More unqualified medical services showing up under Obamacare

posted at 2:31 pm on March 1, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

Nearly a year ago now, I took a look at an unsettling trend in medical practices in the age of Obamacare. As states struggle to keep up with restrictions and fiscal strains under the provisions of the new law, people were looking to both cut costs and make up for a decreasing number of doctors. One area which was being considered was lowering the bar for who could be licensed to perform certain practices. This was of particular concern in the area of eye care, where Kentucky was looking at expanding the role of optometrists (who are not medical doctors), allowing them to perform certain procedures typically left to ophthalmologists.

It seems that this trend has not gone away as Obamacare gears up to full speed, and a similar move is now under consideration in nearby Tennessee.

60 Plus Association, the nation’s leading conservative senior advocate organization is calling on Tennessee lawmakers to oppose House Bill 555 and Senate Bill 220. These bills would allow optometrists – who are not medical doctors and do not go through surgical residency training– to inject anesthesia into the tissues surrounding the eye and perform scalpel surgery on the eyelid. The proposal to expand the legal scope of practice by non-medical eye care providers follows along a similar path that optometrists and legislators in California are currently pursuing in their implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly referred to as ObamaCare…

Jim Martin, Chairman of 60 Plus, explained that among the many problems related with Obamacare, it is resulting in states considering proposals to re-define who can practice medicine and surgery. “It’s one thing for politicians in California to be pushing these radical proposals to implement Obamacare, but why would lawmakers in Tennessee even consider similar legislation that dumbs down patient safety standards,” Martin said. “Our seniors were promised we could keep our health plans and our doctors. Neither promise rang true. But what is true is that Obamacare is tempting states into legislating a new type of doctor or surgeon, one that doesn’t have to go through medical school or residency to perform surgery, but rather to the state legislature instead.

As the article mentions, there has been a similar move underway in California, and it’s no less controversial there. They tried the same thing in Louisiana last year, but the public outcry was such that it was abandoned by its own sponsor. While the temptation to lower the bar and make up for shortfalls under Obamacare is obviously compelling for legislatures, it’s hard to find any unbiased observer who thinks this is a good idea.

I would like to stress yet again that this is not a knock against optometrists. I see one myself on a yearly basis and they do very important work. But if they don’t have the same level of training as an ophthalmologist in terms of performing surgical procedures or the duties of an anesthesiologist, do we really want to begin assigning them this work simply because a new federal law is driving qualified professionals out of the marketplace? That sounds like a very dodgy tradeoff.

Gee… if only someone had warned us about all of this before they voted the law into place. (/sarc)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I foresee a bright future for barbers and witch doctors under Obamacare.

Cicero43 on March 1, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Heck, the proposed Surgeon General is not qualified and is an anti-gun promoter, heavy-hitter of OfA.

Fool represents Kansas
.

Schadenfreude on March 1, 2014 at 2:38 PM

The dems have gotten tired of the response they get when they ask “who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” so they seek to screw up everyone’s eyes now.

Flange on March 1, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Let’s have aroma therapists perform open heart surgery.

rbj on March 1, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Will those optometrists be required to carry malpractice insurance?

If so, I doubt many will be picking up the knife. It’s crazy expensive.

iurockhead on March 1, 2014 at 2:49 PM

You’ll be seeing more PAs and NPs instead of MDs in the future too…

ladyingray on March 1, 2014 at 2:53 PM

This is a really really bad idea.

When I was a kid, I got some kind of infected spider bite or something just below one of my eyebrows. It swelled up so much that my mother actually took me to the doctor (one of the few times I have ever visited a doctor). He examined me and said, “If this was almost anywhere else on your body, I could stick a needle in it and drain it in 30 seconds, and send you on your way. But that area is extremely senstive and filled with eye muscles and nerves and so forth; if something goes wrong during the process, it could affect your vision due to neural or muscular damage. Thus, as extreme as it may seem, we’re going to have to fully anesthetize you in a surgical setting, just to drain this one little infection.”

That was the only time I have ever had surgery. The operation lasted maybe five minutes or less. But I thank that doctor for his abundance of caution, because he was an expert in the field.

Due to ObamaCare, non-experts more and more will be doing delicate procedures, with the predictable skyrocketing boo-boos and side-effects etc.

Zombie on March 1, 2014 at 2:54 PM

Is “bloodletting” allowable treatment under ObamaCare? I’ve got a pocket knife.

GarandFan on March 1, 2014 at 2:55 PM

My collie says:

It’s the Beverly Hillbillies all over again. Recall one of the main premises of that situation comedy:

Jethro Bodine: “I done graduated from the 8th grade. That makes me qualified to be a brain surgeon!”

It’s amazing that the things we laughed at in the 1960′s have now become the norm under the Obama administration.

My collie says:

Yeah, except no one is laughing this time around.

Who knew that reality could get this scary? We are now going to forced to depend on Granny to cook up one of her special cures for whatever ails us.

CyberCipher on March 1, 2014 at 2:55 PM

“Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard….”

Hey Moe!

tanked59 on March 1, 2014 at 3:02 PM

C’mon, Jazz! Toss up a Palin Told-You-So post and score an easy thousand comments.

John the Libertarian on March 1, 2014 at 3:02 PM

Obama: “In the United States great past you were able to get quality, affordable healthcare down the street from your local barber along with a great shave and haircut. Today, I ordered the secretary of HHS to license barbershops to be able to perform medical outpatient surgeries once again. This not only will help lower the cost of healthcare that we all share in the expense in but also help open up new jobs as part of the “My Brother’s Keeper” initiative getting minorities involved in providing surgeries as well as expanding options in that area.
The first license will go to a Mr. Sweeney Todd”

Skywise on March 1, 2014 at 3:09 PM

Well it’s unrelated (Or is it? In California the vast majority of abortions performed are taxpayer-funded) but, in California, just about anyone can now perform surgical abortions without a medical license, or any training … midwives, nurse practitioners, estheticians, dentists, dermatologists … (shamans? janitors? bus drivers? community activists? dog catchers?)

This law was signed into effect by Jerry Brown because there is a “shortage” of doctors want to be involved in murdering children, and, according to the democrat party, there are simply too many minority babies being born in the state.

Pork-Chop on March 1, 2014 at 3:14 PM

I foresee a bright future for barbers and witch doctors under Obamacare.

Cicero43 on March 1, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Can’t wait to be treated by a barber like this one under Obamacare.

CyberCipher on March 1, 2014 at 3:16 PM

Again, can any Obama fluffer name on thing that the critics of Obama democrat care was wrong about?

If you like your third world medical student, you can keep your third world medical student.

jukin3 on March 1, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Libertarians are supposed to be against the idea of the state licensing or designating a group to license jobs.
Funny that any relaxation would be seen as bad…

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Applying the same logic, one can presume that if you can’t afford an architect to design your house, use your realtor.

BobMbx on March 1, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Libertarians are supposed to

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Yawn.

John the Libertarian on March 1, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Libertarians are supposed to be against the idea of the state licensing or designating a group to license jobs.
Funny that any relaxation would be seen as bad…

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Do you have any the faintest inkling of WTF you’re talking about?

Do you see us talking about how Obamacare is causing licenses to be handed out like candy?

Do you think this supports your argument that government licensing is a good thing or a bad thing?

For the record libertarians support accreditation not licensing and what you see here is exactly the reason why.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.

Skywise on March 1, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Applying the same logic, one can presume that if you can’t afford an architect to design your house, use your realtor.

BobMbx on March 1, 2014 at 3:25 PM

“I don’t like the poster of that clown.”
“I wouldn’t remove that poster… it’s a load bearing poster…”

Skywise on March 1, 2014 at 3:28 PM

John the Libertarian on March 1, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Poster child for the anti-libertarian.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Libertarians are supposed to be against the idea of the state licensing or designating a group to license jobs.
Funny that any relaxation would be seen as bad…

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:20 PM

My collie says:

Liberals are supposed to be in favor of the idea that the state licenses or designates a group to license jobs.
Funny how their regulations FAILED to catch Gosnell as he ran his chamber of horrors abortion clinic in Pennsylvania undetected for many years — and even stranger still how the liberal media covers these things up and fails to expose them to the general public…

FTFY. No need to thank us. Just bein’ neighborly.

CyberCipher on March 1, 2014 at 3:32 PM

I’ve always said that plumbers should be doing colonoscopies. If you have ever had them shoot your sewer pipes with their cameras, it’s basically the same thing.

slickwillie2001 on March 1, 2014 at 3:39 PM

FTFY. No need to thank us. Just bein’ neighborly.

CyberCipher on March 1, 2014 at 3:32 PM

I’m not a liberal, so… your point seems to be elusive to me.

Jazz Shaw is the libertarian who should be to the libertarian side compared to me… Yet here he is loving him the state licensing and restrictions between two consenting adults in a contract for services.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:41 PM

My collie says:

It’s the Beverly Hillbillies all over again. Recall one of the main premises of that situation comedy:

Jethro Bodine: “I done graduated from the 8th grade. That makes me qualified to be a brain surgeon!”

It’s amazing that the things we laughed at in the 1960′s have now become the norm under the Obama administration.

My collie says:

Yeah, except no one is laughing this time around.

Who knew that reality could get this scary? We are now going to forced to depend on Granny to cook up one of her special cures for whatever ails us.

CyberCipher on March 1, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Coincidentally, Jethro was also quite an expert at cypherin’.

slickwillie2001 on March 1, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Jazz Shaw is the libertarian who should be to the libertarian side compared to me… Yet here he is loving him the state licensing and restrictions between two consenting adults in a contract for services.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:41 PM

Really? That sounds more like you trying to make s straw man and attacking it then confronting what he said.

I don’t see Jazz writing here that he supports “licensing” just that it’s watering down the meaning of the “licensing”. Which you surely cannot deny.

I also believe Jazz supports getting government out of marriage altogether rather than blessing it like some high school cheerleader captain determining who’s approved to love whom.

Skywise on March 1, 2014 at 3:45 PM

I’d love to hear your opinion on what you foresee taking place with the ‘reasonable person’ standard that traditionally has been used in court in cases of malpractice, negligence, etc.
How will this be impacted by medical necessity rulings being issued via DHHS? What about meaningful use provisions of EMRs and clinical decision support systems that use evidence based standards derived from government-approved “evidence”?

Also what options do we have where patient advocacy is concerned? I’d rather consider such things now before an American version of Liverpool Care Pathway is developed.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Really? That sounds more like you trying to make s straw man and attacking it then confronting what he said.

I don’t see Jazz writing here that he supports “licensing” just that it’s watering down the meaning of the “licensing”. Which you surely cannot deny.

I also believe Jazz supports getting government out of marriage altogether rather than blessing it like some high school cheerleader captain determining who’s approved to love whom.

Skywise on March 1, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Of course he is supporting it. He grants it automatic credibility for keeping us safe. That right there is a direct, not indirect, support of the practice.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Coincidentally, Jethro was also quite an expert at cypherin’.

slickwillie2001 on March 1, 2014 at 3:42 PM

My collie says:

Shhh. We wouldn’t want to expose CC’s true identity.

CyberCipher on March 1, 2014 at 3:52 PM

Of course he is supporting it. He grants it automatic credibility for keeping us safe. That right there is a direct, not indirect, support of the practice.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 3:50 PM

In this particular instance, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 3:54 PM

I agree entirely with the sentiments of the post, but let’s be clear: injexion of local anaesthesia into the tissue surrounding the eyelids is hardly anaesthesiologist work.

Ophthalmologists, maxillofacial surgeons, and other trained doctors who perform minimally-invasive procedures are more than capable of administering their own anaesthesia without a heavy-hitting specialist.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 1, 2014 at 3:56 PM

More unqualified medical services showing up under Obamacare

…WTF could go wrong?

KOOLAID2 on March 1, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Ophthalmologists, maxillofacial surgeons, and other trained doctors who perform minimally-invasive procedures are more than capable of administering their own anaesthesia without a heavy-hitting specialist.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 1, 2014 at 3:56 PM

I would agree, with the provision that comorbidity analysis, H&P, and type of anesthesia being used are all incorporated into surgical plans prior to the procedure.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:02 PM

In this particular instance, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 3:54 PM

Because the state is who should determine who you are able to contract services with.
Just remember that the strip searches at the airports and sporting arenas, soon to be train stations, eventually shopping malls and so forth are just there for your safety.
Those who give up freedom for (ephemeral temporary) security deserve neither and will end up with neither.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:17 PM

If you like your eyesight you can keep your eyesight…

nextgen_repub on March 1, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Because the state is who should determine who you are able to contract services with.
Just remember that the strip searches at the airports and sporting arenas, soon to be train stations, eventually shopping malls and so forth are just there for your safety.
Those who give up freedom for (ephemeral temporary) security deserve neither and will end up with neither.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Because having established criteria to determine the skill, knowledge, education, and experience level of individuals providing health care services (including invasive procedures) is the best means of protecting the public, not to mention keeping lawsuits and health care system costs in check.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:27 PM

Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber Open for business.

Kingfisher on March 1, 2014 at 4:27 PM

Because having established criteria to determine the skill, knowledge, education, and experience level of individuals providing health care services (including invasive procedures) is the best means of protecting the public, not to mention keeping lawsuits and health care system costs in check.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:27 PM

LOL, you seriously wrote that!?! This is too funny.

The state artificially limiting a resource using political measures as the method of establishing criteria for a should be vibrant and ever changing industry is how you keep lawsuits and health care costs in check.

LOL, seriously?

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:31 PM

http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/corporate/contactus/faq/general/background/

Keeping us safe for 120 years, not a government entity.

Competitors: SGS, Bureau Veritas, Intertek

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:37 PM

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:31 PM

I’m guessing your familiarity with how the healthcare industry works isn’t that strong? Familiar with credentialing process? Accreditation? Participating provider? “Reasonable person” standards?

Familiar with any of those?

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:41 PM

I’m guessing your familiarity with how the healthcare industry works isn’t that strong? Familiar with credentialing process? Accreditation? Participating provider? “Reasonable person” standards?

Familiar with any of those?

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:41 PM

I am more familiar with them than you are of freedom.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:43 PM

I am more familiar with them than you are of freedom.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 4:43 PM

s

If you are indeed familiar with them, you’d also realize that within the context of those healthcare concepts, the questions Jazz has in this instance are not only valid but also very much so prudent.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:46 PM

If you are indeed familiar with them, you’d also realize that within the context of those healthcare concepts, the questions Jazz has in this instance are not only valid but also very much so prudent.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 4:46 PM

This is his only question. Whether or not we want to have the government ASSIGN them the work.


But if they don’t have the same level of training as an ophthalmologist in terms of performing surgical procedures or the duties of an anesthesiologist, do we really want to begin assigning them this work simply because a new federal law is driving qualified professionals out of the marketplace?

Credentialing process: A process by which an outside entity determines if the ability of an entity is capable of accomplishing what they say they can and intend to do.

That Credentialing process is frequently used to grant accreditation to an individual indicating that they meet the accreditation entity’s requirements.

Participating provider is a person whom, in this instance for insurance, the insurance company has contracted with to perform services, frequently this is not done based on how well they perform their procedures, but is based on how much they are willing to reduce their fees charged for performing services for the insurance providers clients.

Reasonable Person’s Standard is that a hypothetical reasonable person, in this instance, would believe that the person performing the procedure is capable of doing said procedure.

Of course, a reasonable person should be able to figure out that if you can pull your own tooth, that pretty much anyone out there in the world should be capable of being contracted to pull your tooth for you without a license. A reasonable person should be able to figure out that most nurses should be capable of contracted to sew a small cut shut. That common illnesses do not in fact need a brain surgeon to diagnose and give common frequently used medications for.

You are not a reasonable person in my estimation.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 5:04 PM

I also foresee an increase in home and herbal remedies.

Tinker on March 1, 2014 at 5:07 PM

You are not a reasonable person in my estimation.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 5:04 PM

Obviously I’ve offended you personally or you would not be responding so parsimoniously, right?

Can I share a few facts with you without making it worse?

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 5:24 PM

Obviously I’ve offended you personally or you would not be responding so parsimoniously, right?

Can I share a few facts with you without making it worse?

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 5:24 PM

You do not offend me personally. You are an offense in general since you believe in the all powerful all knowing omnipotent government saving us from our own decisions. That it takes government licensing to make healthcare work.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 5:28 PM

I foresee a bright future for barbers and witch doctors under Obamacare.

