surgblumm Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 I wrote this in the first week of January, 2012 and encountered it this morning on my computer. I wonder if it is relevant today? Your thoughts. Election Time and what that means to us as Americans, PAs and NPs Bob Blumm, MA, PA-C, DFAAPA A citizen of our wonderful country would need to be blind or deaf to be in a situation where they were unaware that the Republicans are seeking a candidate to run against the incumbent President Obama. Concurrently this is the time the AAPA is declaring the nominees for election in the upcoming year and I am sure that the AANP is involved in the same labors. Elections are serious and it amazes me that so often we know so little about the candidates and how they feel on issues of great importance. As Americans, we need to know where our candidates stand on health care, national defense, welfare, social security as well as foreign and domestic affairs. Would we even attempt to pull a lever without knowledge of these issues? The same holds true in PA and NP politics. What does the candidate believe regarding issues concerning healthcare in America, utilization of the PA and NP workforce, reimbursement issues, research, and for the PA, a change to the name associate? THE NP side also continues to look at DNP degrees and their programs and content. What do our candidates believe? Are they willing to buck the tide and stand with the grassroots members of their profession? Take the “Associate” issue for PAs, more than six thousand PAs have asked for a change in our name but is anyone in leadership listening or are they quick to toss the ball to another entity to escape personal accountability? Membership of ALL organizations desires to be heard and also to see how our requests are both responded to and acted upon. Will the newly commissioned professional leaders perform this responsibility, or will they look for “more important” issues and neglect the 6,000? Leadership can be exciting, rewarding, stimulating and an experience in personal growth and development. A leader in an organization is a caretaker and has a responsibility to the profession and to its members. They cannot close their ears to the cries of the members nor can they close their eyes to petitions and comments, letters and facts that are delivered officially to the BOD on behalf of dues paying members. Why pay dues or consider membership if the leadership refuses to respond? In some cases, leaders who were written by members never answered them. Good leaders accept their failures and defeats in some issues so that they may achieve success and triumphs in other areas. Leaders strive to win battles but are more focused on final outcomes and what may be needed five to ten years from now. Perhaps because the role of leadership is filled with a multiplicity of emotions, it can be understood why and how styles and skills can differ among individual personalities. I have personally observed two leadership styles over the past several decades: the strong leader and the strong, sensitive leader. I am of the firm belief that volunteer organizations must have the latter in order to maintain membership and productivity. Observe the following two styles. Which do you prefer? The Strong Leader 1. Is concerned with what is best for them. 2. Creates an atmosphere where membership is totally dependent upon their decisions. 3. Controls from without using tactics such as restrictions, rules and regulations. 4. Invariably has an :”’m superior, you’re inferior attitude” that alienates others. 5. Interprets questions as personal criticism. 6. Takes no risks and tends to pass the ball to others. 7. Limits the growth of other leaders by deterring the actions of others and by not training anyone else for the job. The Strong Sensitive Leader 1. Is considerate of membership and others on the team. 2. Aims to create a plurality of leadership within the group which will ultimately make them unnecessary. 3. Influences from within by encouragement, inspiration and motivation. 4. Respects all members, old and new, Hears their comments and responds. 5. Is willing to discuss actions and reasons for actions. 6. Delegates and allows for success or failure. 7. Desires power with leaders, encouraging input, feedback, ideas and participation. 8. Liberates other leaders by encouraging new ideas and participation in a process where all are heard. Equips others with the tools to accomplish their tasks. So who and what are we seeking in candidates or as officers in our professions? We are seeking visionaries who are action-oriented and energetic, who are not afraid of adversity or challenge. We are looking for those individuals who accept these concepts willingly for the good of the order. Genus is not a requirement, but rather the requirement should be the insatiable hunger to see the profession grow and flourish both today and tomorrow and in the decades to come. We require future leaders who have a strong belief in our professions, our future and will enable us to resist all others who would try to limit our privileges. We need leaders who will stand against ANY powers that feel that they can make decisions for our profession. We need those who will not accept compromise or mediocrity in place in the pursuit of excellence. We need to know how people see the problems our profession has and how they will solve them. That’s what we need to be thinking about before we check off our ballots and vote for our future. Bob Blumm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check 