weekly radio address Obama talked about specifically giving Doctors "incentives" to "avoid unneccessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs. Obama says "Make no mistake : the cost of heath care is a threat to our economy. WAKE UP SENIORS!!! Is this what you really want??

Here's my thought on a cost saving solution: CLOSE EMERGENCY ROOMS to NONCITIZENS!!! That would go a long way to save the healthcare system.

IMHO Government funded healthcare - Medicare, if that works for seniors (and it does), why can't that work for everyone after the FAT is trimmed.....And you know that there is a lot of waste!....I wonder how many 33 year olds were passed by while Cheney got his transplant, that was a mistake!!!!!...Do you really think that closing emergency rooms is the answer, please, how can you turn away a 3 year old Latino that was hit by a car, a little radical don't you think? Obamacare is NOT really a bill that this administration was in love with, only in "like" with....Many changes are in this bills future....Good points on this bill, you can not exclude anyone for a pre-existing condition (insurance companies can not pick and choose who will add to their bottom-line - profit!, shouldn't insurance companies take the same risk that all of us do when signing up for their policy), no life-time limit to benefits (how would you like to find out that your limit of care has ended because you've "max'd out", children can stay on their parents insurance until 26....Healthcare should not be political, I know both parties would benefit from this bill, only hope the Supreme Court agrees with me. Bottom line, To quote Pres. Sadat — 'we all understand our differences but we have to find our similarities so we can live together in peace.

[Guest]

Government controlled healthcare inevitably leads to some sort of rationing due to shortages of services and financing.
[snip]


richielion - don't stop at healthcare...gov't controlled ANYTHING leads to rationing etc!

[Guest]

The right wing has been amazingly successful at convincing people whose interests could be greatly served by things like the affordable healthcare act, increased income taxes on the wealthy, and raised limits on social security taxation that they should be against these things because they are largely promoted by democrats. Carl Rove, Grover Norquist and other right-wing spin meisters, with the financial support of the Koch bros, among others, have spun middle and even sometimes, lower economic class folks into allies, against their economic self-interest. They rattle the sabres of abortion, gun-control, and religion to suck people in, while really caring only about keeping and making more money, and reducing government regulation so they can pollute, and treat worker and consumer safety without regulatory interference. If you are gullible enough to be sucked in by their tactics, you deserve what you get, but if enough of you continue to be hoodwinked, you will bring the rest of us down with you.

[Guest]

My problem with nationalized government healthcare for all is....

a) It's never proposed in Congress or by the White House for "All". Congress, Executive Branch, Judicial Branch, and "all" federal and their union employees are never included as insureds in the proposals for "the public option", Public Medicaid, health insurance exchanges, etc. ". They have their choice of the best of the best PRIVATE insurance plans, with the taxpayer paying about 3/4 of their premiums! See link (1) at the end.

b) I cannot imagine the elected politicians in Washington managing, and worse yet, appointing local/regional politicians to manage the financing and delivery of "all" OUR healthcare (not theirs......their private insurance companies can fire employees for stinking job performance).

Who could possibly want this congressional bunch of clowns to run all healthcare for us, the same way they ran Cash for Clunkers....in which taxpayers ultimately paid $24,000 per vehicle sold, and the Top 10 Vehicles Sold were ASIAN makes????? (2) (3)

See:

(1) Insurance Programs for Florida Federal and Congressional employees (http://www.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/PLANINFO/2012/states/fl.asp)

(2) Cash for Clunkers Results Finally In: Taxpayers Paid $24,000 per Vehicle Sold, Reports Edmunds.com - Edmunds.com (http://www.edmunds.com/about/press/cash-for-clunkers-results-finally-in-taxpayers-paid-24000-per-vehicle-sold-reports-edmundscom.html?articleid=159446&)

(3) http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/08/cash-for-clunkers-top-10-most-popular-new-cars-and-trade-ins.html

[Guest]

The right wing has been amazingly successful at convincing people whose interests could be greatly served by things like the affordable healthcare act, increased income taxes on the wealthy, and raised limits on social security taxation that they should be against these things because they are largely promoted by democrats. Carl Rove, Grover Norquist and other right-wing spin meisters, with the financial support of the Koch bros, among others, have spun middle and even sometimes, lower economic class folks into allies, against their economic self-interest. They rattle the sabres of abortion, gun-control, and religion to suck people in, while really caring only about keeping and making more money, and reducing government regulation so they can pollute, and treat worker and consumer safety without regulatory interference. If you are gullible enough to be sucked in by their tactics, you deserve what you get, but if enough of you continue to be hoodwinked, you will bring the rest of us down with you.

Hail the Government!!

[Guest]

Hail the Government!!

If you are gullible enough to be sucked in by their tactics, you deserve what you get.

[Guest]

The posters on this forum will be screaming the loudest when they can't buy health insurance with their vouchers, after, as promised, Mitt Romney ends medicare as we know it, because they have pre-existing conditions. Republicans have been trying to get rid of medicare since its inception.

[Guest]

Hail the Government!!

No...Hell the government. someone mentioned government's inability to govern anything and referenced "cash for clunkers" and thrn added an example. Another example was the credit given to people buying golf carts. The deal was so lucrative that GM bought thousands of golf carts and then stored them away.

ObamaCare if fully implemented will eventually be so cost prohabitive that the unintentional consequeces will be deciding where best to apply scare resources. And so that means anyone vulnerable, old people, very serious sickly people, people with severed disabilties etc will be placed on the bottom of government's priority list. In fact they probably won't even make the list. Consider now that the medical community utilizes a triage to sort out the serious from less serious maladies based on need. What you are going to see is a triage based on both need but overriden by costs , age, disability, liklihood of success, etc

Someone addressed VP Cheney moving to the head of the line for care. With or without ObamaCare rich and powerful people will always find a way to jump the line. While distasteful it is a fact of life.

The early reference to" cash for clunkers" fiasco was to illustrate that even with a simple program the government was helpless to do anything about fraud and waste. Can you imagine given the complexity of health care the field day dishonest people will have with this program.

Watch what you asked for...you just might get it.

[Guest]

My problem with nationalized government healthcare for all is....

a) It's never proposed in Congress or by the White House for "All". Congress, Executive Branch, Judicial Branch, and "all" federal and their union employees are never included as insureds in the proposals for "the public option", Public Medicaid, health insurance exchanges, etc. ". They have their choice of the best of the best PRIVATE insurance plans, with the taxpayer paying about 3/4 of their premiums! See link (1) at the end.

b) I cannot imagine the elected politicians in Washington managing, and worse yet, appointing local/regional politicians to manage the financing and delivery of "all" OUR healthcare (not theirs......their private insurance companies can fire employees for stinking job performance).

Who could possibly want this congressional bunch of clowns to run all healthcare for us, the same way they ran Cash for Clunkers....in which taxpayers ultimately paid $24,000 per vehicle sold, and the Top 10 Vehicles Sold were ASIAN makes????? (2) (3)

See:

(1) Insurance Programs for Florida Federal and Congressional employees (http://www.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/PLANINFO/2012/states/fl.asp)

(2) Cash for Clunkers Results Finally In: Taxpayers Paid $24,000 per Vehicle Sold, Reports Edmunds.com - Edmunds.com (http://www.edmunds.com/about/press/cash-for-clunkers-results-finally-in-taxpayers-paid-24000-per-vehicle-sold-reports-edmundscom.html?articleid=159446&)

(3) Cash for clunkers: Top 10 most popular new cars and trade ins (http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/08/cash-for-clunkers-top-10-most-popular-new-cars-and-trade-ins.html)

Kind of makes you wish you had chosen a government career, doesn't it?

[Guest]

Section 5000A of ObamaCare requires you to maintain minimum essential coverage or pay $750 fineor 2% of your income - whichever is Greater. Ok for the men - Let's say you have NO plans to remarry and your 48 or 88 so you have NO need for pediatric services. so your in market to buy a health coverage plan without an option to insure children in order to lower your premiums. TOO DAM BAD. Lets say your a woman and are now incapable of having children so you want a lower cost policy without maternity. TOO DAM BAD. Section 1302 FORCES you to cover it anyway. You see it's all about knowing what is in the bill before it's passed. Unlike Pelosi who stated "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it. Educate yourself people. There is so much you don't know. Obama needs to cut expenses and it will be YOU - because 5% of those over age 65 are the beneficiaries of 50% of all spending on health care. Remember when he said "Maybe your better off NOT having the surgery and take a pain med. How's that for compassion?? If you think Obama isn't eyeing the elderly as the prime target audience for making cuts your sadly mistaken.

[Guest]

If you are gullible enough to be sucked in by their tactics, you deserve what you get.

I was lucky enough not to get sucked in by the tactics of the left :wave:

[Guest]

documented. I suggest yoThere is not now nor ever and my end of life wishewas a DEATH PANEL in the bill. However, the bill will pay for you to consult a doctor about your end of life issues. I have already done that and have a will, medical power of attorney s u should do the same.

You may not like Obama Care but for me it will be helpful as my company has pulled the retiree healthcare we had been promised for, in my case, 23 years and COBRA only lasts for 18 months. (Not to mention they also pulled our retirement plan)

I have worked in hospital for all of my adult life and still do. If you don't think there is fraud and misuse of medical resources you must lead a very sheltered life.

Just saying..... YOU have got to be kidding?? You missed the whole point of the post. There plans have NOTHING to do with your will, end of life wishes, etc... Read it again. Maybe you'll finally get it.

[Guest]

Kind of makes you wish you had chosen a government career, doesn't it?

No, because some of us still have the common sense to know that:

"When everyone climbs up onto the wagon, who is going to pull it?"

[Guest]

how about a closer to home hypothesis?
Let's assume that next month there are another 150,000 people added to the EXISTING medical providers, facilities and equipment. (if you don't like 150,000 pick any number....or just double the current population) it really does not matter.

When the bill allows additional folks for what ever reason free loaders, pre-existing conditions, illegals, etc.

the additional load on the providers and facilities and equipment will only be dealt with by longer waits to see the doctor, more decision making who gets what treatments and when and there will come a time when you are just not needy enough because of your age.

So even if you have insurance or the ability to pay it won't matter.

What else will happen will be botique type insurances for higher premiums with treatment at facilities with the premium coverage.

No matter how you slice it you will either get less medical care in the future or wait much longer for it and most certainly will be paying much much more than you do now to to keep the coverage at the level you have now.

And I know everybody is keen enough to be aware we have been sold a bill of goods on where the money will come from to pay for all these newly provided benfits to all who do not have nor have they had for the last 50 years.

We have it as good as it will ever be in our lives going forward and it does not matter if you have an R or D after your name. Enjoy what you have now while you can still afford it. And pray for those generations who come after us.

btk

[Guest]

I was lucky enough not to get sucked in by the tactics of the left :wave:

Well you may not have been sucked in to the left, but the right would have denied you your comfortable union career, had they had their way.

[Guest]

Well you may not have been sucked in to the left, but the right would have denied you your comfortable union career, had they had their way.

That has some truth to it, but lots of Republicans courted the favor of the Teamsters.

Teamsters members do, after all, by and large work for big business. It wasn't taxpayers who put food on my table but the profit of the companies that employed me.

Things aren't black and white when it comes to unions.

[Guest]

That has some truth to it, but lots of Republicans courted the favor of the Teamsters.

Teamsters members do, after all, by and large work for big business. It wasn't taxpayers who put food on my table but the profit of the companies that employed me.

Things aren't black and white when it comes to unions.

The same can be said about virtually any issue my friend.

[Guest]

YOU have got to be kidding?? You missed the whole point of the post. There plans have NOTHING to do with your will, end of life wishes, etc... Read it again. Maybe you'll finally get it.

I was in no way nasty to you....the Death Panel clause was taken out of the Affordable Healthcare Act.

[Guest]

Section 5000A of ObamaCare requires you to maintain minimum essential coverage or pay $750 fineor 2% of your income - whichever is Greater. Ok for the men - Let's say you have NO plans to remarry and your 48 or 88 so you have NO need for pediatric services. so your in market to buy a health coverage plan without an option to insure children in order to lower your premiums. TOO DAM BAD. Lets say your a woman and are now incapable of having children so you want a lower cost policy without maternity. TOO DAM BAD. Section 1302 FORCES you to cover it anyway. You see it's all about knowing what is in the bill before it's passed. Unlike Pelosi who stated "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it. Educate yourself people. There is so much you don't know. Obama needs to cut expenses and it will be YOU - because 5% of those over age 65 are the beneficiaries of 50% of all spending on health care. Remember when he said "Maybe your better off NOT having the surgery and take a pain med. How's that for compassion?? If you think Obama isn't eyeing the elderly as the prime target audience for making cuts your sadly mistaken.