Cicero43 on March 1, 2014 at 2:35 PM

This really ought to be the new narrative from Republicans and Conservatives. They should mention it ALL THE TIME. Dems always love to paint Republican/Conservative policies as “going back to” such and such… slavery, witch trials, etc. Even when there is no basis for comparison. Let’s give them a taste of their own medicine, especially since the arguments for the comparisons are actually more appropriate and compelling.

Sterling Holobyte on March 1, 2014 at 5:36 PM

The dems have gotten tired of the response they get when they ask “who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” so they seek to screw up everyone’s eyes now.

Flange on March 1, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Why not?! Blind people don’t know who they are voting for. I am sure the dem poll watchers would be more than happy to help them.

Sterling Holobyte on March 1, 2014 at 5:38 PM

You do not offend me personally. You are an offense in general since you believe in the all powerful all knowing omnipotent government saving us from our own decisions. That it takes government licensing to make healthcare work.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Yes, I can tell that you think we should immediately dump any and all provisions incorporated into our healthcare system that stem from government. That’s your viewpoint and you’re welcome to it.

Reasonable person standard has to do with the standard that is used in a court of law for deciding standard of care, negligence, malpractice, wrongful death, etc. This came into play not long after the Darling v Charleston case in the late 1960s. This is the case that eliminated the principle of charitable immunity and replaced with the principle of corporate liability.

A lot of the provisions we have incorporated into our healthcare system, such as credentialing and accreditation, tie back into that reasonable person standard with all of the associated legal implications in mind.

There’s more to it than simply saying “I think so-and-so is qualified to perform this healthcare services/procedure because so much of our healthcare reimbursement in the US is being carried by third-party payer of government, who puts forth very specific requirement to qualify as a participating provider.

Until all of that changes, we can’t necessarily just say “screw the system….screw the requirements….screw the licenses..” because of the way our system operates.

That’s reality. Not a theoretical hypothetical of how great it would be if we got rid of all regs and requirements. Reality.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 5:41 PM

I foresee a bright future for barbers and witch doctors under Obamacare.

Cicero43 on March 1, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Might add voodoo priests and palm readers too.

Ruckus_Tom on March 1, 2014 at 5:45 PM

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 5:41 PM

The reality is that our high cost of care is based on things you currently refuse to get rid of. That Jazz Shaw supports. That is reality. You have accepted the federal government as the protector of your safety and freedom be damned.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 6:09 PM

The reality is that our high cost of care is based on things you currently refuse to get rid of. That Jazz Shaw supports. That is reality. You have accepted the federal government as the protector of your safety and freedom be damned.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 6:09 PM

No, I haven’t. The truth is that Obamacare was a trade-off, i.e. expansion of health insurance at the cost of healthcare (quality, scope, access, etc.) Most people familiar with the healthcare industry have been aware that the situation was likely to move in this direction. Now, it’s a matter of what is given up and how much is given up.

I can’t say that I would entirely eliminate government regs and standards from healthcare, because we always get idiots like Dr. Gosnell who abuse the system and drive up the costs, both through litigation and through extended high $$ care that it takes to even come close to recovering from that abuse.

But I would like to see the scope of government greatly limited from where it stands at this point.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 6:18 PM

Well it’s unrelated (Or is it? In California the vast majority of abortions performed are taxpayer-funded) but, in California, just about anyone can now perform surgical abortions without a medical license, or any training … midwives, nurse practitioners, estheticians, dentists, dermatologists … (shamans? janitors? bus drivers? community activists? dog catchers?)

This law was signed into effect by Jerry Brown because there is a “shortage” of doctors want to be involved in murdering children, and, according to the democrat party, there are simply too many minority babies being born in the state.

Pork-Chop on March 1, 2014 at 3:14 PM

They do suggest a minimum 5 gallon shop vac for all procedures. Since shamans are unlikely to posess such equipment, you might want to leave them off this list.

Also of note: They do NOT recommend such procedures for anchor babies.

Freddy on March 1, 2014 at 6:27 PM

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 6:18 PM

So, according to you Dr Gosnell is a success of government licensing? LOL! He was licensed you know… He was regulated you know…

There is nothing that will happen for failures of government agencies that license and regulate.

If Gosnell was under a private accreditation or a private inspection company there would be consequences for those accrediting and inspecting him.

Your argument is nothing more than what one would expect from a big government no liberty regressive.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 7:05 PM

Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber!

Johnnyreb on March 1, 2014 at 7:50 PM

More unqualified medical services showing up under Obamacare

…WTF could go wrong?

KOOLAID2 on March 1, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Why nothing, nothing at all. More quack doctors, herbalists, aromatherapy, witch doctors, leeching, quackery at it’s finest. Longer times to see a doctor, more time seeing an NP or PA who can’t actually treat you. Where’s the problem?

onesheep on March 1, 2014 at 8:35 PM

to inject anesthesia into the tissues surrounding the eye and perform scalpel surgery on the eyelid.

This really is a tempest in a tea-pot, except that it’s a bad precedent.

Yes, it could describe removing skin cancers or other lesions of the eyelids, but it’s fussy surgery and not worth the crappy payscale that the gummint (and thus the private insurers) set on it. So I don’t think anyone’s fighting for that opportunity.

The actual procedure listed here is an almost exact description of a cosmetic eyelid lift – a blepharoplasty. Someone’s lobbying is aimed at getting a piece of the lucrative cosmetic surgery pie, the only healthcare pie left, in fact. And since that’s not supposed to be covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or most private policies, it usually a cash deal. (In point of fact, some Ophthalmologists get away with doing lots of Medicare-funded cosmetic blepharoplasties by “documenting” that the droopy lids interfere with visual fields, but that’s a different argument…)

bofh on March 1, 2014 at 8:36 PM

Aren’t most babies in the UK delivered by midwives?

mbs on March 1, 2014 at 8:38 PM

“In other news, the AFL-CIO applied for union plumbers to secure the right to perform colonoscopies.

“‘Hey, look: same product going down each set o’ plumbing, ain’t dat right?’, explained AFL-CIO representative Vincent ‘Vinny’ Tortorice, of the Local 206 Plumbers’ Union in Queens.”

orangemtl on March 1, 2014 at 8:39 PM

Your argument is nothing more than what one would expect from a big government no liberty regressive.

astonerii on March 1, 2014 at 7:05 PM

Wow. ROFL. Okay, whatever you say.

Have a nice night.

lineholder on March 1, 2014 at 11:40 PM

Real horror show…

claudius on March 2, 2014 at 3:46 AM

Is “bloodletting” allowable treatment under ObamaCare? I’ve got a pocket knife.

GarandFan on March 1, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Yes, but only using leeches.

Grammar Nazi on March 2, 2014 at 9:01 AM

Oh, my! What’s next from lawmakers, requiring women to bring their own coat hangers when they visit PP? Who knew the optometrist lobby was that strong. This is just another example of lawmakers not knowing squat about that which they make laws for.

Kissmygrits on March 2, 2014 at 9:30 AM

Heck, we have a COMPLETELY UNQUALIFIED president and a COMPLETELY UNQUALIFIED director of HHS: Isn’t the introduction of COMPLETELY UNQUALIFIED surgeons and doctors just “trickle down”???

landlines on March 2, 2014 at 1:39 PM

I guess I’ll have to look at things differently. Let’s see:

- Licensed medical doctor ==> un-licensed medical doctor
- Qualified success ==> un-qualified success
- ACA (Affordable Care Act) ==> UACA (Un-Affordable Care Act) or un-constitutional or a tax
- Employed and working in the private sector ==> un-employable or un-/dis-barred (example: professional politician,senator or representative – state or US)
- Lawyer ==> un-licensed person who practices law or medicine
- Licensed school nutritionist ==> un-vegan (closet carnivore) or FLOTUS (First Lady)
- The president’s State of the Union address ==> we already know what that is; un-true
- An ambassador ==> Un-familiar with the country he/she is ambassadorring (sic)

The un-possibilities are endless. I for one would like to see an un-tax.

HHW on March 2, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Will the optometrists be including a free pair of glasses if you buy the eye lid surgery?

brightwinger on March 2, 2014 at 7:07 PM

It had to happen eventually.

JetBlast on March 3, 2014 at 9:14 AM