Texas Medical Association @TexMed “Friendly Incumbent” rule

A fellow Texas Medical Association member asked me today how I felt about TexPAC – was it even worth giving them money and “what about their endorsements for judges?” He had been surprised to notice the TMA’s endorsement of some Democrat candidates after the Judicial endorsements caught his eye. (He even asked whether the list was just a pet of some of the more wealthy docs in the TMA.)

I explained that, while the TMA generally opposes ObamaCare, the Association unfortunately has what they call the “friendly incumbent” rule.  I also agreed that the policy doesn’t explain all of the choices on the TexPAC list. But for the most part, It’s virtually a given that the PAC endorses the incumbent in a race, even if the candidate doesn’t agree with the TMA on such vital issues as ObamaCare and the (Un-) Sustainable Growth Rate (“SGR”) or even the “RAC audits.” (“Recovery Audit Contractors” – *private* contractors who audit Medicare “providers” – doctors and hospitals, and earn more for finding more “fraudandabuse.”)

The policy – along with the heavy-handedness of some of the leaders of the PAC –  leads to such debacles as their mistaken endorsement of Jeff Wentworth, who opposed tort reform, over  Dr. Donna Campbell, the eventual winner (by a 2 to 1 vote!) of the Texas Senate District 25 Republican Primary,

I suggested that he include a note about his disagreements with the PAC in any check he writes in the future. As for this election, I advised my friend – who is very opposed to ObamaCare – to ignore any recommendation that didn’t have an “R” for “Republican” in front of the candidate’s name – especially when it comes to the candidates for our Third Court of Appeals: Scott Fields is a much better choice for conservative voters than the incumbent. (I could say the same about Congressional District 35, where I hope my neighbors will vote for Susan Narvaiz, rather than Layoff Lloyd Doggett.)