User login
Appeals Court Ruling Upholds Individual Mandate
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July 13.
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July 13.
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July 13.
Appeals Court Ruling Upholds Individual Mandate
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July 13.
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July 13.
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July 13.
Appeals Court Ruling Upholds Individual Mandate
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July13.
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July13.
The three judges – two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee – said that requiring individuals to buy health insurance or face a penalty is legitimate and a “valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
“The provision regulates active participation in the health care market, and in any case, the Constitution imposes no categorical bar on regulating inactivity,” the judges concluded in their opinion.
Judge James Graham dissented somewhat from the majority, stating that he was concerned that if Congress was allowed to use its power to levy the mandate, there might not be any limit to that ability in the future.
Challenges to the individual mandate have asserted that Congress does not have the ability to regulate inactivity, that is, the choice to not buy insurance. They also have argued that if Congress can order someone to purchase insurance, it could require Americans to do other things.
The plaintiffs in the 6th Circuit case had appealed a lower court ruling upholding the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Those plaintiffs – the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., and three individuals – presented oral arguments to the appeals court on June 1, as did the Department of Justice (DOJ), as the defendant.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that the government welcomed the judges’ opinion. “We will continue to vigorously defend the health care reform statute in any litigation challenging it,” said Ms. Schmaler, adding that challenges to other landmark laws such as the Social Security Act and the Civil Rights Act had failed. “We believe these challenges to health reform will also fail.”
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, also praised the ruling. “The court – made up of judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents – recognized that health care makes up a substantial portion of the national economy and that Congress has the power to regulate that market,” he said in a statement. “We expect that other appellate courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, will reach the same decision.”
Opinions from those other appellate courts – the 4th U.S. Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th U.S. Circuit in Atlanta – are expected soon. Oral arguments in another case will be heard before the 9th U.S. Circuit in San Diego on July13.
AMA Delegates Affirm Support of Individual Mandate
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION’S HOUSE OF DELEGATES
AMA Delegates Affirm Support of Individual Mandate
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION’S HOUSE OF DELEGATES
AMA Delegates Affirm Support of Individual Mandate
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION’S HOUSE OF DELEGATES
AMA Delegates Affirm Support of Individual Mandate
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION’S HOUSE OF DELEGATES
AMA Delegates Affirm Support of Individual Mandate
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
CHICAGO – The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates voted on June 20 to support the premise that all Americans should be required to buy health insurance if they can afford to do so.
The so-called individual mandate is an essential element of the Affordable Care Act, but the AMA itself has had a long-standing policy backing the purchase of insurance. On June 20, the House of Delegates voted 326-165* in favor of keeping the policy adopted in 2010 that more formally backed the individual mandate. The vote was a resounding rejection of an effort by a vocal minority to overturn that policy.
A resolution had been offered by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons, and state delegations from Kansas, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma. They sought a new policy stating that the AMA believed that health insurance purchase should be an individual’s responsibility, but not a requirement.
Counter-resolutions were offered by delegates led by the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.
When it came time for a vote, both the AMA Council on Medical Services, which had jurisdiction over the issue, and the AMA Board of Trustees recommended that the House of Delegates reaffirm the AMA’s current policy and not adopt any of the alternative resolutions.
On the floor, Dr. Richard Warner of the Kansas delegation rose to offer a new amendment that would allow the AMA to support states having the option of whether they wanted to institute a mandate. That amendment was struck down by almost 60% of the delegates.
A similar amendment seeking to give states flexibility was offered up by another delegation, but was ruled as being out of order by Speaker Andrew Gurman. The delegates backed his ruling and voted down the amendment.
Passions ran high on both sides of the issue. Delegates who sought to overturn the AMA policy said that it took away choice and would not guarantee that more Americans would get access to health care.
Dr. Melissa Garretson, a pediatrician from Fort Worth, Tex., and a delegate from the American Academy of Pediatrics, said that while many who were against the mandate were angry, she had 700,000 pediatric patients who were uninsured and "angry too."
"The evidence has shown that mandating insurance coverage gives us the highest percentage of insured in this country," Dr. Garretson said, adding that having insurance translated to better health behaviors, higher school attendance, and ultimately, healthier adults.
After the vote, AMA President Dr. Cecil Wilson said that the organization was gratified that the House supported the mandate. The vote shows that "fully two-thirds of the House said today our policy is good," he said.
Some state delegations had complained that the AMA’s stance supporting the Affordable Care Act was leading to defections in members. But Dr. Wilson said he did not believe that was the case.
The AMA membership overall declined by 5%, or about 12,000, from 2009 to 2010, to a total of 215,854 members. An AMA committee looking at membership issues reported that the numbers for 2011 may increase this year.
* Correction, 6/22/2011: An earlier version of this story reported an inaccurate vote count. The error has been corrected.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION’S HOUSE OF DELEGATES
Insurers Paying More Quickly, but Accuracy Still an Issue
CHICAGO – A sampling of claims payments from some of the nation’s top insurers shows that although they are paying much more quickly, some 23% of claims were denied and almost a fifth were paid incorrectly.
The study was conducted for the American Medical Association and issued June 20 at the organization’s annual House of Delegates meeting.
The 2011 National Health Insurer Report Card showed that the error rate of 19.3% represented an extra $3.6 million in erroneous claims, a 2% increase from the previous year. The AMA estimated that these faulty payouts and the hassles associated with them added $1.5 billion in administrative costs to the health care system.
"This report card conveys that the current state of the health care claims process is untenable," AMA board member Dr. Barbara L. McAneny said at the annual meeting of the AMA’s House of Delegates.
She said that 10%-14% of a physician’s revenue goes to dealing with administrative issues. The AMA is working with insurers and physicians to get that down to 1% of revenue.
The report card tracked a number of performance measures at Medicare and seven private insurers: Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Cigna, Health Care Services Corp., Humana, Regence, and UnitedHealthcare.
UnitedHealthcare was the only insurer that improved its claims-processing accuracy from 2010, paying 90% of claims in an accurate manner. Anthem, on the other hand, paid only 61% of claims accurately.
The outright denial rate (in which no payment is made) ranged from a low of 17% of claims at Regence to 25% at Anthem and Cigna.
Prior authorization is a growing problem for physicians and constitutes one of the top eight reasons for denial of claims, according to Mark Rieger, CEO of National Healthcare Exchange Services, the company that conducted the analysis for the AMA. Coping with prior authorization is the second-largest administrative task for physicians, consuming at least 20 hours a week of physician and staff time, he said at the meeting.
Cigna had highest rate (6%) of claims requiring prior authorization; Regence had the lowest (0.04%).
There were some bright spots in the report. The vast majority of claims are now being paid within the first 15 days, with the remainder coming largely within 16-30 days of submission. Humana and Medicare were the fastest, paying some 95% of claims within 15 days. Cigna and Health Care Services Corp. were close behind.
The data were compiled by National Healthcare Exchange Services. The company analyzed claims submitted between Feb. 1 and March 31, 2011. Claims came from 42 states and included 4 million services billed on 2.4 million claims made by 400 practices covering 80 specialties.
CHICAGO – A sampling of claims payments from some of the nation’s top insurers shows that although they are paying much more quickly, some 23% of claims were denied and almost a fifth were paid incorrectly.
The study was conducted for the American Medical Association and issued June 20 at the organization’s annual House of Delegates meeting.
The 2011 National Health Insurer Report Card showed that the error rate of 19.3% represented an extra $3.6 million in erroneous claims, a 2% increase from the previous year. The AMA estimated that these faulty payouts and the hassles associated with them added $1.5 billion in administrative costs to the health care system.
"This report card conveys that the current state of the health care claims process is untenable," AMA board member Dr. Barbara L. McAneny said at the annual meeting of the AMA’s House of Delegates.
She said that 10%-14% of a physician’s revenue goes to dealing with administrative issues. The AMA is working with insurers and physicians to get that down to 1% of revenue.
The report card tracked a number of performance measures at Medicare and seven private insurers: Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Cigna, Health Care Services Corp., Humana, Regence, and UnitedHealthcare.
UnitedHealthcare was the only insurer that improved its claims-processing accuracy from 2010, paying 90% of claims in an accurate manner. Anthem, on the other hand, paid only 61% of claims accurately.
The outright denial rate (in which no payment is made) ranged from a low of 17% of claims at Regence to 25% at Anthem and Cigna.
Prior authorization is a growing problem for physicians and constitutes one of the top eight reasons for denial of claims, according to Mark Rieger, CEO of National Healthcare Exchange Services, the company that conducted the analysis for the AMA. Coping with prior authorization is the second-largest administrative task for physicians, consuming at least 20 hours a week of physician and staff time, he said at the meeting.
Cigna had highest rate (6%) of claims requiring prior authorization; Regence had the lowest (0.04%).
There were some bright spots in the report. The vast majority of claims are now being paid within the first 15 days, with the remainder coming largely within 16-30 days of submission. Humana and Medicare were the fastest, paying some 95% of claims within 15 days. Cigna and Health Care Services Corp. were close behind.
The data were compiled by National Healthcare Exchange Services. The company analyzed claims submitted between Feb. 1 and March 31, 2011. Claims came from 42 states and included 4 million services billed on 2.4 million claims made by 400 practices covering 80 specialties.
CHICAGO – A sampling of claims payments from some of the nation’s top insurers shows that although they are paying much more quickly, some 23% of claims were denied and almost a fifth were paid incorrectly.
The study was conducted for the American Medical Association and issued June 20 at the organization’s annual House of Delegates meeting.
The 2011 National Health Insurer Report Card showed that the error rate of 19.3% represented an extra $3.6 million in erroneous claims, a 2% increase from the previous year. The AMA estimated that these faulty payouts and the hassles associated with them added $1.5 billion in administrative costs to the health care system.
"This report card conveys that the current state of the health care claims process is untenable," AMA board member Dr. Barbara L. McAneny said at the annual meeting of the AMA’s House of Delegates.
She said that 10%-14% of a physician’s revenue goes to dealing with administrative issues. The AMA is working with insurers and physicians to get that down to 1% of revenue.
The report card tracked a number of performance measures at Medicare and seven private insurers: Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Cigna, Health Care Services Corp., Humana, Regence, and UnitedHealthcare.
UnitedHealthcare was the only insurer that improved its claims-processing accuracy from 2010, paying 90% of claims in an accurate manner. Anthem, on the other hand, paid only 61% of claims accurately.
The outright denial rate (in which no payment is made) ranged from a low of 17% of claims at Regence to 25% at Anthem and Cigna.
Prior authorization is a growing problem for physicians and constitutes one of the top eight reasons for denial of claims, according to Mark Rieger, CEO of National Healthcare Exchange Services, the company that conducted the analysis for the AMA. Coping with prior authorization is the second-largest administrative task for physicians, consuming at least 20 hours a week of physician and staff time, he said at the meeting.
Cigna had highest rate (6%) of claims requiring prior authorization; Regence had the lowest (0.04%).
There were some bright spots in the report. The vast majority of claims are now being paid within the first 15 days, with the remainder coming largely within 16-30 days of submission. Humana and Medicare were the fastest, paying some 95% of claims within 15 days. Cigna and Health Care Services Corp. were close behind.
The data were compiled by National Healthcare Exchange Services. The company analyzed claims submitted between Feb. 1 and March 31, 2011. Claims came from 42 states and included 4 million services billed on 2.4 million claims made by 400 practices covering 80 specialties.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION'S HOUSE OF DELEGATES
Insurers Paying More Quickly, but Accuracy Still an Issue
CHICAGO – A sampling of claims payments from some of the nation’s top insurers shows that although they are paying much more quickly, some 23% of claims were denied and almost a fifth were paid incorrectly.
The study was conducted for the American Medical Association and issued June 20 at the organization’s annual House of Delegates meeting.
The 2011 National Health Insurer Report Card showed that the error rate of 19.3% represented an extra $3.6 million in erroneous claims, a 2% increase from the previous year. The AMA estimated that these faulty payouts and the hassles associated with them added $1.5 billion in administrative costs to the health care system.
"This report card conveys that the current state of the health care claims process is untenable," AMA board member Dr. Barbara L. McAneny said at the annual meeting of the AMA’s House of Delegates.
She said that 10%-14% of a physician’s revenue goes to dealing with administrative issues. The AMA is working with insurers and physicians to get that down to 1% of revenue.
The report card tracked a number of performance measures at Medicare and seven private insurers: Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Cigna, Health Care Services Corp., Humana, Regence, and UnitedHealthcare.
UnitedHealthcare was the only insurer that improved its claims-processing accuracy from 2010, paying 90% of claims in an accurate manner. Anthem, on the other hand, paid only 61% of claims accurately.
The outright denial rate (in which no payment is made) ranged from a low of 17% of claims at Regence to 25% at Anthem and Cigna.
Prior authorization is a growing problem for physicians and constitutes one of the top eight reasons for denial of claims, according to Mark Rieger, CEO of National Healthcare Exchange Services, the company that conducted the analysis for the AMA. Coping with prior authorization is the second-largest administrative task for physicians, consuming at least 20 hours a week of physician and staff time, he said at the meeting.
Cigna had highest rate (6%) of claims requiring prior authorization; Regence had the lowest (0.04%).
There were some bright spots in the report. The vast majority of claims are now being paid within the first 15 days, with the remainder coming largely within 16-30 days of submission. Humana and Medicare were the fastest, paying some 95% of claims within 15 days. Cigna and Health Care Services Corp. were close behind.
The data were compiled by National Healthcare Exchange Services. The company analyzed claims submitted between Feb. 1 and March 31, 2011. Claims came from 42 states and included 4 million services billed on 2.4 million claims made by 400 practices covering 80 specialties.
CHICAGO – A sampling of claims payments from some of the nation’s top insurers shows that although they are paying much more quickly, some 23% of claims were denied and almost a fifth were paid incorrectly.
The study was conducted for the American Medical Association and issued June 20 at the organization’s annual House of Delegates meeting.
The 2011 National Health Insurer Report Card showed that the error rate of 19.3% represented an extra $3.6 million in erroneous claims, a 2% increase from the previous year. The AMA estimated that these faulty payouts and the hassles associated with them added $1.5 billion in administrative costs to the health care system.
"This report card conveys that the current state of the health care claims process is untenable," AMA board member Dr. Barbara L. McAneny said at the annual meeting of the AMA’s House of Delegates.
She said that 10%-14% of a physician’s revenue goes to dealing with administrative issues. The AMA is working with insurers and physicians to get that down to 1% of revenue.
The report card tracked a number of performance measures at Medicare and seven private insurers: Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Cigna, Health Care Services Corp., Humana, Regence, and UnitedHealthcare.
UnitedHealthcare was the only insurer that improved its claims-processing accuracy from 2010, paying 90% of claims in an accurate manner. Anthem, on the other hand, paid only 61% of claims accurately.
The outright denial rate (in which no payment is made) ranged from a low of 17% of claims at Regence to 25% at Anthem and Cigna.
Prior authorization is a growing problem for physicians and constitutes one of the top eight reasons for denial of claims, according to Mark Rieger, CEO of National Healthcare Exchange Services, the company that conducted the analysis for the AMA. Coping with prior authorization is the second-largest administrative task for physicians, consuming at least 20 hours a week of physician and staff time, he said at the meeting.
Cigna had highest rate (6%) of claims requiring prior authorization; Regence had the lowest (0.04%).
There were some bright spots in the report. The vast majority of claims are now being paid within the first 15 days, with the remainder coming largely within 16-30 days of submission. Humana and Medicare were the fastest, paying some 95% of claims within 15 days. Cigna and Health Care Services Corp. were close behind.
The data were compiled by National Healthcare Exchange Services. The company analyzed claims submitted between Feb. 1 and March 31, 2011. Claims came from 42 states and included 4 million services billed on 2.4 million claims made by 400 practices covering 80 specialties.
CHICAGO – A sampling of claims payments from some of the nation’s top insurers shows that although they are paying much more quickly, some 23% of claims were denied and almost a fifth were paid incorrectly.
The study was conducted for the American Medical Association and issued June 20 at the organization’s annual House of Delegates meeting.
The 2011 National Health Insurer Report Card showed that the error rate of 19.3% represented an extra $3.6 million in erroneous claims, a 2% increase from the previous year. The AMA estimated that these faulty payouts and the hassles associated with them added $1.5 billion in administrative costs to the health care system.
"This report card conveys that the current state of the health care claims process is untenable," AMA board member Dr. Barbara L. McAneny said at the annual meeting of the AMA’s House of Delegates.
She said that 10%-14% of a physician’s revenue goes to dealing with administrative issues. The AMA is working with insurers and physicians to get that down to 1% of revenue.
The report card tracked a number of performance measures at Medicare and seven private insurers: Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Cigna, Health Care Services Corp., Humana, Regence, and UnitedHealthcare.
UnitedHealthcare was the only insurer that improved its claims-processing accuracy from 2010, paying 90% of claims in an accurate manner. Anthem, on the other hand, paid only 61% of claims accurately.
The outright denial rate (in which no payment is made) ranged from a low of 17% of claims at Regence to 25% at Anthem and Cigna.
Prior authorization is a growing problem for physicians and constitutes one of the top eight reasons for denial of claims, according to Mark Rieger, CEO of National Healthcare Exchange Services, the company that conducted the analysis for the AMA. Coping with prior authorization is the second-largest administrative task for physicians, consuming at least 20 hours a week of physician and staff time, he said at the meeting.
Cigna had highest rate (6%) of claims requiring prior authorization; Regence had the lowest (0.04%).
There were some bright spots in the report. The vast majority of claims are now being paid within the first 15 days, with the remainder coming largely within 16-30 days of submission. Humana and Medicare were the fastest, paying some 95% of claims within 15 days. Cigna and Health Care Services Corp. were close behind.
The data were compiled by National Healthcare Exchange Services. The company analyzed claims submitted between Feb. 1 and March 31, 2011. Claims came from 42 states and included 4 million services billed on 2.4 million claims made by 400 practices covering 80 specialties.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION'S HOUSE OF DELEGATES