A Look from Another Angle

Obama touts his health care as affordable and universal. Let's look at it from the Massachusetts angle. Two years ago, Massachusetts implemented its state health care program. Almost everyone was given access to health insurance. Health care costs are now wrecking the state budget. Health care spending has risen 10% a year. This month, a panel recommended ditching their fee-for-service system and replacing it with a single payment. In other words, the doctor gets the same amount of money no matter what he treats you for.

This is what will inevitably ensue with Obamacare. The argument is that doctors profit by you under their care longer, so they order unnecessary tests and treatments. I don't know about you, but that's not been my experience. I've had several fairly serious medical problems over the years, and my doctors have always taken a conservative approach -- "Let's try this, and if that doesn't work, then we'll order this or that test and try something a little more involved." They're also leaving the patient out of this equation -- the patient has the option to ask, "Is this test really necessary? What will happen if I don't have the test?" If you don't trust your doctor to give you an honest answer, you need to get another doctor.

Back to my original point - from the opposite angle, if a doctor is getting paid the same amount for every patient no matter what he does, I can see a weary, underpaid physician saying, "Take two aspirin and call me in the morning," when I may be suffering from a brain tumor. I won't have the option to choose another doctor, because I'll get the one the government picks for me.

Which system would you rather have - fee-for-service or some form of Obamacare?

"Health care system can ill afford to continue with fee-for-service." The Dallas Morning News; July 21, 2009; p. 1D.