JAMA, the ACA and the Presidential Elections
I was asked by Howard Bauchner, the editor-in-chief of JAMA (the Journal of the American Medical Association, but the journal goes by “JAMA”), to join a group of physicians, economists, and health services researchers this year to blog about the presidential race and health-related events, including the Supreme Court’s hearing of challenges to the Affordable Care Act. This is a first for the JAMA blog (news@JAMA) and has been given a separate name: JAMA Forum. It’s fairly new and most of the posts are about their articles or other health news. The argument for venturing into the realm of the politics of health care was made by JAMA news editor Joan Stephenson, Bauchner, and executive editor Phil Fontanorosa in an editorial in the March 14th issue of the journal. These blogs provide interesting commentaries thus far. But politics is tricky business and it remains to be seen whether the AMA’s members will think the JAMA Forum is a good idea. The editorial independence of JAMA makes it unlikely that the editors or authors of the JAMA Forum would be influenced by any member concerns. Certainly, the editors at JAMA confirmed with the blogging authors that their posts would be lightly edited only.
My first post about dinner conversations and the Supreme Court’s deliberations about the Affordable Care Act. Looking forward to more conversations.
Diana J. Mason, PhD, RN, FAAN, Co-director, CHMP