Unintended consequences?

Regarding Froma Harrop's opinion column on Sunday, Oct. 4, her suggestion to pass health care reform and fix warts later lends credence to my belief that the Democrats continue to ignore the unintended consequences of their actions.

Some years ago Congress thought it wise to get as many people as possible into homes, and the unintended consequences of pressuring banks to do that has led us and the rest of the world into our current recession, credit, lending and banking problems. She glossed over Massachusetts problem: Who do we spend money on in the health care debate? The healthy? No, we spend it on those who are sick; to cut the cost we have to cut the care for the sick. Am I wrong?

She suggests the state will change the way doctors and hospitals are paid; in other words, she's suggesting that they will be paid less and less as costs continue to rise, and they will.

This will lead many doctors and hospitals to simply refuse, if they're allowed, to see more patients, or, get out of the business, or to spend a lot less time with patients, which often means a greater chance of missed diagnosis. Unintended consequences, people; pay attention.

Martin J. Uttich

Carol Stream