2017 AUPN Fall Chairs Session
(Held in conjunction with ANA Annual Meeting)
With the seismic shift in political alignment brought about by the 2016 federal election, the fates of the Affordable Care Act, Medicare and other major systems supporting healthcare are in question. When is it appropriate (and when inappropriate) for Chairs to be politically active and lobby for what academic neurology needs to meet its missions and goals? How do the goals for academic neurology differ from those for private practice neurologists? What are the most effective means to inform our legislators, executive branch, and the public of our perspective and needs? How do we prioritize those needs (more GME slots, better reimbursement for cognitive specialties, more funding for research)? What can/should we as chairs do to promote a new plan for healthcare that accounts for the challenges faced by academic medical centers in general and neurology in particular?
1. To understand the major health policy issues confronted by Congress
2. To understand the major factors that influence Congressional decisions on these issues
3. To understand how neurology chairs could develop priorities for advocacy
Richard Kronick, PhD; University of California, San Diego School of Medicine