2 Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 Not here. No. We can't have political conversations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surgblumm Posted October 1, 2020 Author Share Posted October 1, 2020 Thank you. Kill it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediMike Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 We really should just go ahead and start some knock down drag out political discussions in the Recovery Room. Kind of what it's designed for right? Everything that doesn't fit in the other categories? Or maybe we can petition to get a new subforum of "Political Infighting" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surgblumm Posted October 1, 2020 Author Share Posted October 1, 2020 The article was more on PA leadership but I understand your feelings and this was probably foolish of me and I mentioned to another person to take down the post if it is inflammatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check 2 Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 What is the Recovery Room? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediMike Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Reality Check 2 said: What is the Recovery Room? Subforum at the bottom of the main page. Where @EMEDPA talks about chickens and whatnot 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check 2 Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 should be called the Rubber Room - padded walls, xanax salt licks and all the stuff we need at the end of a long shift. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 21 minutes ago, Reality Check 2 said: should be called the Rubber Room - padded walls, xanax salt licks and all the stuff we need at the end of a long shift. OMG, I spit out my coffee!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted October 1, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 1, 2020 4 hours ago, MediMike said: We really should just go ahead and start some knock down drag out political discussions in the Recovery Room. Kind of what it's designed for right? Everything that doesn't fit in the other categories? Or maybe we can petition to get a new subforum of "Political Infighting" The problem is people on here can’t let things go, then it spills into every other conversation. It’s been tried. It fails. we try not to lock threads prophylactically, especially ones that are not explicit to their political affiliation, though ones with topics such as this are locked with a hair trigger. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediMike Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 12 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said: The problem is people on here can’t let things go, then it spills into every other conversation. It’s been tried. It fails. we try not to lock threads prophylactically, especially ones that are not explicit to their political affiliation, though ones with topics such as this are locked with a hair trigger. I gotcha. Would be nice to have an outlet of some kind to allow threads like COVID Redux to continue on with clinical information. Too bad so sad I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surgblumm Posted October 1, 2020 Author Share Posted October 1, 2020 AS I mentioned, I defer to the administrators who are aware of the atmosphere on the forum. The last thing that I want to accomplish is to destroy the harmony of the best PA Forum on the internet with an outdated post that has present merit. Please remove it if it is against policy. I have no skin in the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 Where can I get a Xanax salt lick?????? Must have. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 Or let us talk politics here without closing the threads. There are only 1-2 people who offer nothing to the conversation except personal attacks. Ban them and let the adults have a conversation. Healthcare is run by politicians who tell us what we can/can't do, who can/can't do it, how much it will cost the patient, how much it will cost the taxpayers, who has to buy what insurance, who CAN'T by what kind of insurance, how much the providers will be paid, etc etc ad nauseum. And since we all work in healthcare, all of our jobs are therefore political (except for the lucky few who may work concierge medicine). 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted October 1, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 1, 2020 3 minutes ago, Boatswain2PA said: Or let us talk politics here without closing the threads. There are only 1-2 people who offer nothing to the conversation except personal attacks. Ban them and let the adults have a conversation. Healthcare is run by politicians who tell us what we can/can't do, who can/can't do it, how much it will cost the patient, how much it will cost the taxpayers, who has to buy what insurance, who CAN'T by what kind of insurance, how much the providers will be paid, etc etc ad nauseum. And since we all work in healthcare, all of our jobs are therefore political (except for the lucky few who may work concierge medicine). Well, we can have a discussion on insurance. Politics is run by special interests. Health care is run by the same special interests. You want better healthcare and politics, get the money out of both. Politicians are just middle men puppets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 10 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said: Well, we can have a discussion on insurance. Sure, as long as we all agree about the politics OF insurance. Can we talk about he-who-shall-not-be-named-Care that forced nuns to offer medical insurance that covers abortion? Or can we talk about he-who-shall-not-be-named who overturned that mandate? Can we even talk about that mandate? Or can we talk about the mandate for people to buy health insurance or pay a fine? How about how (insert-politicians name)-Care drove insurance prices up for everyone and caused the majority of counties in the US to have fewer insurance carriers, with 960 counties eventually only having ONE insurance carrier. Can we talk about Medicare? Can we talk about how a President (won't insert which one or his political party) lowered the insulin co-pay to $35 for those on Medicare? The list is long, and confusing. Better to just ban the folks who can't be respectful and let the adults have a conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cideous Posted October 1, 2020 Share Posted October 1, 2020 32 minutes ago, Boatswain2PA said: Healthcare is run by politicians who tell us what we can/can't do, who can/can't do it, how much it will cost the patient, how much it will cost the taxpayers, who has to buy what insurance, who CAN'T by what kind of insurance, how much the providers will be paid, etc etc ad nauseum. And since we all work in healthcare, all of our jobs are therefore political (except for the lucky few who may work concierge medicine). I agree with this. Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted October 2, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 2, 2020 3 hours ago, Boatswain2PA said: Sure, as long as we all agree about the politics OF insurance. Can we talk about he-who-shall-not-be-named-Care that forced nuns to offer medical insurance that covers abortion? Or can we talk about he-who-shall-not-be-named who overturned that mandate? Can we even talk about that mandate? Or can we talk about the mandate for people to buy health insurance or pay a fine? How about how (insert-politicians name)-Care drove insurance prices up for everyone and caused the majority of counties in the US to have fewer insurance carriers, with 960 counties eventually only having ONE insurance carrier. Can we talk about Medicare? Can we talk about how a President (won't insert which one or his political party) lowered the insulin co-pay to $35 for those on Medicare? The list is long, and confusing. Better to just ban the folks who can't be respectful and let the adults have a conversation. First off, we can talk about Romney and Romney Care. The fact you would speak bad about a republican speaks to your maturity and lack of bias. https://www.politifact.com/article/2011/may/18/romneycare-and-obamacare-can-you-tell-difference/ I agree, it’s pretty stupid. Should have just gone with single payer, right lol! Glad your feeling the Bern. though I don’t know why you would disparage him by saying it mandates abortion coverage? Not even left wing nut job Obama did that https://help.ihealthagents.com/hc/en-us/articles/225188587-Are-Abortions-Covered-Under-ObamaCare- now now, let’s be fair to Romney’s plan that Obama used. It’s not that much more expensive for the majority https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/oct/26/george-holding/holding-misleads-obamacare-premium-increase-during/ um let’s walk back. Insulin isn’t much cheaper for most people, but I’m glad you acknowledge governments involvement in healthcare can be good. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/03/donald-trump/trump-inflates-insulin-help-seniors/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 LT - you just totally took some random comments and added what you think I think about them, and you're wrong on almost all accounts. We can talk about "he-who-shall-not-be-named"-care until some immature folks come in and start throwing insults, then the mods shut it down. BTW - I think the insulin executive order is a bad thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted October 2, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 2, 2020 4 minutes ago, Boatswain2PA said: LT - you just totally took some random comments and added what you think I think about them, and you're wrong on almost all accounts. We can talk about "he-who-shall-not-be-named"-care until some immature folks come in and start throwing insults, then the mods shut it down. BTW - I think the insulin executive order is a bad thing. The way you wrote it seemed to heavily imply some feelings, but text can be hard for inference. in my opinion, ACA is an okay topic, but if we start bringing in presidents, justices, overturning, and especially nuns (religion) it’s going to turn south fast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 13 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said: The way you wrote it seemed to heavily imply some feelings, but text can be hard for inference. Understandable. Again, I wasn't arguing for or against anything, but rather how closely health care and politics are intertwined, and how ridiculous I think it is to prohibit political discussions in a discussion board full of medical folks. 16 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said: in my opinion, ACA is an okay topic, but if we start bringing in presidents, justices, overturning, and especially nuns (religion) it’s going to turn south fast The ACA is, at it's face, political. So are the arguments to change it, and the arguments to dismantle it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.