Wednesday, December 23, 2009

'Insurance is Not Assurance'

Yesterday the AMA stood shoulder to shoulder with the Democrats and announced their support of the Senate healthcare bill. The Dems are taking that endorsement along with that of AARP to bolster their arguments, which is falling on the deaf ears of the increasing number of Americans who are not buying into the shuck and jive tactics for taking over the healthcare in this country.
"Americans are about to be in for a massive, massive shock," said Dr. Michael Stechison.

Stechison is a neurosurgeon at Gwinnett Medical Center. He's also a Canadian. In 1989, he moved his practice to the United States to get away from nationalized health care. "I'm here to tell you, as a refugee from a socialized system in Canada, that it is just not a system that people are happy with or serves the people well," Stechison said Tuesday.
Where will the doctors go after our federal ruling elite pass this legislation?

The passage of this 2000+ page Frankenstein package of bribes and payoffs will require an increase of doctors, not a decrease. Would you spend all of the money it requires to attend medical school or go so far in debt that you may never be able to pay it off, just to enter a profession where the government is going to dictate how much you can charge for your services or tell you which tests you can pursue to best serve your patient?

It seems the Democrats have fallen in love with limiting the income of the citizens, and taking government bailout money is not a prerequisite to having your salary capped. Sure, they did it to the financial institutions, only to make exceptions apparently for those who were members in good standing with the Socialist, er sorry Democrat party. It soon extended to health insurance execs, who haven't taken a dime of federal money and now by sleight of hand they will do the same thing to doctors.

It seems the only folks who don't have to worry about pay caps are union workers, lawyers, and ACORN employees.
Doctors in opposition to the currently proposed reforms claim the ironic result of those reforms would likely be less access to health care. They point to Medicare and Medicaid as prime examples of the shortcomings of health care funded by the government. "Those poor older patients can't get in to see the doctor because the doctors can't afford to see them because they're operating at a loss to take care of them. So, that is not a solution," Stechison said.

"Insurance is not assurance. Just because you have a card that says 'Medicaid' on it, doesn't mean you're going to be able to get in and see a doctor," Williamson said.

No comments: