Guest Article - Doctor Shortage

Doc holiday
By MICHAEL D. TANNER -a Cato Institute senior fellow.


"The doctor is not in.

The United States already faces a growing physician shortage. As our population ages, we require more and more intensive health care. At the same time, enrollment in medical schools has been essentially flat, meaning we are not producing new physicians at anywhere near the rate we need to. In fact, according to the American Association of Medical Colleges, we face a shortfall of more than 150,000 doctors over the next 15 years.

And it could get a whole lot worse.

The health reform bill signed into law last year is expected to significantly increase the number of Americans with health insurance or participating in the Medicaid program. Meanwhile, an aging population will increase participation in Medicare. This means a greater demand for physician services.

But at the same, the bill may drive physicians out of practice.

Existing government programs already reimburse physicians at rates that are often less than the actual cost of treating a patient. Estimates suggest that on average physicians are reimbursed at roughly 78% of costs under Medicare, and just 70% of costs under Medicaid. Physicians must either make up for this shortfall by shifting costs to those patients with insurance — meaning those of us with insurance pay more — or treat patients at a loss.

As a result, more and more physicians are choosing to opt-out of the system altogether. Roughly 13% of physicians will not accept Medicare patients today. Another 17% limit the number of Medicare patients they will see, a figure that rises to 31% among primary care physicians. The story is even worse in Medicaid, where as many as a third of doctors will not participate in the program.

Traditionally, most doctors have been willing to take some Medicare patients either out of altruism or as a “loss leader,” to reach other family members outside the Medicare program. Others try to get around Medicare’s low reimbursement rates by unbundling services or providing care not covered through the program. (Nearly 85% of seniors carry supplemental policies to cover these additional services). With many office and equipment costs fixed, even a low reimbursement patient may be better than no patient at all for some doctors. This is even more true for hospitals where Medicare patients may account for the majority of people they serve. And doctors can take some comfort in the fact that Medicare is pretty much guaranteed to pay and pay promptly. The same is not always true of private insurance.

But if reimbursements fall much more, the balance could be tipped.

The government’s own chief actuary says that reimbursement cuts could mean “reductions in access to care and/or the quality of care.” Once the cuts hit hospitals, they too will be in trouble. Medicare’s actuaries estimate that 15% of hospitals could close. Inner-city and rural hospitals would be hardest hit.

Nor is the pressure on reimbursement rates likely to be felt solely in government programs. The health care law contains a number of new regulations that are already driving up insurance premiums. The government is responding by cajoling and threatening insurers. If insurers find their ability to pass on cost increases limited, they too may begin to cut costs by cutting reimbursements.

For a lot of older physicians, retirement in Florida may begin to look like a very good option. Roughly 40% of doctors are age 55 or over. Are they really going to want to stick it out for a few more years if all they have to look forward to is more red tape (both government and insurance company) for less money? Those that remain are increasingly likely to join “concierge practices,” limiting the number of patients they see and refusing both government and private insurance."

And, at the same time, fewer young people are likely to decide that medicine is a good career. Remember, the average medical school graduate begins their career with more than $295,000 in debt.

A 2010 IBD/TPP Poll found that 45% of doctors would at least consider leaving their practices or taking early retirement as a result of the new health care law. And, an online survey by Sermo.com, a sort of Facebook for physicians, found that 26% of physicians in solo practices were considering closing. Of course, not every doctor who told these polls that he or she would consider leaving the field will actually do so. But if even a small portion depart, our access to medical care will suffer.

In fact, we have already seen the start of this process in Massachusetts, where Mitt Romney’s health care reforms were nearly identical to President Obama’s. Romney’s reforms increased the demand for health care but did nothing to expand the supply of physicians. In fact, by cracking down on insurance premiums, Massachusetts pushed insurers to reduce their payments to providers, making it less worthwhile for doctors to expand their practices. As a result, the average wait to get an appointment with a doctor grew from 33 days to over 55 days.

Promising universal health coverage is easy. But what does universal coverage mean if you can’t actually see a doctor?"

New Texas Law Proposed

TSA Take Notice
Finally, there's a new Texas legislature bill would make TSA (Transportation and Security Administration - a division of Homeland Security) groping a felony! The bill would make it illegal for any security officer to intentionally touch someones genitals (even with clothes on), unless they have a probable cause that the person is carrying a weapon or something illegal!

THREE CHEERS FOR TEXAS!
It's about time someone somewhere got some guts and did the right thing to stop these illegal search and seizure tactics used buy TSA at our airports under the guise of "security." Hopefully, this new law will also include CHILD MOLESTATION as well!

How Much Freedom to Give Up
Does the new TSA "screening" procedure really make air travel safer? Seriously, what are the statistics? Do we have any documented proof that these invasive procedures have been effective in preventing a terrorist attack?

The answer is "NO." These security procedures have NOT prevented any attacks. So why do we still permit them? Good question.

Action To Take
Let your reps in Congress know that you want them to support a similar effort to block TSA from using these invasive techniques any longer. It just isn't right to sacrifice freedom for an unjustified and ILLEGAL seach in a public airport!

Weekly Polls

The Rasmussen Reports is an independent electronic publishing firm that specializes in public opinion polling. Here are some current results on some main issues:

Presidential Tracking Poll
This tracks how the President is doing by those surveyed.

• Strongly Approve... 24%


• Strongly Disapprove... 38%


• Approval Index... -14

Presidential Approval Index
This chart is from RasmussenReports.com:


Job Approval Rating

• 53% of voters say that tax cut would help the economy.


• 21% say that tax cuts would hurt the economy!


• 13% not sure.

Guest Article - Here's the Stats

Dollar Loses More Ground
By STEPHEN L. BERNARD - Wall Street Journal

"NEW YORK—The dollar dropped after economic indicators pointed to a dismal employment picture and slowing economic growth.

First-time claims for unemployment benefits jumped 25,000 to 429,000, indicating employers might have slowed their hiring recently. Economists were expecting claims to fall to 395,000.

At the same time, gross domestic product rose at a modest 1.8% pace in the first quarter, matching economists' forecasts. However, the pace of expansion is much weaker than it was at the end of 2010, when the economy was growing at 3.1% pace.

"Overall this suggests that the U.S. economy is slowing down a bit and that could potentially weigh on the dollar going forward," said Brown Brothers Harriman strategist Mark McCormick.

The euro was at $1.4827 from about $1.4794 late Wednesday. The dollar was at ¥81.48, from ¥82.04.

The dollar has been hammered recently, losing out on interest-rate differentials and regularly hitting multiyear lows against other major currencies. Losses were especially bad Wednesday after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke indicated the central bank is far from tightening monetary policy as economic growth remains slow and unemployment remains high.

During European trading hours, the euro reached its highest level since December 2009 at $1.4882, while the Australian dollar hit yet another post-float high and traded at $1.0919."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What Does It All Mean?
You must have noticed how you are running out of money before the end of the month or before the next paycheck. It's no accident! It's now costing $50-70 dollars to fill up because Obama won't drill or use coal. You can BLAME the economic policies of the Obama administration plus, the inflationary actions created by Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank.

Between these two entities, Americans are being pulverized by BAD economic policies and deliberate de-valuation of the dollar. Don't blame anyone else. This is apparent. This is Obama's record. He can't blame this on onyone but himself! This is how Obama is "Fundamentally Changing America." Obama and his minions are deliberately doing this to America. They keep telling us all that everything is OK. Yeah? Look around. This isn't a recession - this is another Great Depression. Unemployment numbers reported by the government don't jive with those of the Gallop pole. What gives? The government is lying! This is a major re-distribution of wealth. The net result is that America's standard of living is being destroyed.

Action To Take
Do not re-elect Obama! In the mean time, tell Congress not to raise the debt ceiling and STOP SPENDING and BORROWING immediately.

Barry's World

Obama's Deficit Spending


Obama Money (his Stash)


The Stimulus Plan


Two Years After the Vote


Obama's Regulatory Czar
Cass Sunstein - responsible for many new big government regulations - all negative.

Cell Phones - Secret Weapon

Weapon Against Tyranny
You cell phone is a strong weapon! It has a camera and a video recorder! Video recordings by citizens have been used in court trials across the USA. However, there is a new trend in eliminating your Rights and personal freedoms.

13 States Trample Your Rights
Currently there are 13 states who have passed "laws" to protect public officials - including the police. Protect them from WHAT? If they are performing their respective duties lawfully - then what's to protect?

The states who have trampled your rights are as follows: AR, CA, CT, FL, IL, LA, MA, MD, MO, NH, OH, TX, and WV. Is yours on the list? If it is, you'd better be careful about video recording the police or public officials. These states IGNORE your Constitutional right to free speech, and illegal search and seizure! They say you cannot video record police or public officials. If you do, you will be arrested! This is no joke!

You will be arrested, camera confiscated, evidence destroyed and you will be held for various "trumped-up" charges. In all these cases throughout the USA, individuals usually are never convicted! Instead, they are treated like criminals and spend at least a night in jail. That's false arrest and harassment!

No Accountability
In states that have these "laws", there is no accountability for police who exercise their power incorrectly or falsely arrest people on "bogus" charges. There are never any investigations - even though your RIGHTS have been trampled on and ignored. Police often delete or destroy the "evidence" that can be used against them. There are never any follow-up investigations because until the advent of the cell phone camera, the police narrative used to be the "official" narrative.

What's Wrong With This Picture?
The laws should protect innocent citizens - NOT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS! Citizens should be allowed to continue using this technology instead of being harassed and/or arrested. In fact, a citizens' video should be helpful to the police, if they are doing their job correctly (and legally!).

The circuit Court of Maryland recently dismissed the case of recording of police action resulting in a citizen's arrest for using the camera. They stated: "Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power if the state... should not expect tour actions to be shielded from public observation. 'Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?'" (Meaning: Who watches the Watchman?)

Action To Take
Hold public officials accountable in public. Record their actions - including police officers. They have no legal right to prohibit you for video recording them in public. You do NOT need their permission. That's a violation of your Constitutional rights! These "laws" are unconstitutional.

You can live-stream the video to QIK.COM for archiving so the police cannot destroy the evidence. Use it, and it will verify your side of the story!

Refuse to be bullied!

Guest Article - War Protestors? What's That?

Where Did All the Anti-War Protestors Go?
By John Stossel - FBN News

"The anti-war movement was all over the news before President Obama was elected. But apparently they weren’t really anti-war ... they were just anti-President Bush. Two college professors just released a study of national protests between 2007 and 2009. What did they find?

… After January 2007, the attendance at antiwar rallies [measured in] roughly the tens of thousands, or thousands, through the end of 2008.

… After the election of Barack Obama as president, the order of magnitude of antiwar protests dropped [...] Organizers were hard pressed to stage a rally with participation in the thousands, or even in the hundreds. For example, we counted exactly 107 participants at a Chicago rally on October 7, 2009.

Amazing. Especially because the war in Afghanistan ramped up after Obama was elected. American fatalities shot up in 2009 and 2010.

The protesters have remained silent over Libya.

And I’m struck by the hypocrisy of the supposedly "anti-war" politicians who voted against Iraq, like Nancy Pelosi. Since Obama was elected, she has voted to continue the war in Afghanistan … and supported the attack on Libya.

Only a handful of Congressmen have remained principled on foreign intervention. One of them is Ron Paul. On my FBN show this week, I’ll talk with him about why he opposes our "aggressive foreign policy." Thursday at 10pm EST."