AMA Should Take Stronger Stance

In President Obama's address to the AMA yesterday, he laid out some basic framework for the health care overhall he is undertaking in his still very young term. As part of his reform, one of his key considerations is a public insurance option in addition to the many private insurance options. The AMA has long been considered a conservative organization and fundamentally opposed to a socialized or universal payer system. While Obama is not directly proposing either of these options, he is laying the groundwork for a state controlled health care system. Many would argue that a public option in a private market is simply a back door way to socialize medicine, much the same way the TARP funds were a back door way for government to intervene in the banking sector.

Unforunately, the AMA did not take a firm stance against this public insurance option and remained cautious. They, of course, did not specifically endorse a public option but they did not close the door on it. This is something they should have done to show that we will not tolerate any slide toward a state contolled system. Honestly, does any really believe that a public option will not attempt to push the private sector out of the health care industry? Any does anyone seriously believe they could even accomplish this goal efficiently? All one needs to do is take a look at the fiscally disaterous public options now available to specific populations, Medicare and Medicaid, to see this is not a vaible option. More and more doctors are deciding not to accept Medicare and Medicaid because reimbursements are declining and it is not financially efficient to do so. This problem will be expontenially compounded under a public option available to the general public.

Overall, the public insurance option is not a feasible plan in many aspects. This author believes the AMA should take a stronger stance against this proposition and let the administration know where we stand. There are many other health care reform changes that would provide better care for patients, lower costs, and be acceptable for physicians. These will be outlined in later posts.

www.politicsandmedicine.com