US Politics/Harkin vs. Wexler and the Academy's position

US Politics/Harkin vs. Wexler and the Academy's position

Mr. Barr,

I am responding to your E-mail that appreared on the listserve yesterday
asking where the Academy is regarding support for the Wexler or Harkins
bills. Where the Academy is in all of this is not the bigger question,
rather it is not a question at all, at this time.

The Academy is not a subset of AOPA. It is a separate organization dedicated
to serving the professional needs of its members. Like most professional
societies, its primary activities center around those professional needs,
such as meeting the practitioner's need for continous updating of
professional knowledge, providing affordable and accessible education
offerings, nurturing the professional growth of newcomers to the profession,
etc.

The support of legislative and regulatory activities becomes a priority only
when the content of those activities adversely effects the professionalism of
the practitioner. AOPA, representing the O&P facilities has that at the core
of their purpose, which is the basic distinction between professional
societies and trade associations.

The Academy is not confined to any standard position of AOPA or anyone else.
Your comparison of the Harkin and Wexler bills are yours alone. Perhaps
there are some Floridians that you include in your example that did feel that
the chapter was representing them.

The Academy has not taken an official stance on these two legislative
proposals. ABC is not a membership association. Unlike the Academy and
AOPA, it has no constituents.

I have repeatedly thanked my board for taking exactly the stance it did
during the consolidation process, even though it may have appeared to have
been passive.
I can assure you, and any other reader, my board is not passive.
Consolidation was an issue for individual members to make an informed
decision about. I believe the steering and communications committees,
comprised of officers from all three organizations, did their jobs of
formulating the By-laws and various other components of consolidation and
communicating these thoughts to the members sufficiently so that the three
boards did not have to support or oppose them from the sidelines. I may well
be accused of passivity on the issue of consolidation, please do. I am quite
comfortable with the method by which I handled the situation and guided my
board.

I am not comfortable that you have included our mission statement in your
last paragraph in quotes, the way you have. It is not entirely accurate.
You are making it longer and more inclusive than it is.

Yes, our mission is to promote patient advocacy and high standards of patient
care through education, literature, and research. It does not include
political activism or legislative position taking. The Academy is dedicated
to supporting professional and ethical conduct among all ABC certified
practitioners.

In conclusion, I would think the Academy board, present and future, would
respond to the direction by the membership when provided; just as it is doing
now, preparing for an autonomous and independent, as well as cooperative,
relationship with its two sister organizations.

Sincerely,

Bill Schumann, CPO; President, American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists