>Also, most MDs are not happy with the introduction of ICD10, a diagnosis coding system that is more detailed than ICD9.
>
>I worked (briefly, just 6 months) in late 2012 for United Health Care, and one of the projects I touched involved some of the crosswalks. I realize how complicated ICD10 is....but that absolutely a more marginal issue compared to a national system that will ultimately impact careers and livelihoods.

From our POV ICD10 is not complicate, just detailed. Its mechanism is just the same as ICD9. For the MDs, the problem is in selecting the right ICD10 code and learning to cope with the greater level of details. BTW, the ICD10 has been in the works for many years and has nothing to do with this administration.

>There is a belief (certainly anecdotal) at this point that the progression of ACA might ultimately affect (negatively) people wanting to enter the medical profession. That might or might not occur - but I highly doubt we'll have a drop in people entering med school because of ICD10. Apples to little oranges

It think its neither. MDs just want to do their procedure and not to be bogged down with administrative stuff. American billing and insurance reimbursement is extremely complex. Under universal healthcare things are many times easier as everyone has the same level of coverage, but even here in the Netherlands where we have about 24 insurance companies (as opposed to the 2000+ in the US) the insurance companies have to cover certain levels of coverage, which makes things not as simple as universal healthcare but an order of magnitude easier than in the US.