Most company plans today are very general. You get to choose between a PPO or HMO. Simple as that. So I don't get your point...I am over childbearing years yet still pay for the coverage through my company insurance plan.

[Guest]

Well you may not have been sucked in to the left, but the right would have denied you your comfortable union career, had they had their way.

e - i doubt that - the right needs the teamsters since they don't seem to get down and dirty when it comes to work.

[Guest]

e - i doubt that - the right needs the teamsters since they don't seem to get down and dirty when it comes to work.

The right need truck drivers - they would prefer they not be Teamsters.

[Guest]

and of course the Doctors will be leaving their practices also so not only will you wait you will wait longer because of the shortage of Doctors

[Guest]

and of course the Doctors will be leaving their practices also so not only will you wait you will wait longer because of the shortage of Doctors

Interesting information - I have not heard that, although we probably don't seek the same resources.

[Guest]

Where are the Doctors going?

[Guest]

That has some truth to it, but lots of Republicans courted the favor of the Teamsters.

Teamsters members do, after all, by and large work for big business. It wasn't taxpayers who put food on my table but the profit of the companies that employed me.

Things aren't black and white when it comes to unions.

The same can be said about virtually any issue my friend.

That's one of those vague thoughts that mean nothing. Most things are black and white it can be said, and that still means nothing.

[Guest]

From AAMC - Association of American Medical Colleges:

Addressing the Physician Shortage Under Reform

—By Sarah Mann

Given the likelihood that more people will enter the health care system in coming years following passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), it is equally likely that more doctors will be needed to treat them.

Recognizing the growing gulf between physician supply and patient demand, medical education leaders and the AAMC are working to inform Congress and other lawmakers about the best means of addressing physician shortages. One of these potential means is lifting the existing cap on Medicare-funded residency positions.

“After the passage of ACA, there is recognition that there will be real physician shortages if we don’t do more to lift the residency cap,” said AAMC Chief Advocacy Officer Atul Grover, M.D., Ph.D. “People on both sides of the aisle have realized the need to train more doctors.”

A physician shortage was already expected before ACA was signed into law in March 2010, and now that gap could worsen. According to projections released last fall by the AAMC Center for Workforce Studies, there will be a shortage of about 63,000 doctors by 2015, with greater shortages on the horizon—91,500 and 130,600 for 2020 and 2025, respectively. Earlier projections had placed the shortage at about 39,600 doctors by 2015.

Since 2008, AAMC projections have incorporated later utilization data and changing specialization patterns among new physicians, and have shown shortages across those specialties as well as in primary care.

The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 froze the number of Medicare-supported positions in hospitals at 1996 levels. Since then, the number of Medicare-funded residency slots has remained relatively stable at about 100,000 per year, despite a growing demand for medical services and increasing projections of physician shortages.

Several factors are contributing to the growing demand. On top of the 32 million Americans who will get insurance cards if the ACA is fully implemented, 15 million more will become eligible for Medicare in the coming years. Meanwhile, physician supply is projected to drop because of baby boomer retirement and other factors.

“The new AAMC projections reflect what happens with a relatively sudden increase in physician demand,” said Scott Shipman, M.D., M.P.H., senior researcher of workforce studies at AAMC. “From a projection standpoint, there is an exacerbated shortage in all areas.”

To mitigate the coming shortages, in 2006, the AAMC called for a 30 percent increase in medical school enrollment by 2015. To date, enrollment has risen 13 percent. But without a concomitant increase in Graduate Medical Education (GME) [residency-training] slots, increasing the overall physician supply in the U.S. will be impossible.

Several specialties in particular could experience shortages of 62,400 doctors by 2020, according to 2008 data from the federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). General surgery is predicted to be one of the hardest-hit specialties, with a shortage of 21,400 surgeons......"
https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/reporter/april11/184178/addressing_the_physician_shortage_under_reform.htm l

Medicare: Graduate Medical Education

Medicare funds the vast majority of residency training in the US. This tax-based financing covers resident salaries and benefits through payments called Direct Medical Education payments. Medicare also uses taxes for Indirect Medical Education, a subsidy paid to teaching hospitals in exchange for training resident physicians. For the 2008 fiscal year these payments were $2.7 and $5.7 billion respectively. This in turn has funded the provision of physician level health care that would have otherwise cost the systems orders of magnitude more to finance. Overall funding levels have remained at the same level over the last ten years, so that the same number or fewer residents have been trained under this program.

Meanwhile, the US population continues to grow older, which has led to greater demand for physicians. At the same time the cost of medical services continue rising rapidly and many geographic areas face physician shortages, both trends suggesting the supply of physicians remains too low.

Medicare finds itself in the odd position of having assumed control of graduate medical education, currently facing major budget constraints, and as a result, freezing funding for graduate medical education, as well as for physician reimbursement rates.

This halt in funding in turn exacerbates the exact problem Medicare sought to solve in the first place: improving the availability of medical care. In response, teaching hospitals have resorted to alternative approaches to funding resident training, leading to the modest 4% total growth in residency slots from 1998–2004, despite Medicare funding having been frozen since 1996."
Medicare (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)#Graduate_Medical_Educatio n)

[Guest]

Obama care has raised our insurance rates more in last 2 yrs then the last 8yrs total and have cut benefits and raised out of pocket exps. 3yrs ago had robotic prostate surgery my out of pocket was about $800 3 months ago had out patient shoulder surgery out of pocket about 3000.The rates this year alone were up more then 300 a month.Coworkers with families didn't know if they could afford to keep it.This putting a big burden on people who are on tight budgets.Even today on face the nation they said how rate were going up.My wife who has been in medical field for 35 yrs has had meetings on all theses cuts in benefits in medicare coming down pike and that's a fact. What I don't understand is how people can be against the Wis. gov. allowing the state to put Ins.out for bid saving the tax payers money and then be for Obama care that's hurting working family's and seniors.People Talk about fraud in the medical field but don't say a word about public sector unions forcing tax payers to buy ins at over market prices,isn't that steeling from the tax payer also?The fact is if obama care stands we will all pay more for less

[Guest]

The right need truck drivers - they would prefer they not be Teamsters.

but we all can't have what we prefer...can we?...i preferred not to have obama - but i wound up with him! ;)

[Guest]

COLOGAL,

With all due respect, I have been blessed thus far with good health and am old enough on the other hand that this bill probably will never influence me in any way but I would like to ask two questions simply because I do not know and is not meant to be argumentative..

1. Are there not drug plans that you can get that use NON generic drugs ?

2. Is the reason for your inability to see the specialist one of the specialist himself and being popular and/or your choice of a specific specialist ?

The reason I am asking is that this would not be a rationing but in fact, good examples of free market, in that you CAN get both, but it is a cost issue !!!!

Again, not meant to be argumentative but if I am correct and I hope you will correct me if I am, THAT is one of my many beefs with this particular bill....it does not in anyway, AS PROMISED, address health costs in anyway !

Thanks

Bucco...sorry I missed this post.

1. About 2.5 years ago I was on a non generic drug and in December I refilled the prescription as I did every month. In Jan I went to refill and was told I needed a pre-authorization before I could refill. That started a epic battle between myself and Medco. My insurance company didn't change just the coverage. I was sick for about 5 months being forced to try other generic drugs before finally I got the drug that worked. Funny thing was I when the prescription arrived it was generic. I only have 1 non-generic drug left and I went through the pre authorization process with that one a few months later. I have a new health plan now, my company was purchased, and I have been told I will have to go through the process again when I try to refill. So in my experience its not a matter of price.

2. I knew it would be hard to get into this specialist because she is very good. But I also asked my doctor for a referral to a less busy specialist. So far no luck with either. My travel schedule can affect my ability to get an appointment but this time that is not an issue.

I think we can agree on your point that healthcare costs have to be addressed. I am watching Marsha Blackburn (R) Tenn. on MSNBC right now talking about the Republican plan for their version of the Affordable Healthcare plan. Her response to what the plan would do for patient with Pre-Existing conditions was a State run healthcare plan. Seriously, does she even understand how many people have pre-existing conditions. Remember a newborn baby was declared to have a pre-existing condition by an insurance plan.

Unfortunately, the free market model is failing in this area, in my humble opinion.