The real issue here is that doctors and all other providers will eventually be paid by the government, especially under the healthcare takeover act that was deceitfully named the "affordable care" law.

When the government decides to pay them less, providers will naturally be less inclined to work increasingly growing workloads for ever decreasing rates of government payment.

Then the government can begin to REQUIRE providers to take all comers. After all, the Supreme Court just ruled that government can tax citizens if they don't buy health insurance. So, why can't it "tax" providers by making them work for less? It's a very slippery slope...

And by the way, if you don't think the government can force doctors to take on patients that they don't want to take on, just ask the two doctors in San Diego County who were found to have violated the civil rights of two lesbians who wanted a child through artificial insemination, when they declined on religious grounds.

The headline in NYT & CA Healthline is misleading. The "health law" isn't worsening the shortage or the regional disparities, particularly in primary care. Those are regrettably already in place, and uninsured and disadvantaged people have been living awkwardly with access defiency for years. The "health law" will, however, make local systems visibly accountable for their ability to mitigate the impact of workforce shortages affecting the entire population. More doctors will help, eventually, but meanwhile smarter systems and expanded teams stimulated by the "health law" will be essential.

I guess what this report is trying to say is, the Republicans are correct. The US just can't afford to provide health care to everyone. Some people are going to have to sacrifice so that health care doesn't suffer for everyone.

Maybe we do need to take their approach to health care. If you can't afford to pay for your own health care, then don't get sick, and if you do, please die quickly. You don't want to be a further drain on society.

http://livingwithmcl.com