Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Some publications, professional and other, devote much space to criticisms of the American Medical Association, as though the Association were an enemy of the profession or of the people. In the professional arena, conservative voices especially denounce AMA's sponsorship of the Medicredit proposal. Yet of all legislative proposals of this kind, Medicredit would be most supportive to private practice— the very thing conservative physicians hold most dear. It is understandable that some physicians would dislike the prospect of even so much federal intervention as would inevitably be caused by Medicredit. Nevertheless, among many purposes served, merely having this proposal before the Congress has given the AMA a ticket of admission to the whole three-ring circus of legislative shenanigans. When the AMA had no solid base on which to stand, as was the case in Medicare days, the Association, after the Johnson landslide of 1964, received scant hearings and almost no
JAMA – American Medical Association
Published: Jun 19, 1972
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.