0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Research Letter |

The Political Alignment of US Physicians An Update Including Campaign Contributions to the Congressional Midterm Elections in 2014 FREE

Adam Bonica, PhD1; Howard Rosenthal, PhD2; David J. Rothman, PhD3
[+] Author Affiliations
1Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California
2Department of Political Science, New York University, New York
3Center on Medicine as a Profession, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York
JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(7):1236-1237. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1332.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

We recently reported that between 1991 and 2012, the political alignment of American physicians shifted from predominantly Republican toward the Democrats.1 In 2014, the Republican surge changed party control of Congress: the Republicans gained 9 Senate seats and became the majority party there, and the Republican majority in the House of Representatives increased to the largest since 1928. To determine if the political alignment of physicians also shifted toward Republicans, we studied their campaign contributions to federal elections in 2013 and 2014. We found that physicians’ campaign contributions did not shift to the Republicans, in contrast to the change in the public’s voting behavior. In general, the shift in campaign contributions toward the Democrats that prevailed in 2011 to 2012 and earlier election cycles continued, even in the 9 states where the Republicans gained Senate seats.

Our methods, including how we identified physicians, measured their campaign contributions, and analyzed the data, have been previously described.1 We grouped 2013 and 2014 contributions by the 2-year congressional election cycle and calculated the percentage of physicians who contributed to Republicans for all donors, previous donors, and new donors, both unweighted and weighted by amount of contribution, and the total amount of physician contributions.

The Table lists physicians’ contributions in each 2-year election cycle from the 1993-1994 cycle through the 2013-2014 cycle. In the 2013-2014 election cycle, 45% of all physician donors contributed to Republicans, including 45% of previous donors and 44% of new donors; when the percentages were weighted by the amount of the contributions, the comparable percentages were 50%, 50%, and 46%, respectively. Nearly all physicians contribute exclusively to 1 of the 2 major parties. Few physicians ever switch parties, so shifts in contributions reflect the exit of previous donors and the entry of new donors.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable.  Physician Contributions to Federal Election Campaigns by Election Cycle

The Figure shows the percentage of physician campaign contributions to Republicans by sex, for-profit vs non-profit employment status, and surgeons vs pediatricians. In all groups, there was a small uptick in the Republican direction in the 2013-2014 election cycle; however, the shift toward the Republicans was less than in the 2009-2010 cycle, when Congress debated and voted on the Affordable Care Act during President Obama’s first term. In all groups, the percentage of physician campaign contributions to Republicans was less than in the 2005-2006 election cycle, when the Democrats gained control of the Senate.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Percentage of Physician Campaign Contributions to Republicans
Graphic Jump Location

In the 2013-2014 cycle, there were far fewer new physician donors than in the 2009-2010 cycle, when the Affordable Care Act was under consideration (5737 vs 14 724); the total amount of physician donations also decreased ($57.5 million in 2013-2014 vs $81.6 million in 2009-2010).

In the 9 states where the Republicans gained Senate seats in the 2013-2014 cycle, physician contributions were equally split between Democrats and Republicans, with 49% of previous donors and 51% of new donors contributing to Republicans (Table). When the percentages were weighted by the amount of contributions, Republicans secured the majority of funds: 57% from previous donors and 60% from new donors.

Although the results of the 2014 congressional midterm elections in the United States may have constituted an important political shift toward the Republicans, the majority of physicians continued to be aligned with the Democrats. Of physicians who contributed to federal campaigns in the 2013-2014 election cycle, 55% contributed to Democratic candidates, 45% to Republican candidates.

Political divisions among physicians will almost certainly persist. Given the increasing numbers of women physicians and salaried physicians, who typically ally with the Democrats, in contrast to surgeons, who typically ally with the Republicans, our findings suggest that the medical profession will be challenged to achieve consensus on health policy issues. The profession is unlikely to speak with one voice on questions such as the provision of health insurance or controlling the costs of medical care. The polarization among physicians, however, may spur both political parties to work harder to maintain and increase physicians’ support. Thus, the political divisions among physicians may have the unintended effect of enhancing the political standing of the medical profession.

Corresponding Author: David J. Rothman PhD, Center on Medicine as a Profession, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, 622 W 168th St, PH15-25, New York, NY 10032 (djr5@columbia.edu)

Published Online: April 27, 2015. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1332.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Additional Contributions: Kristy Blackwood, BA, Center on Medicine as a Profession, provided exceptional editorial and administrative assistance for this article. She was not compensated for her contribution beyond her normal salary.

Bonica  A, Rosenthal  H, Rothman  DJ.  The political polarization of physicians in the United States: an analysis of campaign contributions to federal elections, 1991 through 2012. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(8):1308-1317.
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Percentage of Physician Campaign Contributions to Republicans
Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable.  Physician Contributions to Federal Election Campaigns by Election Cycle

References

Bonica  A, Rosenthal  H, Rothman  DJ.  The political polarization of physicians in the United States: an analysis of campaign contributions to federal elections, 1991 through 2012. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(8):1308-1317.
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

1,091 Views
0 Citations
×

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
Jobs