Did you know that under Obamacare as it kicks in over the next few years you may no longer see your own doctor but will be subject to treatment determined by a team?

I learned of this for the first time in an article in USA Today written by Kevin Pho, a primary care physician and member of the newspaper’s board of directors. I haven’t seen it anywhere else although the New York Times is quoted on it.

Rules proposed last March by the Department of Health and Human Services, says Pho, would encourage health providers to operate in teams. A patient’s trip to the doctor might result in treatment by a clinician from the doctor’s team, or a physician assistant or nurse practitioner.

Its called a Patient-Centered Medical Home where everyone involved would share information, work together and be jointly responsible for the patient’s care. It’s actually already being tried and according to a report from the American Academy of Family Physicians, patients were unhappy with the change.

Many patients, according to the Times, “felt displaced as they saw the old one-to-one doctor patient interaction replaced with one to four relationships involving not only the doctor but a whole host of providers.”

No doubt adding to the patients’ distress is the fact that they have had no input. They are just being merged into the new system without being told about it first. Terry McGeeney, a primary care physician who led the Medical Home project, said, “the Achilles heel of all this is a lack of understanding and engagement” because someone forgot to inform the patients how their health care would change.

Pho says policymakers should do a better job of preparing patients for what to expect, inform them that they may not solely see their own doctor but other members of the health care team. Tell patients their health care information may be shared among others on the team.

I’d go a lot further than that. Let’s repeal the whole damn Obamacare law and start from scratch with everybody involved in public discussions of what will work best. It was obvious from the beginning that hardly anyone in office or out favored the plan which was rushed through without being read in order to meet the new president’s time line for establishing his legacy.

The longer we wait and fool around with this, the more provisions in Obamacare will kick in and be difficult to undo if repeal comes as a result of a new president and members of Congress next year.

Now, another subject where we aren’t being told the whole story. This is from the Wall Street Journal by Paul Peterson who directs Harvard’s Program on Education Policy. Even as the president was signing the debt limit bill, says Peterson, he was insisting on continuing “to keep making key investments in things like education.” What he didn’t tell us was that we already spend $12,922 per child annually and that investing more means higher taxes to pay the tab.

When the public was asked if spending on schools should increase, decrease or stay the same, 65 percent went for more. When told of the current $ payout, only 49 percent were for an increase. Asked if taxes to fund schools should go up, down, or stay as is, only 35 percent were for an increase. That’s why the president and the spenders “forget” to mention the $12,933 or that increase means higher taxes. And that, says Peterson, “is the nation’s debt crisis in a nutshell.”