ANA membership?

Posted

You are reading page 2 of ANA membership?. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

ghillbert, MSN, NP

Specializes in CTICU. Has 26 years experience. 3,792 Posts

I am only an ANA member because they offered the grad students a free membership.

I pay for AACN membership (and the Aussie equivalent) and AAHFN membership.

subee, MSN, CRNA

Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired. Has 50 years experience. 4,145 Posts

The nurses who aren't active in their state associations have no IDEA what goes on. There's no other organization that can lobby for their interests at the state level better than their SNA who personally knows the politicians in that state. Playing the political game is how legislation gets passed. No one individual can be very effective in regulating our profession to keep up with the times. Certainly some nurses have a reasoned stance to oppose their SNA, but I believe that most are too lazy or too cheap to help The Cause. No one agrees with every stance any organization takes, but sometimes the better war is fought when you suck up your differences and fight for something bigger than you.

Honnête et Sérieux

Honnête et Sérieux

Specializes in Flight Nurse, Pedi CICU, IR, Adult CTICU. 283 Posts

Would a new attorney not join the American Bar Association? Would a new doctor not join the AMA? No, these lobbying groups have virtually 100% membership.

I understand your point, but are you sure about that? Info seems to place ABA membership at 50% and AMA membership below 20%...and both of these agencies are equally, if not more controversial than the ANA.

Yet only about 10% of nurses join the ANA. It is our strongest and largest representing (& lobbying) organization and yet 9 out of 10 nurses don't join. Read this thread.

Again, sorry for the hijack! We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

I avoided the ANA because of their overt political bias in spite of their claims of bipartisanship. For example, in their endorsements for the 2008 election cycle, only 7% were Republicans. Now, I'm no Republican, but that hardly looks bipartisan to me. And reviewing their endorsements, the only way a Republican got an endorsement was if they were up to their arses in some kind of nursing legislation and had "I :redbeathe RN's" tattooed just above the waterline. Some of the Dem endorsements were simply because the candidate expressed a "hope" to be involved in nursing issues....phuleease.

Another reason I stayed away was because of their labor affiliations. Now that has changed, but their overall stance is not acceptable to me. I don't feel like the ANA is an agency that is seeking to serve the interests of RN's, but instead is a tool for a select few RN's to promote themselves, and that the ANA serves more to corral and categorize RN's instead of functioning effectively to promote nursing as a profession.

Instead of trying to direct national healthcare policy, they need to return to their membership...focus on building it back up and then listening to their new members. They also need to find out what makes other associations successful...and it's by these two methods; high standards for education (I know, the deadly ADN/BSN discussion), and lobbying for legislative protection and expansion for nursing practice at all levels, even if it PO's the physicians. The ANA wiggles their butt in that direction on occasion, but they always quickly retreat.

Maybe they can apply for bailout money and hire Haley Barbour and Bill Clinton to be their powerful lobbyist voice in DC.

nicurn001

nicurn001

Specializes in Psych , Peds ,Nicu. 805 Posts

H & S , agreed with your post above , but I guess ANA's wish to be bipartisan is hard to fulfill . As it is difficult to find moderate republicans , in positions of power who would support nurses , rather than the Healthcare industry . Leaving the ANA the choice with endorsing Democrats , or being Apolitical , an unsustainable positon for a group who wishes to lobby for a legislation .:twocents:

Honnête et Sérieux

Honnête et Sérieux

Specializes in Flight Nurse, Pedi CICU, IR, Adult CTICU. 283 Posts

H & S , agreed with your post above , but I guess ANA's wish to be bipartisan is hard to fulfill . As it is difficult to find moderate republicans , in positions of power who would support nurses , rather than the Healthcare industry . Leaving the ANA the choice with endorsing Democrats , or being Apolitical , an unsustainable positon for a group who wishes to lobby for a legislation .:twocents:

Uh...why do they have to be moderate republicans? Conservatives care about nurses! Liberals care about nurses! I have to say...I'm just a tad insulted! :cry:

And the solution is to endorse NO ONE. They can be apolitical and still lobby congress, and successful lobbyist groups work both sides of the aisle, not just one, and that might be the problem with the ANA; they picked a team, and it's not working for them.

