To the Honorable Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger,
Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,
On August 30, 2010, Jay Garfinkle MD wrote the following e-mail to Professor Sharon Winer MD MPH,
with copy to CMA's Executive Committee, staff and leadership, enclosed.
Jay Garfinkle, MD, is a member of CMA's Board Of Trustees, BOT.
Dr. Garfinkle is a Board Certified General Surgeon, specialized in Cancer, in Hayward, CA.
He did his Residency at the Ochsner Foundation Hospital & Kaiser Hospital- Sunset.
Professional interests: Breast Cancer Surgery conservation techniques and sentinel lymph node biopsy.
Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery including laparoscopic procedures.
Thyroid Cancer Surgery.
From: Jay Garfinkle, MD
Subject: RE: AB 1235 - Was CMA taken over by CHA ?
Date: August 30, 2010 8:15:02 AM PDT
Sharon,
I don't think you're the only one feeling betrayed. The two peer review
bills which are of major importance to many of us rank and file members
have been under consideration by the legislature for several months.
And, given the obvious need to modify them, especially AB1235,
in order to protect our rights in peer review actions, a reasonable
person would have expected CMA's Board Of Trustees, BOT, to be
heavily involved in the process. A review of the minutes of the last BOT
meeting which was only a few weeks ago, however, does not indicate
that there was any discussion re this issue.
It would appear, therefore, that this has been entirely a Staff project
without any meaningful input by the BOT.
And as a result, we have what many of us consider to be misguided support
for what is clearly a bad (as currently written) bill. And equally as important,
we have a widespread and growing feeling of discontent and betrayal among
those members who are paying attention and trying to participate in the CMA's
activities.
My conclusions may be entirely incorrect, but I have been given no clear
reason to believe otherwise.
Jay Garfinkle
From: Sharon Winer
Subject: Re: AB 1235 - Was CMA taken over by CHA ?
Date: August 30, 2010 3:19:59 AM PDT
Hi Dustin and Francisco:
I have been following the email discussions regarding SB 700 and AB 1235 with increasing anxiety, concern and sense of betrayal.
Please comment and explain the CMA rationale for supporting both of these bills if this is still the case. It would be nice to have this
clarified and resolved before the HOD where it would become a dominant issue.
Sharon Winer
Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,
To date, CMA has not responded to Professor Sharon A. Winer's e-mail.
In view of the above, you MUST VETO AB 1235, as it is still a "work in progress",
Respectfully submitted,
Enclosure:
Subject: AB 1235 - Was CMA taken over by CHA ?
Date: August 29, 2010 3:35:11 AM PDT
Thank you very much for your e-mail dated, August 27, 2010, whereby you admit that you do have the power to withdraw
Subject: Healing arts: peer review.
Authored by: Hayashi,
Accordingly, one has to wonder why you refuse to withdraw this bill and insist on passing it, when the HOD clearly directed
you to pass a bill that is the exact opposite to AB 1235 ?
Following, please find, copy of the e-mail I received from Dr. Weinmann, Past President of the Union of American
Physicians and Dentists, UAPD, that ponders over your possible ulterior motives.
From: Robert Weinmann
Subject: Re: AB 1235 - Was CMA taken over by CHA ?
Date: August 27, 2010 7:53:09 PM PDT
Ordinarily, when an organization loses control of a bill because opposition forces have
rammed through unfriendly amendments, the organization withdraws from support of the
bill and, if they're sponsoring it, cancels the sponsorship. If that doesn't happen,
it's fair to ask why, e.g., were the amendments actually OK'd by the sponsor or other
supporters, is there a proposed trade-off in the works, etc. Usually, it's the "et cetera."
I note that AB 1235 includes a most unusual and dangerous clause, whereby physicians who are employees of hospitals or
medical groups, are treated differently from physicians who are not employees. Why would CMA do such a thing ?
SEC. 2. Section 809.04 is added to the Business and Professions Code, to read:
(b) To ensure that the peer review process is not circumvented,
a member of a medical or professional staff, by contract or
otherwise, shall not be required to alter or surrender staff privileges,
status, or membership solely due to the termination of a contract
between that member and a health care facility. However, with
respect to services that may only be provided by members who
have, or who are members of a medical group that has, a current
exclusive contract for those identified services, termination of the
contract, or termination of the member’s employment by the
medical group holding the contract, may result in the member’s
ineligibility to provide the services covered by the contract.
Page — 6 — AB1235
Unfortunately, as written at the present time, AB 1235 would not protect any physician that CMA purports to protect,
such as Dr. Sharon Siegel, see: