1996 congressional campaign priorities of the AMA: tackling tobacco or limiting malpractice awards?

• Published in: American journal of public health (1971) Vol. 88; no. 8; pp. 1233 - 1236
• Main Author: Sharfstein, J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Washington, DC Am Public Health Assoc 01.08.1998; American Public Health Association
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; American Medical Association - economics; Biological and medical sciences; Campaign contributions; Campaigns; Child; Committees; Congressional elections; Election results; Federal legislation; Federal regulation; Financing, Organized; Health care policy; Health Care Reform - economics; Health Care Reform - legislation & jurisprudence; Health insurance; Humans; Insurance, Liability - legislation & jurisprudence; Legal reform; Legislation; Legislators; Lobbying; Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence; Medical malpractice; Medical profession; Medical sciences; Negative campaigning; PAC; Pain; Pharmaceutical industry; Political action committees; Political parties; Politics; Priorities; Professional associations; Public health; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Scandals; Smoking; Smoking - legislation & jurisprudence; Smoking cessation; Teaching. Deontology. Ethics. Legislation; Tobacco industry; Torts; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration - legislation & jurisprudence; USA; United States; North America; America; Human; Politician; Health policy; Voting; Attitude; Decision making; Legislation; Tobacco smoking; Public health
• ISSN: 0090-0036; 1541-0048
• DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.88.8.1233

This study sought to determine whether the political action committee of the American Medical Association (AMA) contributed more to pro- or anti-tobacco members of Congress in the 1995/96 campaign and whether representatives' voting records on malpractice reform could explain the AMA's contribution patterns. Campaign contributions to House members were analyzed. The AMA's political action committee contributed averages of $5382 to pro-tobacco representatives and $2103 to anti-tobacco representatives (P < .0005). This contribution pattern can be fully explained by representatives' votes to limit malpractice awards. In seeking malpractice reform, the AMA contributed significantly more to pro-tobacco representatives, potentially undermining tobacco control legislation.