Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Dr. Kulak Galt Von Wrecker

Dr. Kulak Galt Von Wrecker

Will not see Obamacare patients.

All of this was foreseen.

The Revolt of the Kulak doctor wreckers who would refuse to give up the fruits of their labors for the State.

From Richard Pollock, Doctors boycotting California’s Obamacare exchange

An estimated seven out of every 10 physicians in deep-blue California are rebelling against the state’s Obamacare health insurance exchange and won’t participate, the head of the state’s largest medical association said.

“It doesn’t surprise me that there’s a high rate of nonparticipation,” said Dr. Richard Thorp, president of the California Medical Association.

Thorp has been a primary care doctor for 38 years in a small town 90 miles north of Sacramento. The CMA represents 38,000 of the roughly 104,000 doctors in California.

“We need some recognition that we’re doing a service to the community. But we can’t do it for free. And we can’t do it at a loss. No other business would do that,” he said.

California offers one of the lowest government reimbursement rates in the country — 30 percent lower than federal Medicare payments. And reimbursement rates for some procedures are even lower.

You know what must be done.

(Full feature image available here.)

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Talk about inequality.

No better way to create a two-tier system of healthcare inequality.

You know what must be done.

Obama: “I just read in the newspaper that doctors are going broke, and I care about doctors, so today I’m announcing an Executive Order for doctor subsidies”.

    Doug Wright Old Grouchy in reply to rinardman. | December 7, 2013 at 1:52 pm

    What? Gov. Brown’s going to resurrect a modern version of Chairman Lenin’s famous prescription on how to deal with Kulaks? Does the DoJ and DHS need to sign off on this?

    Just kidding, yet expect Obama’s Media Acolytes would willingly support doing just that, even without waiting for B. Ayers to repeat his pronouncement of many years ago.

    Subsidies to infinity and beyond. Redistributive change, or recycled change, or change with diminishing returns, schemes always favor a select minority in their struggle to retain control and elevated status. It’s a myopic vision with an egocentric perspective. I think normalizing abortion and denigrating individual dignity will aid them in their flailing efforts. What species voluntarily murders their own offspring for convenience? It’s survival of the fittest. The Dodos were inferior.

Once again, a Disney movie title will suffice:

Honey, I Shrank the Provider Networks.

    GrumpyOne in reply to LukeHandCool. | December 7, 2013 at 2:49 pm

    …and now the final solution is at hand, single payer!

      In an effort to avoid addressing the comprehensive and progressive misalignments they caused in our economy and society. There are not a few people who are obsessed with intelligent design and the material benefits promised by mortal gods.

      Yep,
      You got it right.
      Obamacare was designed to fail and bring about the panic needed to push through Socialized Medicine.
      I think we may see this push very soon, probably in January.

        rabidfox in reply to snowshooze. | December 7, 2013 at 9:01 pm

        Hard to justify government controlled single payer in the face of the massive incompetence shown so far.

          Karen Sacandy in reply to rabidfox. | December 7, 2013 at 10:53 pm

          I agree. Obama’s credibility is zilch. I don’t think dems are gonna want to hang their election chances on another medical “breakthrough” brought to voters by Obama.

“Only in September did insurance companies disclose that their rates would be pegged to California’s Medicaid plan, called Medi-Cal. That’s driven many doctors to just say no.”

Kaboom. There it is.

I’m a physician, and the son of a physician (now retired). Medicaid has always had terrible reimbursement. In my father’s primary care practice (I’m a specialist), the reimbursement was so low that it was actually more cost-effective to see the patient for FREE, compared to the time-and-effort required to get paid by the State’s Medicaid system.

That’s right. If you tried to get paid, you were actually out MORE money than simply doing it for nothing. That’s how perverse the system is.

This is why physicians take very few medicaid patients, if they participate in the program at all. It represents a monetary loss, except in practices that herd the Medicaid patients through like cattle. Few physicians choose to push that kind of volume/pace, since it greatly increases your malpractice exposure.

The laws of economics are real; it’s all about the numbers… and the numbers don’t give a damn how you “feel” about them.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Bones. | December 7, 2013 at 4:06 pm

    I’m a psychologist, not an MD, but it’s the same in my substance abuse clinic. I don’t accept Medicaid or private insurance because it costs too much for admin staff to process it all. I’m single party payer only. Cash, check, credit, debit, cows, chickens, etc., but no insurance.

      Juba Doobai! in reply to Henry Hawkins. | December 7, 2013 at 10:45 pm

      That’s how I deal with my doctor when I’m in the USA, and get a hefty 50% discount for it, too. Just cash or debit card. He tells me what’s wrong, and I hunt for the herbs to solve the problem. After the last adventure when Walmart’s pharmacy served up azithromycin-that-wasn’t from India, it’s gonna be herbs.

“We need some recognition that we’re doing a service to the community. But we can’t do it for free. And we can’t do it at a loss. No other business would do that,” he said.

Ah, see, THERE’s the rub…

These charlatans and money-grubbers think they are in business.

Pres. ScamWOW and Moonbat Jerry will soon set them right. They are part of the Collective, and no better than the dedicated workers of the DMV.

Who do they think they are? Free men and women?

    Karen Sacandy in reply to Ragspierre. | December 7, 2013 at 10:57 pm

    Around 1990, nearby judges instituted a requirement lawyers represent indigent criminals. Since I was inexperienced, I was going to be paid Zero. I sued the judges and got a ruling they had to pay me.

    Physicians are now in that boat. They need to start asserting themselves, loudly and proudly. And aggressively. Bullies will push EXACTLY as far as you let them.

      Ragspierre in reply to Karen Sacandy. | December 8, 2013 at 11:07 am

      While I agree with your response, I see dragooning lawyers to defend the criminally charged as fundamentally different.

      There IS a Constitutional right to legal counsel in anyone accused of a crime, and we ARE “officers of the court” when we join the bar. It was a rational…if VERY imperfect…way to provide for a dearth of lawyers in some regions.

      Happily, the bar and the judiciary in most places have fashioned means to provide both criminal and family lawyers to the really indigent. Maybe under the impetus of the very kind of situation you relate.

Did chief justice John Roberts considered that compelling me to buy a thing would also entail compelling somebody else to provide it?

    Henry Hawkins in reply to gettimothy. | December 7, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    CJ Roberts wasn’t practicing law, he was practicing politics, therefore such considerations are irrelevant.

    You know how in sports a ref might make a bad call and then later give a ‘make up’ call to balance it out? I only hope Roberts has that in mind the next time a monumental decision crosses his desk.

      rabidfox in reply to Henry Hawkins. | December 7, 2013 at 9:08 pm

      That might work if CJ Roberts WAS conducting politics – but I suspect that he may have been conducting self defense. Rumor has it that there might have been something wonky about his adoption of those two kids and he was threatened with exposure. No proof of this, of course, just internet rumor but it would explain his 180degree about face.

        Karen Sacandy in reply to rabidfox. | December 7, 2013 at 10:58 pm

        I think John Roberts is more left than we might have imagined. He represented some folks on a same-sex issue before he was appointed. Very disappointed when I learned that.

        Where is Harriet Meyers (sp?) when you need her?

    Estragon in reply to gettimothy. | December 8, 2013 at 2:07 am

    For more than a year, nearly every Republican in Congress and every party official at RNC took every opportunity to declare that the individual and employer mandates were in effect and in law, taxes.

    Obama and every Democrat in Congress and all their party officers and activists screamed at the top of their lungs that it was not.

    Roberts ruled that we were right all along. But that makes him the bad guy? Nonsense.

    If all that matters to you in a SCOTUS decision is the outcome and not the law, you are in the wrong party. That’s the Democratic philosophy.

    It is also the Democratic philosophy to denounce anyone who strays from the party line on any given issue. But there seems to be an awful lot of that in recent years from those who claim to be Republicans.

Midwest Rhino | December 7, 2013 at 6:12 pm

When the French inflated their currency, the bakers had to buy real priced grain, but sell for paper currency. The French guillotined some bakers that were too greedy, for not producing at a loss.

The Obama administration likes to take a few people and hang them publicly to bully others into subservience … or at least investigate innocent conservatives, using the IRS or Holder or the EPA.

But how many doctors can they hang or torture? Sure Obama wants to teach “the rich” a lesson, and force them to work for minimum wage, but Obamacare is such a flop, it seems he can’t force them to lose money, while everyone has insurance rates going up up and away.

    This evokes recollection of the hanging scene in The Counterfeit Traitor. It seems like just yesterday.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Midwest Rhino. | December 7, 2013 at 6:32 pm

    Best put a date on the French thing. It would cause a big consternation if tourists thought the baker was being guillotined out back as they ate their croissants.

    If you are talking the French rev then there became a fashion directly after when all food had to be as black as possible. Very gothic indeed & most likely hid the mould. & rot.

    Tired of this the more discerning Parisians were heading off to the new Bistros that were opened up by the former kings former chefs serving former food . Things sold out very quickly hence the name.
    Some of the original bistros are still in business.

    End of French lesson!

    Juba Doobai! in reply to Midwest Rhino. | December 7, 2013 at 10:48 pm

    Remember, Obama has to see doctors, too. A pity “first do none harm” prevents payback. Eh, wait a minute, does that motto apply to a guy who demands doctors do harm via abortions?

Bitterlyclinging | December 7, 2013 at 7:21 pm

It’ll be either the rifle butt or the rifle barrel. Remember Chairman Mao’s quote that “All power emanates from the barrel of a gun” and Comrade Barack will have no qualms at all dealing that hand to the nation’s formerly wealthy.
The state already has the means to force participation, licensure. With a little tweaking it can be used to ensure the recalcitrant practitioner’s complete compliance.
The DEA number which each physician must hold in order to prescribe controlled substances can simply be made conditional on compliance in Obamacare.
If you’re a GP or internist denied the ability to prescribe adequate pain relief for your patients suffering a sinus, or ear infection, kidney stones, or even to treat a simple case of diarrhea, you’re out of business.

    As I understand it, doctors here in California are required to get a flu shot, or: wear a mask or wear a label saying that they have not had a flu shot.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to Bitterlyclinging. | December 7, 2013 at 10:50 pm

    There are herbs for all of that. Doctors would do well to expand their horizons to pre-empt the coercive state.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to Bitterlyclinging. | December 7, 2013 at 10:58 pm

    Furthermore, if doctors banded together and refused to treat should they be presented with those conditions, patients would have no choice but to rise up against the bureaucrats and lawyers or go without medical care. In a battle between the doctors and lawyers, I’ll choose the doctors. When even a criminal in jail can bone up and practice law, lawyers ought to chill.

    If doctors don’t want to be coerced, they have the means to prevent it; for, even the bastards at the DEA need doctors and pain-killers sometimes.

The dems are taking a great country and throwing it away with both hands.

It’s #WAR. Time to resort to whatever weapons are at hand.

    Estragon in reply to Karen Sacandy. | December 8, 2013 at 2:12 am

    Agreed.

    But the first problem is the number of conservatives who seem to believe the first priorities are circular firing squads and purges.

    Even Stalin was smart enough to know you need to secure power first, before starting a purge.

Here in the deep blue state of Washington several years ago, the state announced that, to cut costs, the state Medicaid program would be cutting its payments to pharmacies by some figure (I think it was 30%), and pharmacists were reported as saying that such a deep cut meant that they’d be LOSING money with every state Medicaid prescription filled. Many said that they’d therefore not be taking any new state Medicaid customers, and of course there was quite an uproar over that. But these socialists think that you OWE your services free to the state. How you are supposed to pay your property taxes or business taxes when you have no income is not THEIR problem.

2nd Ammendment Mother | December 9, 2013 at 1:41 pm

Someone needs to call Governor Perry….. seems like a bunch of those California doctors might be interested in learning about the benefits of moving to Texas where we have some decent tort reform on the books (lots of work still to do there), no personal income tax and your choice of world class hospitals to work in.

Texas hasn’t been immune to the harms of Obamacare, but at least we have a legislature, Attorney General and Governor who have worked hard to minimize them.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend