The Medical Society of New Jersey Responds to National Healthcare Reform

Statement of Dr. Joseph Reichman, 217th President of the Medical Society of New Jersey

“The 9,000 physician-members of the Medical Society of New Jersey all agree the United States healthcare system is in desperate need of reform.

Back home in New Jersey, a handful of big insurance companies control the healthcare market by raising premiums and reducing benefits to patients and payments to doctors. We hope the federal legislation will address these key issues as many provisions of the sweeping legislation are not clear at this time.

For physicians, the Medical Society of New Jersey believes the legislation falls short of real reform in some key areas.  The legislation does not include any medical malpractice reforms that would lower physician costs and prevent defensive medicine practices.

We see no reduction in administrative burdens for physicians and no reform in the way healthcare services are paid under the Medicare Program.

Finally, the expansion of the Medicaid program, while laudable, is problematic here.  The payments in New Jersey’s Medicaid program are among the lowest in the country, resulting in a majority of our physicians opting out of it altogether.

As physicians, we are pleased to see the bill provides access to coverage for millions of uninsured Americans and prohibits insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing medical conditions.  However, the bill doesn’t go far enough to protect the healthcare providers who strive to preserve the physician-patient relationship.”

Advertisements

About MSNJ

Founded in 1766, the Medical Society of New Jersey is the oldest professional society in the United States. The organization and its dues-paying members are dedicated to a healthy New Jersey, working to ensure the sanctity of the physician–patient relationship. In representing all medical disciplines, MSNJ advocates for the rights of patients and physicians alike, for the delivery of the highest quality medical care. This allows response to the patients’ individual, varied needs, in an ethical and compassionate environment, in order to create a healthy Garden State and healthy citizens.

3 responses to “The Medical Society of New Jersey Responds to National Healthcare Reform”

  1. joseph parlavecchio says :

    what a lame bureaucratic butt kissing response . physicians are going out of business and you produce this . i’m glad i don’t waste my money on this organization . do you think lawyers would stand for this? when are you going to grow a set and call for a strike – nationwide ? they’re cutting you off at the knees and you say thank you . don’t forget to beg for your monthly sgr extension

  2. Arif Hashmi, MD says :

    j parlavecchio (I presume he is a physician) is a typical example of why physicians are faring so badly these days. We are quick to criticize organised medicine but do nothing to try and change how the medical society is doing. Politicians are influenced by money and votes and the sooner we physicians realise and act on this, the more likely we are to get better control of our destinies. If, like the lawyers organisations, MSNJ represented 100% of doctors in NJ all of whom contributed $1000 or more to political action every year, we would be justified in holding MSNJ to MUCH higher standards. Not to mention our other direct competitors – the hospital and pharmaceutical organisations and their warchests. Talk is cheap and unconstructive criticism is cheaper.

  3. sandra grossett says :

    Base on experience some feedback he or she figures would affect the health bill. The person doesn’t have to know from what’s going on up in Washington, but what he or she is accustom to and why so would affect the bill.

    A set of questions for pharmaceutical:

    Do new fees of the 80 million impose any financial burden on the companies that have pharmaceutical responsibilities? Explain.

    Would the 12 years protection to sell biologic medicines be a good thing for the industry before having to face threats of cheaper, off-brand alternatives? Explain.

    How would the doughnut hole be a good investment? Explain.

    How would one feel about a generic competition? Explain.

    Why did pharma lobbyists thought it successful in making sure that provisions the industry opposed were not included yet allowed consumer re-imported medicine from abroad with the feds deciding those prices? Explain.

    One person from a pharmaceutical said, “Nothing would benefit the industry immediately,” would you agree?

    Don’t forget the names of these sources their ages, titles, addresses and phone numbers determines whether he or she contributes to the assignment.
    Base on experience some feedback he or she figures would affect the health bill. The person doesn’t have to know from what’s going on up in Washington, but what he or she is accustom to and why so would affect the bill.

    A set of questions for the insurance: Quote from one of the papers that issued info on the bill. That “the law would also do away with life time caps on insurance coverage, and force insurance companies to cover people right away with pre-existing medical conditions.”

    What would be your idea / feeling provide as an insurer with concerns of how the country is going to pay?

    Would competition be an advantage from various insurers on what now exists?

    “If one from the bill predict tens of thousands of working people will seek new jobs or start their own businesses.”

    What exactly would that mean?

    Are you in agreement with the changes made by the signing of the health bill for insurance companies?

    Why?

    Would you also agree with how small businesses are dealt with in all this?

    The exchanges that are state-run why the government would turn it into a market place for consumers when that’s part of the reason they sought a health bill in the first place?

    Do you believe it’s a wise move on the part of the government in providing an extension in federal subsidies, for example with the new government health policy they have in mind?

    Don’t forget the names of these sources their ages, titles, addresses and phone numbers determines whether he or she contributes to the assignment.

    Base on experience some feedback he or she figures would affect the health bill. The person doesn’t have to know from what’s going on up in Washington, but what he or she is accustom to and why so would affect the bill.

    A set of questions for the Doctors:

    If there were to be a decline in reimbursements substituted with more options from the government health policy that would bring a sense to satisfaction to the service doctors provide?

    Why would a decline in the reliance of charity care be a good thing in the health bill when it’s in for people who are non-immigrants?

    Wouldn’t it be better for those who are permanent to be separated with another option for the fed than Medicaid that is only given to someone who went on welfare?

    Don’t forget the names of these sources their ages, titles, addresses and phone numbers determines whether he or she contributes to the assignment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: