Re: AMA Union

[rlande@UBmail.ubalt.edu]

I have not seen the Bill, only Press accounts of it.  My suspician it that
it is a scheme by Doctors to make more money.

Physicians who work for hospitals already can join Unions, so that is
not the issue.  According to Press accounts - which might not be reliable
- now all of the doctors in a particular area will be able to form a
"union".  The reason they give is so they will be able to have more clout 
to bargain for things that are good for patients.  Possibly.  But I bet
that the first thing they will bargain for is more money for themselves.
If this really were something "for the patients" - which is the way that 
they are trying to sell this Bill - then it would specifically not allow 
Doctors to bargain for higher prices for their services.  But there
does not appear to be any such exclusion.

So, it appears to be just another example of a special interest
cartel trying to justify an antitrust exemption for itself.

If the Press reports that I read are wrong, then my analysis could be
wrong.  If anyone can explain a contrary perspective, I would certainly
like to hear it.

Bob Lande

On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Rick Dahlgren wrote:

> It would appear to me at first glance that the antitrust exemption
> historically bestowed upon the insurance industry would be extended to the
> providers through their physicians.  I have long been for revocation of the
> insurance industry's antitrust protections.  This amplifies the importance
> of accountability  to an industry that has had gone too long without any
> consumer safeguards or "real" competitive forces.
> 
> Rick Dahlgren
> Cottonwood Communications
> rd@cottonwood.com
> 
> >What to make of the AMA attempting to unionize doctors and the Congress
> >considering exempting such a union from the antitrust law?
> >
> >It seems like bad policy.  Why not allow any other trade association to
> >"unionize" and fix prices?  The whole premise of the discussion seems to
> >suggest that the human patient is no longer the client of the doctor,
> >instead the third-party payor is.  And, the lawyer in me wonders if the
> >strength of the HMOs isn't somehow related to tort reform.  Just wondering.
> >
> >Brian Blackman
> >(512) 252-3179
> >bblackman@i-enternet.com
> 
> 
>