In an escalation of intra-medical politics, the Independent Medical Alliance (IMA) is urging the U.S. Senate to launch an investigation into the American Medical Association (AMA), alleging conflicts of interest and regulatory capture through its ownership of the widely used Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding system.
The move comes just after the AMA demanded a Senate investigation into HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s decision to fire all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Kennedy has defended the action as necessary to reduce industry influence and rebuild public trust.
At the AMA’s annual meeting last week, delegates passed a resolution urging Kennedy to reinstate the committee and asking the Senate Health Committee to probe the firings.
“We are not angry. We are physicians, we are scientists,” said Dr. Jason Goldman, who introduced the resolution. “More importantly, we do not want to be on the wrong side of history.”
But the IMA is pushing back, arguing the AMA should be the one under scrutiny. “The AMA pockets hundreds of millions from CPT code royalties, adopted by HHS as the U.S. healthcare standard,” said IMA spokeswoman Lynne Kristensen in a press release. “It’s essentially an AMA tax on American healthcare.”
The AMA earns $150–$160 million annually licensing its proprietary CPT codes, which are required for billing in nearly every U.S. hospital and clinic. Much of this revenue comes from taxpayer-funded programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are mandated by HHS to use these codes for processing medical claims.
David Mansdoerfer, former HHS official, told the Dallas Express, “When a single group controls a critical aspect of healthcare billing and benefits financially from it, serious questions arise about conflicts of interest and the burden on patients’ costs. A swift and transparent review is essential to ensure fairness and keep healthcare affordable for everyone.”
As tensions rise between the AMA and its critics, the calls for increased oversight reflect broader concerns about transparency, influence, and fairness in the healthcare system. Whether the Senate acts on these requests remains to be seen, but the debate shines a spotlight on the complex relationships that shape American healthcare policy.
