Subscription Center
Jun 15, 2009 04:07 PM | 11
After proposing $313 billion in cuts to providers of health care this weekend, President Obama took the stage at the American Medical Association’s (AMA) annual meeting in Chicago today to reassure doctors and ask for their backing of his plan to remake health care.
It was the latest stop on Obama’s campaign for health reform and the first time a president has addressed the AMA since Ronald Reagan in 1983.
To trim wasteful spending, Obama suggested changing payment of doctors and hospitals to reward quality over quantity of care.
But many doctors fret that cuts and a proposed government-run insurance option could hurt their livelihoods. “Now, I know there’s some concern about a public option,” Obama told the doctors. “In particular, I understand that you are concerned that today’s Medicare rates will be applied broadly in a way that means our cost savings are coming off your backs.”
While calling the concerns “legitimate,” Obama said they could be overcome by rewarding best practices over the “current piece-work reimbursement.” He also said he wouldn’t push a single-payer system.
The president called for greater spending on preventive care, a switch to electronic medial records, a reduction of medical school costs for students and scrutiny of the effectiveness of treatments.
The price of the $2-trillion-a-year health care system, which Obama called a "ticking time bomb," is poised to consume 20 percent of individuals' salaries within 10 years. "For all this spending," he said, "the quality of our care is often lower, and we aren't any healthier."
He applauded the AMA's efforts in teaming up with others in the health-care industry to cut $2 trillion in spending over the next decade and received standing ovations himself from the gathering of doctors. But the hall quieted—and a few people booed—when he argued against caps on malpractice awards, saying they “can be unfair to people who’ve been wrongfully harmed.”
Read coverage from 10 years ago about rising health care costs.
Image of Obama at a 2007 presidential forum on health care courtesy of the Center for American Progress Action Fund via Flickr
Tags:
health care reform
More News Blog:
Next: Veterinarians caught in a cross-fire of Chinook
Previous: Penis-shaped mushroom named after frog expert
See what we're tweeting about
notscientific Critical Science Writing: A Checklist for the Life Sciences. By @jalees_rehman http://t.co/vHPxUY4nkx #scilogs notscientific @kahoakes @AkshatRathi @aidanhorner Let's hope he doesn't!! :P
kahoakes @notscientific @AkshatRathi @aidanhorner If Tim Berners-Lee said we had to call the WWW "W3" would you?
Deadline: Jul 30 2013
Reward: $100,000 USD
The Seeker desires a method for producing pseudoephedrine products in such a way that it will be extremely difficult for clandestine che
Deadline: Jun 29 2013
Reward: $7,000 USD
The Seeker for this Challenge desires proposals for chemical methods that could rapidly degrade a dilute aqueous solution
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
11 Comments
Add CommentIt is absolutely outrageous that the richest country on earth does not have health coverage for almost 40 million of its people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPeterT
I find it disgusting that our country can put a man on the moon before any other country but when faced with a simple task such as giving universal healthcare, we back down and become afraid because it might cut into doctor's paychecks. WTF!!! Since when does human greed factor more than trying to make that country's population healthy. I think that everyone who votes against universal healthcare should be tried and convicted of treason by endangering the health of everyone without insurance.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is simple stupidity that US treasury pays for lawless army of od aprtheid Israel and its racist citizens while Americans run pillar to post for medicines. It is time for America to rise up and say No to Israel and Yes to America. Otherwise US will disintegrtae like British empire or USSR. If Americans decide to be dictated by CNN, Fox and NYT then they deserve to be in the state they are in or may be even worse.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe fact is that Americans (and many illegal immigrants) are already receiving free health care- by the millions. We have the greatest medical system in the world. If you limit what doctors can charge then you limit the number of people entering the profession. In addition insurance costs for these doctors take a large bite out of their salary already to cover the "potential" malpractice suits. Consider the other side of the story before rushing to judgement.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBTW, if you like socialized medicine go to Russia. I'd choose an American doctor anyday over a socialized one. At least you have options. God Bless the USA!
Being a health care provider I see this from many angles. Having ultra conserative family members as well as more liberal friends it has given me a well rounded view. My aunt (ultra conservative) actually believes that if you dont earn you health care coverage-too bad for you. So i think, so we dont treat people? Just let them die? I have worked with physicians for 30 years and find that about 50% of them are all about the money. I have heard them talk about how they got more money in the 1980's for a ortho surgery for example and many other similar stories. I tend to think " oh my" i can only have 3 cars, 2 homes, and 1 large boat. I see patients every day that can't get into a specialist due to no coverage or very limited coverage. On the other hand i see family members insist on keeping a family member alive at outrageous costs that is not going to even bring any quality of life to that person. We need some sanity in medicine. I am distressed that physicians can refuse to treat medicade or medicare patients because of the low reinbursement. This pushes these people to the remaining kind and caring physicians who will take them. I fell that they should be required to make at least a small percent of there practive to consist of medicare patients. So these physicians who worry so much about there income with health care reforms are the same ones that refuse to provide care to the poor. Shame, shame, shame to the greed and selfishness of the AMA. I hope our president can at least start to change this mess. At the same time i think that we need patient education concerning the astronomical cost of end of life treatments that are not even helpful-even harmful to the patient.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGO4IT, What is your angle??? Millions of indigents are receiveing free medical care, so everything is wonderful? What about the countless more middle class folks who just can't afford medical insurance? America is the richest and most powerful nation on earth and healthcare is our national disgrace. America has the WORST medical system in the first world and it also happens to be the MOST expensive one. Just take your own advice, do some research and consider the other side. It's not a secret. Your suggested paradigm is just business as usual for the medical establishment that provisdes us with the highest cost, lowest quality medical care of all developed nations. And where do you get off sending us to Russia? Just cross our northern border to Canada where they have socialized medicine. Is it perfect?- No, but at least they take care of their own.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMost bankruptcies in this country are due to catastrophic health problems. Single payer, done properly, will be vastly more efficient and economically vital than our current for-profit mishmash.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIF THE GOVERMENT RUNS THE HEALTH CARE.KISS YOUR HEALTH AWAY.WHAT ABOUT MEDICARE AND MEDCAID,HOW CAN THEY CARE &2 TRILLION IS SPENDING.OBAMA DOES NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT HIS HEALTH OR HIS FAMILY,THEY HAVE THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE WORLD.WHAT ABOUT THE SENIORSWHO NEED THEIR DOCTORS.ROB FROM PETER TO PAY PAUL.THROW GOOD MONEY AWAY AFTER THE GOOD.PIE ITHE SKY .OBAMA IS NOT MY PRESIDENT.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEnter Your Comment Here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCan anyone please explain why the President needs the AMA's support? It is a bit like asking the fox if it's OK to build a chicken wire fence to protect the fowl. Who does the AMA control that the President has to kowtow to them? No one accuses him of not being at the high road of ethical conduct. But what is the explanation?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe President has spoken of paying more for quality. We can see that there certainly is room for improvement for as of early 2007 the U.S. had not made it into the top ten countries with the greatest longevity. While few doctors would not be able to provide the highest quality care to his/her present patients, they would of necessity have to cut down on the number of patients they treat or something else will suffer. Here are the possible scenarios: short vacations, more thinking, more responsibility, less money made as a result of business acumen, more work when the patient changes doctors (possibly mitigated by electronic health records). The AMA is not going to give up any of the status quo and so, why was the President there?
The standing ovations meant that the President has acquiesced to a special interest, a union, a lobbyist, the mighty AMA. These things diminish most presidencies and we can only hope that the President has an ace up his sleeves that will leave the AMA with high blood pressure, depression, diabetes, sore throats, and all the other cash cows that maintain a U.S. doctor's lifestyle.
I see a lot of ignorant envy of the doctor's lifestyle. Don't worry if the doctor's too busy to see you. I'd like to see studies showing that electronic records really improve quality and not just claims from software companies and their lackeys in government. Who do you think will pay for these electronic records? Do you really imagine that the doctors are independently wealthy? If EMRs really improved doctors' efficiency and quality of care, they would have been adopted a long time ago and wouldn't have to be forced upon them. I think the real question is, can the public afford EMRs? Regarding saving money, forget about it. Not without the trial lawyers on board.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this