Sally Pipes, President of the Pacific Research Institute, has written an important article in Forbes analyzing new survey results demonstrating that 87% of medical physicians in the United States no longer view the American Medical Association as representing their views and interests.

Ms. Pipes states: “Much of that dissatisfaction stems from the organization’s support for President Obama’s contentious health care reform package.” The survey, conducted by physician recruitment firm Jackson & Coker, discovered that more than three times as many doctors believed that the quality of American health care would “deteriorate” rather than “improve” under ObamaCare; and nine of ten physicians think ObamaCare will have a negative impact on their profession. Most member driven organizations would collapse with such negative trends; but the AMA survives by collecting up to $70 million from its exclusive relationship with the federal government to provide CPT Codes in direct conflict with medical doctors.

The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code are maintained by the Chicago-based American Medical Association to describe medical, surgical, and diagnostic services and is designed to communicate a uniform set of information about medical services and procedures to physicians, patients, accreditation organizations, and payers for administrative, financial, and Medicare and Medicaid billing coders. These codes have been designated by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services to be published for treatment guidelines and billings.

Federal and state spending on health care is $1.1 trillion; about 42% of all healthcare spending in the U.S. last year. CPT codes set average physician and hospital reimbursement rates. For example the average physician rates for treating Medicare beneficiaries is 81% of the rate private insurers pay and for Medicaid patients the reimbursements are just 56% of the private rate.

American Medical Association 2009 revenue according to “Hoover’s Company Profiles” was $248 million; with $70 million of income coming from “publishing”. This is an especially large percentage of revenue, considering that the AMA membership dues were only $42 million.

(more…)

On August 31, I headed to the health care town hall meeting of my congressional representative, Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). I suspected that she planned to stack the meeting with paid organizers, after she vowed on Real Time with Bill Maher to bring “millions” of people into the streets to support the so-called “public option.” So I brought a video camera.

A friend and I took turns filming protesters on both sides of the issue. We caught an organizer from the group Health Care for America Now (HCAN) instructing followers to block dissenting views: “So if they stand up and start asking questions, and you’re in that area, simply stand up, and start chanting… ‘Health care now! Health care now!’”

(more…)

The first game in a long series of Obamacare battles is complete and the liberals lost Game 1 by 13 votes.  The Senate voted against a procedural motion to debate the so-called “Doc Fix” bill Wednesday.  Just as Manny Ramirez of the Los Angeles Dodgers has taken a beating in the media for leaving Game 5 of the National League Championship Series early to take a shower and hitting a mere .250 for the series, Senator Harry Reid has taken a beating in the press for marching the Democrat Caucus into a losing vote in the first battle over Obamacare.

A bipartisan coalition of senators concerned about spending stopped Senators Reid from bringing “Doc Fix” to a vote with 13 Democrats siding with the entire Republican Caucus.  Democrat Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Bill Nelson of Florida, Jon Tester of Montana, Mark Warner and Jim Webb of Virgina, Ron Wyden of Oregon and Independent Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut all opposed the motion to start debate on the bill.

The strategy to pass the “Doc Fix” outside of Obamacare in an attempt to buy off doctors groups’ support for Obamacare was documented in the media.  The Hill reported earlier this week that “the White House and Democratic leaders are offering doctors a deal:  They’ll freeze cuts in Medicare payments to doctors in exchange for doctors’ support of healthcare reform.”  Clearly the majority of senators would not go along with this strategy because the $247 billion price tag for the bill was too high to buy Obamacare. 

(more…)

The public option has been a political football since early summer. The President has said more than once that he prefers it but will not demand it. This was considered capitulation by many on the left who see the public option as necessary for “real” reform. Meanwhile, belying the President’s public statements, there are reports that the President’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel has been quietly but firmly twisting arms in the back rooms to insure the public option is included in the final bill. Even now, pressure is mounting on Harry Reid to include the public option in the health reform bill he brings to the Senate floor.

In response to the tumult over what appears to be a small feature of the effort, more than one critic has wondered aloud why Democrats don’t just give up on the public option – which is opposed by every Republican – in order to reach a more bipartisan outcome. What exactly is so important about the public option anyway? And why do Democrats in particular seem so wedded to the idea?

There is a simple answer to these questions, but it’s an answer you’ve likely not heard from any institution in the mainstream media. The truth is that the public plan is a carefully devised scheme, a sneaky strategy, to deceive American voters. It’s a political marketing ploy designed to move the nation to a single-payer system – like the one in Canada – over the next decade. The public option is the Trojan horse. On the outside it’s all about “choice and competition”, but once it has been dragged within the walls of American medicine it’s true nature will become evident. By that time, it’ll be too late.

(more…)

What appears to be the official blog of President Obama’s administration is all aflutter because the President will welcome, “doctors from across the United States to the White House to share their unique perspective on the struggles that American families face every day when it comes to health care.”  (They posted today’s agenda in the name of transparency!)

The post even links to a National Public Radio (NPR) story in which a survey of medical professionals indicates they are among the biggest supporters of the so-called “public option.”  A co-sponsor of the study, Dr. Alex Federman, indicates that, “physicians favored Medicare when it came to delivering care to patients. They thought Medicare was better when it came to autonomy and their decision making and their ability to get patients the care that they thought the patients needed.”

Furthermore, the American Medical Association (AMA) has endorsed the public option after an appeal from the President and despite, according to ABC News, the fact that “some member physicians at the group’s annual meeting [in June] likened the notion to communism.”

Beverly Gossage, Research Fellow for Show-Me Institute and founder of HSA Benefits Consulting wondered which insurance companies rejected the most claims.  She found her answer in the AMA’s own 2008 National Health Insurer Report Card.  The chart below appears on page 5 of the 16-page report.

Of the eight insurers listed, Medicare is most likely to reject a claim, sending away 6.85% of requests.  This is more than any private insurer and double that of the private insurers’ average!

In short, the AMA is endorsing a plan whose closest existing example is the most frequent denier of claims.  How the public option exemplifies “delivering care to patients” is unclear.