ACPM Resolutions Introduced for Consideration at the Fall 2001 Business Session


01-01(I) Health Care for All 101
John T Ashley MD, MBA, FACPM
Robert H. LeBow, MD, MPH
Robert T. Pero, MD, MPH
RESOLVES THAT: The ACPM develop a complete proposal to present to Congress for the purpose of enacting universal coverage, a proposal which could be called Health Insurance for All (HIFA).

THAT: This proposal would:

  1. Guarantee health insurance for all US residents.
  2. End the responsibility of US industry to provide health insurance benefits.
  3. Create a tax-based (like Medicare) health insurance program funded by the federal government and/or the states.
  4. Build on the current strengths of American health care professionals and institutions to deliver quality, scientific based care and prevention.
  5. Utilize the strengths of American health insurers to administrate the system.
  6. Minimize the economic incentives or disincentives to either over-utilize marginally effective services or underutilize proven beneficial services.
  7. Allow flexibility at the state level – except for mandating universal coverage.
  8. THAT: Some of the agreed-upon principles (by the authors of this resolution) of this proposal would include – subject to modification and/or development in more detail by an ACPM committee:

    1. Federally funded health insurance coverage for all residents of the USA with a single risk-pool that enrolls every resident automatically (details of enrollment to be worked out) in an Essential Health Insurance (?Care) Package (EHIP) in the state where the individual resides.
    2. The proposal could cover all residents initially, or phase in some already covered groups step-wise, such as Medicare, the VA, and military populations.
    3. The EHIP would have no premiums; would include primary care, essential specialist care, hospitalizations, and pharmaceuticals; proven preventive care; mental health with parity; basic dental care.
    4. There would be no deductibles and minimal co-payments for essential services, with a mechanism to waive co-payments as deemed necessary. [ACPM policy in 1993 stated that basic preventive services should be delivered "free of any co-payment."]
    5. Discretionary specialty services would have higher co-payments.
    6. Creation of a national board for oversight, regulation, and design of the benefit package.
    7. EHIP financed through a progressive payroll tax (or self-employment tax) on all income, collected similar to social security and Medicare taxes.
    8. Supplemental insurance, for services or co-payments not covered in the EHIP, would be sold on the private market. Employers could opt to buy supplemental insurance for non-covered services.
    9. Current employer contributions for health insurance should be converted to increased wages for employees.
    10. Provision for capture of the tax-exemption (currently amounts to about $125 Billion a year) in the financing of this plan.
    11. Enrollment process to be developed. Could provide role for current insurers in enrollment as well as administration.
    12. Rates and reimbursements negotiated between the EHIP administrators and health care professionals/institutions. Could be fee-for-service or capitation, or other negotiated payment mechanism.
    13. Enrollees have full choice of provider participating with chosen insurer.
    14. Long term care to be integrated into package when feasible with current Medicare and Medicaid long term care programs retained until altered.
    15. States responsible to monitor and regulate insurers in each state and allowed flexibility to add needed benefits, e.g., as with current Medicaid recipients.
    16. Assume continued federal/state support for delivery systems for special populations (e.g., Migrant/Community Health Centers, Health Care for the Homeless, Public Health Clinics).
    17. Funding for prevention and public health, as well as educational programs, to be included within this financing system – but not excluding other funding as well.
    18. Federal government to monitor and regulate state performance in assuring access and quality of care to residents of the states.

THAT: The ACPM work with other professional (?and community) organizations to form a broad base of lobbying support for this Health Insurance for All plan.

THAT: The ACPM form a committee to develop this proposal in detail to present it to our membership for approval.

ACTION TAKEN:  The ACPM Policy Committee deferred action on this resolution until the Open Policy Forum at Preventive Medicine 2002 (February 20-24, 2002, in San Antonio, Texas).

REMARKS:
  This resolution was the product of several months of collaboration and dialogue by the authors, who had submitted somewhat similar, but separate, resolutions for consideration at the 2001 Open Policy Forum. At that time, the Policy Committee referred both resolutions back to the authors and urged them to coordinate their efforts and resubmit a combined, refined resolution. As a result of concerns about the scope and role of ACPM expressed by the committee via the listserv prior to the October 21 meeting, Dr. LeBow addressed the committee and urged ACPM to consider at least adopting the principles and supporting other organizations’ and coalitions’ advocacy efforts consistent with these principles. The committee questioned how these principles matched up with other organizations’ reform proposals (e.g., AMA) and expressed some additional concerns about some of the all-payer principles. One committee member suggested ACPM consider a more targeted approach, such as the "MediKids Health Insurance Act of 2001" currently being considered by Congress. Dr. LeBow reiterated that the proposed resolution seeks revolutionary system changes, with a focus on primary and secondary prevention for the whole population, not a tinkering around the edges for one segment of the population. The committee decided to defer action until the spring meetings of the committee and Open Policy Forum and urged the authors to do additional research into how their principles compare to other organization/coalition reform proposals.

