Healthcare PACs Tilt Toward GOP
"Everyone realizes that when you talk about presidential campaigns, you are talking about massive amounts of funding for each candidate to compete," Weinstein says. "We feel we can have a greater impact on issues affecting our patients in our profession by building relationships with members of Congress. We always consider that question for each election cycle: What do we want to do for our members? Our philosophy is that we're a bipartisan PAC. We support both Democrats and Republicans, and we are most supportive of candidates who understand what we want—appropriate access for specialty care."
Mueller, of the American Society of Anesthesiologists agrees. "Congressional races offer our members the best opportunities to fully participate in campaigns," he says. "The large scale of a presidential campaign simply doesn't offer the same meaningful experience. For the time being, we think our resources are best used where our anesthesiologists can more fully engage with the candidates."
Whether it's dealing with the "record number of drug shortages or making progress on fixing payment issues, there are members on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers of Congress who understand these issues and how they relate to our specialty," Mueller says.
At this point, the healthcare PACs are "looking for a target audience," says Dowling of the Heritage Foundation. "In this case, it's Congress. It's paying for influence."
Joe Cantlupe is a senior editor with HealthLeaders Media Online.
- CMS to Speak with ICD-10 Backers Tuesday
- Feds Stonewall ICD-10 Summit
- Boston Marathon Bombing Yields Lessons for Hospitals
- Governor Details Healthcare Payment Reform Path in Arkansas
- Hospital Groups Back NQF Report on Patient Sociodemographics
- Managed Care Contract Negotiations Morph Under PPACA
- Cyberattack Drill Exposes Healthcare's Vulnerabilities
- Physician Payment Data is Where the Action Is
- NY Abolishes Written Practice Agreement for NPs
- MetroHealth Revs Its Population Health Engine