Religion & Law

Earlier this month, I completed a five-part series about the recently-enacted health care legislation, concluding that it was unlikely to succeed and that the cause of greater access to health care might be set-back rather than advanced by this irresponsible legislation.  I argued that we must maintain our attention on the matter of health care and diligently continue the search for genuine reform, because the Democrat-party-line enactment was not prudent, was not economically viable, and was not politically sustainable.  (The full series can be found here.)

A commentary today by Daniel Palestrant in Forbes reports on a recent survey of physicians which found that 79 percent were more pessimistic about the future of health care after enactment of the Democratic health care legislation.  Moreover, two-thirds of physicians were considering opting-out of government-funded health care programs, which of course would make the approach pushed through by the Democrats a non-starter:

The same reform bill that will provide "care for all" may drive away more physician caregivers than attract previously uninsured patients. What a predicament that would be.

Many may find the data from the poll puzzling. How could physicians be so pessimistic about a bill that clearly has so many positives? For one, the bill addresses none of the issues most consistently ranked by physicians as the most critical for lowering costs and improving access. Tort reform, streamlining billing and payment, and fixing the flawed government formula for calculating physician reimbursement are given little, if any, serious attention.

* * *

Health care without active physician participation is no health care at all.

Greg Sisk