02-01(I) Support for Abstinence Education Programs
Marcela Meyer, MD, MPH, FACPM
RESOLVES THAT, the ACPM go on record as approving those Abstinence  Education Programs for young people which incorporate the 8 criteria for federal-to-state funding for Abstinence Education programs as stated in Section 510(b)(2) of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 which amends Title V of the Social Security Act (see attachment to resolution).

ACTION TAKEN
:
  ACPM did not adopt this resolution.

REMARKS
:
  This same resolution was submitted to 
ACPM and considered by the Policy Committee in February 2001. ACPM decided not to adopt it at that time as well. However, because the author was not able to present the resolution in February, and an evaluation of her sexual abstinence program had been completed since that time, she opted to resubmit it for consideration. At the October 21 meeting, she and her colleague presented the resolution and the results of the evaluation survey that demonstrated program success. Policy Committee members raised concerns about the validity of the survey evaluation results and methodology. The committee also noted the resolution’s stance against sexual activity in all cases except for marriage and felt that marriage excluded certain segments (e.g., gay and lesbian) of the population. The committee felt that ACPM could only support abstinence as part of a more comprehensive sexual education program, and encouraged the author to consider raising the issue at ACPM’s Open Policy Forum in February 2002.

03-01(I) ACPM Emergency Resolution to Strengthen Preventive Medicine as a Medical Specialty
Joel L. Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA, FACPM
RESOLVES THAT
  1. THAT, the ACPM Policy Committee and Board declare that an emergency situation exists in which other business of ACPM must be declared lower in priority to the action needed to immediately strengthen the specialty of preventive medicine.
  2. THAT, resources be immediately deployed to rapidly and fully implement the entire workplan of the Job Market Intiative (JMI) – including
    1. Web site, job listings,
    2. Outreach to actual and potential employers of PM physicians,
    3. Outreach and liaison to other national organizations and
    4. Development of postgraduate fellowship opportunities.
  3. That, in addition to the JMI agenda, action be initiated, renewed or dramatically enhanced on the following fronts:
    1. To convince the ACGME RRC (Residency Review Committee) of the importance of formal recognition of the non-clinical portions of PH and PM residency training programs
    2. To fully engage ACPM (and possibly other PM national organizations) in
      1. The APHA/ASPH project to "certify" public health professionals.
      2. The CDC-associated public health workforce enumeration project
      3. National deliberations on institutional response to bioterrorism and the provision of the leadership and technical staff needed to assure appropriate response in public health, academic, healthcare delivery and other settings
    3. To secure and enhance funding for PM residency training programs, with special emphasis on those oriented toward development of leadership staff for state and local health departments
    4. To explore both formal and informal means by which we can redevelop Public Health as a subspecialty of Preventive Medicine – and implement these means in a way that will enable us to assure state and local governments of the qualifications of PH physicians board certified in PM
    5. To begin the process of redeveloping all PM training programs to meet the needs of the job marketplace and to identify the ways in which the knowledge and skills needed to fill all potential PH/PM physician job niches can be offered in PH/PM training programs, at MPH, residency and continuing education levels. This will require the following steps
      1. Identifying the jobs that should require or prefer PM physicians in the job specifications
      2. To identify the knowledge and skills required for such jobs
      3. To develop the educational programming to teach such knowledge and hone the skills under skilled mentorship in the context of PM residency training programs
    6. To enhance and accelerate development of part-time and off-site PM training opportunities as a path to PM Board certification by currently employed PM physicians and non-PM physicians who might seek such training and certification
    7. To take these and other steps necessary to create a situation in which PM training and Board Certification is of substantial value to PM physicians seeking PM related jobs
  4. That ACPM play the lead role to enlist the active participation of sister preventive medicine, public health and medical organizations in this effort.
  5. That ACPM play the lead role in enlisting the active participation of ACPM members and their respective institutional employers in academic, public health, healthcare delivery, industrial and other settings to further this agenda.
ACTION TAKEN:  The Board passed the following Resolves in lieu of the proposed ACPM resolution: (1) THAT, the ACPM Board recognize the urgent need to strengthen the specialty of preventive medicine as a top priority of the College, (2) THAT, the ACPM Board, appropriate committees, and staff work with sister preventive medicine, public health, and medical organizations to accomplish this goal, and (3) THAT, the details of adoption and implementation of specific action be referred to the Board/Executive Committee and be determined by the February 2002 Board meeting.

REMARKS:
  The Policy Committee expressed some concerns with the specific details within the proposed resolution, such as use of the term "Board eligibility" and misrepresentation of the roles of the ACGME Preventive Medicine RRC. After discussion about adopting a more general resolve to deem the status of the specialty of preventive medicine a top priority for the College and refer the details of an action plan to an ACPM committee(s), the Policy Committee recommended the resolution be adopted as submitted. However, the Board expressed concerns with numerous provisions within the body of the resolution and agreed to support the thrust of the resolution, but not the itemized details as presented. The adopted action taken reflects the Board’s sentiments.




   
   
   
   

For more information, contact Mike Barry.