Re: US Politics: Consolidation Bylaws

Re: US Politics: Consolidation Bylaws

Anderson Harold R.

4/30/1999

While it does appear that Mr. Gallo is pretty adamently opposed to
consolidation, I think that he makes some important points that should be
taken into consideration during the next draft of the proposed consolidation
bylaws. Dave is right in that we have to have a structure in mind whether
we consolidate or not. Otherwise, how do we know what we are working
towards?

I still haven't made up my mind. I have some of the same concerns about the
effects of putting too much power in the hands of the business side and
reducing the power of the individual practitioner. I don't see it as a
conspiracy - maybe it is but I doubt it. But I don't see how you can say
that the business person and the practitioner (sometimes the same person)
have the same motivations. Both have motivations that may affect patient
care positively and negatively. But they are different and any
consolidation effort between the two needs to balance these two entities.

Harold Anderson, CO



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dcscpo [SMTP: <Email Address Redacted> ]
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 1999 8:53 AM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: Re: US Politics: Consolidation Bylaws
>
> Reference is made to the comments of Mr. Gallo regarding the draft
> bylaws for the consolidation issue.
>
> I fail to understand how draft bylaws could be drafted if there was no
> intent to place the issue before the membership. These draft bylaws have
> been put before the membership as an operating documents should
> consolidation occur. You have to have a structure in mind in order to
> draft bylaws to support it.
>
> What is apparently being overlooked here is the fact that the bylaws are
> draft bylaws. That means that a group of very hardworking volunteers have
> put down their thoughts on the bylaws. Then in the democratic society we
> have they submitted them to the current membership for purposes of voicing
> their opinions and asking for changes they feel are necessary.
>
> Mr. Gallo seems to suspect a conspiracy in which the business community of
> our field is going to take over the professional side. Show me a
> professional that is not a business man/woman and I will show you someone
> who is not a professional. Being a professional is like saying your
> powerful, if you have to say you are, you ain't.
>
> Quite frankly I have become very tired of hearing from the professionals
> about the conspiracy of the business side attempting to take over the
> profession. I consider myself a professional and a businessman as well.
> One can't work without the other. Try to run your profession without
> business rules and regulations. I deal with professional matters and
> business matters on a daily basis. Does that make me any less of a
> professional? I think not.
>
> As someone once said, I have seen the enemy, and it is us.
>
> DAVID C, SCHULTZ, CPO
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Morris Gallo < <Email Address Redacted> <mailto:<Email Address Redacted>>>
> To: < <Email Address Redacted> <mailto:<Email Address Redacted>>>
> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 1999 8:02 PM
> Subject: US Politics: Consolidation Bylaws
>
> > What follows is a response to Mr. Hoxie relative to the draft of
> > the proposed bylaws recently sent the membership. To understand you
> > must have a copy of the draft with the numbered lines. I encourage
> > comment, as I am now against consolidation but do have an open mind to
> > those with more insight.
> > I urge everyone to submit ideas and opinions, we need fully
> > understand the consequences of our actions, or lack thereof.
> >
> > Morris Gallo, CPO
> >