Commentary
By Jamison Foser
Thursday’s New York Times article about the American Medical Association’s opposition to the inclusion of a strong public option in health care reform had several serious flaws. As a result, it greatly overstated the significance of the AMA’s stance and left out key information that undermines the group’s claims.
The most basic flaw in the Timesarticle is that it never made clear who the AMA represents. The article’s headline described…
