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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives. 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. Methods. Campaign contributions to House members were analyzed. Results. 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. Conclusions. In seeking malpractice reform, the AMA contributed significantly more to pro- tobacco representatives, potentially undermining tobacco control legislation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1233-1236
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican journal of public health
Volume88
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1998
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '1996 congressional campaign priorities of the AMA: Tackling tobacco or limiting malpractice awards?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this