• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Side Effects: What Doctors Have to Say About Obamacare

    No one is more familiar with the health care system than doctors. So what do they have to say about Obamacare? Nothing good, according to a recent survey.

    The Physicians Foundation found that “rather than a sign of progress, the survey suggests that most physicians view health reform as a further erosion of the unfavorable conditions with which they must contend.” Furthermore, Obamacare “has further disengaged doctors from their profession, with potentially negative consequences for both the medical profession and for the quality and accessibility of medical care in the United States.”

    Sixty-seven percent of respondents initially held a “very negative” or “somewhat negative” impression of Obamacare. When asked how their feelings had changed months after passage of the law, 51 percent said they felt the same, while 39 percent felt more negative. Furthermore, 86 percent of respondents said physicians’ perspectives were not adequately taken into account during the reform process.

    Physicians also expressed concern that Obamacare will further erode the quality of health care in the United States. Only 10 percent of respondents expect the health law to improve quality of care, while 56 percent expect quality to diminish. As a result of the new law, a majority of physicians expect to spend less time with patients and restrict their practice significantly for certain types of patients, especially Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.

    Sixty-five percent of the survey respondents confessed to holding a “somewhat negative” or “very negative” attitude toward the practice of medicine after passage of Obamacare, an increase from 49 percent before enactment. And no wonder: The new law darkens the future for practicing and aspiring physicians in several harmful ways.

    According to the Physicians Foundation, Obamacare will exacerbate the pending physician shortage, making it more difficult for patients—especially those on Medicare or Medicaid—to access care. In addition, Obamacare will largely replace the private practice model by compelling physicians to consolidate or become hospital employees.

    Heritage analysis shows that the new law will reduce physician autonomy, weaken the doctor–patient relationship, and increase the role of the federal government in medical decision-making. Physicians will also face more bureaucratic hoops to jump through, requiring the devotion of more time to meeting administrative requirements.

    Finally, Obamacare fails to address growing concerns already facing the medical profession. According to Heritage health policy expert Robert Moffit:

    It is hard to imagine how the health law will improve the prospects of the medical profession. … The medical liability problems that confront physicians in many states remain. Moreover, the existing system of administrative payment for doctors and other medical professionals under Medicare and Medicaid, a deepening problem for physicians, is re-entrenched with federal program coverage expansions.

    The Physicians Foundation claims that health reform was “necessary and inevitable,” but Obamacare is the wrong way forward. By creating new problems within the practice of medicine and inflaming existing ones, Obamacare will succeed only at hurting the medical profession.

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    9 Responses to Side Effects: What Doctors Have to Say About Obamacare

    1. Mark Jarmuth says:

      Tax cuts on millionaires good for job growth? If that were true, since Bush enacted the largest tax cut in our history, he should have had the best record on job creation of any president ever. In fact, he had the worst record of any president since Hoover.

      Let me publish an opposition paper on the Republican tax plan now proposed. I'll show based on an extensive examination of our economic history how, if enacted, such a plan would be a disaster for our economy.

    2. Mark Jarmuth says:

      Tax cuts on millionaires good for job growth? If that were true, since Bush enacted the largest tax cut in our history, he should have had the best record on job creation of any president ever. In fact, he had the worst record of any president since Hoover.

      Let me publish an opposition paper on the Republican tax plan now proposed. I'll show based on an extensive examination of our economic history how, if enacted, such a plan would be a disaster for our economy.

      jarmuth@hotmail.com

    3. Bobbie says:

      It's already eroding the quality of care. My doctor has become less certain because he is not certain what he can be certain of.

      This will clear out doctors of quality and replace with doctors not so qualified. It will decrease standards that will make us sick.

      A lot of miscommunication goes unheard. But there are many of doctors that have such a thick accent, putting much stress on the elderly or anyone unable to understand clearly. Everyone with an accent isn't held accountable to any mistakes made, they're made exception to. Especially if they're immigrant (who did not go through the same educational, ethical, process the doctors of America did. It's time to realize what is happening and stop it asap.

    4. Pingback: COACHEP » Blog Archive » News about Obamacare issue #197

    5. Eddie says:

      Mark Jarmuth, during GW Bush's administration, unemployment was at or below 5%. During Carter's administration, it bounced around just under 6% to 7.5%. The rate during Obama's "reign" has been over 9%.

    6. Mark Jarmuth says:

      In response to Eddie:

      Eddie: Are you saying Obama is responsible for the 9% unemployment rate? Everyone knows the economy went south under Bush, not Obama. Bush was a two recession president and had the worst record on job creation of any president since Hoover. Furthermore, the Dow Jones was a thousand points less when bush left office than when he took office (8,600 versus 9,800) Morever, since Kennedy, the GNP under Democratic presidents has been twice that of Republican presidents, as I pointed out in my first book, The Nazi Paradigm.

      There's one more problem with your statement Eddie: you cherry pick facts. You point out the unemployment rate under Bush without mentioning that interest rates were cut to a forty year low to win Bush the 2004 presidential election.

      jarmuth@hotmail.com

    7. Pingback: FRC Blog » The Social Conservative Review: The Insider’s Guide to Pro-Family News–December 9, 2010

    8. Pingback: Obama Claims Power to Decide if Your Medicine is Too Expensive to be Allowed : Stop The ACLU

    9. Pingback: Side Effects: What Doctors Have to Say About Obamacare — We The People of Longview, TX

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×