The hospital I work for has a apolitical gov't affairs office that lobbys the state assembly, and they don't endorse ANYONE! They engage both sides of the aisle and make them aware of the challenges we face, and lobby both sides to act to the benefit of our interests...

nicurn001

nicurn001

Specializes in Psych , Peds ,Nicu. 805 Posts

They would , with a high degree of probability , have to be moderate republicans , as the conservatives would be unlikely to want to be assosicated with a group that , by your definition ( in post 14 ) were partisan ( because of their 93 % support of democrats ). So I don't think , you have cause to feel insulted , though if you are , that is your choice .

The ANA can lobby both sides of the aisle , but only garner the support of enough republicans , that only 7% of their funding goes to Republicans .If the ANA changed it's stances to gain more conservative support it would have to either compromise it's principals or dilute it's legislative agenda ( if the conservatives supported these , they would already be onboard , and not worried about your percieved lack of bipartisanship ) to such a degree it would no longer achieve their desires .

It is your view , that your hospitals government affairs office is apolitical ( is this office stand alone , or part of the hospitals affiliation with an external assosciation? ),just by approaching bothsides of the aisle doesn't make you apolitical .

As many on this forum would argue what is best for the Hospital is not always best for the staff or patients .

Honnête et Sérieux

Honnête et Sérieux

Specializes in Flight Nurse, Pedi CICU, IR, Adult CTICU. 283 Posts

They would , with a high degree of probability , have to be moderate republicans , as the conservatives would be unlikely to want to be assosicated with a group that , by your definition ( in post 14 ) were partisan ( because of their 93 % support of democrats ). So I don't think , you have cause to feel insulted , though if you are , that is your choice..

LOL...you are missing the point of lobbying. The ANA is supposed to be reaching out on behalf of nurses, not sitting around waiting to be courted. The ANA reached out to the 100% of the politicians they supported, but they CHOSE an overwhelming number of democrats...it wasn't the democrats who chose them. And the side-point is this; they can't then claim to be bipartisan.

The ANA can lobby both sides of the aisle , but only garner the support of enough republicans , that only 7% of their funding goes to Republicans .If the ANA changed it's stances to gain more conservative support it would have to either compromise it's principals or dilute it's legislative agenda ( if the conservatives supported these , they would already be onboard , and not worried about your percieved lack of bipartisanship ) to such a degree it would no longer achieve their desires.

This is completely wrong...that is not how a lobbying functions, but it is possible that the ANA thinks the same way you do, and that is why they are a consumate failure. It's not about the ANA making it's own ideals match up to those of a few politicians, it's supposed to be about taking their own ideals and showing them to influential leaders (regardless their persuasion), and convincing them to act on the behalf of their constituents.

Otherwise, what I seem to be reading is some approval of impropriety where the ANA should only affiliate with politicians who can be 'bought.' :nono:

It is your view , that your hospitals government affairs office is apolitical ( is this office stand alone , or part of the hospitals affiliation with an external assosciation? ),just by approaching bothsides of the aisle doesn't make you apolitical .

As many on this forum would argue what is best for the Hospital is not always best for the staff or patients

It is my EXPERIENCE that they are apolitical. I have assisted them with designing a report for the state assembly. Our gov't affairs office is transparent and blatantly apolitical; they pursue all avenues to promote their position and intention, and don't align themselves with one side or another...unlike the ANA.

The very act of involving both parties is by it's very function nothing else except bipartisan.

And whatever vague comment you are making about the hospital could equally be applied to the ANA.

nicurn001

nicurn001

Specializes in Psych , Peds ,Nicu. 805 Posts

lol...you are missing the point of lobbying. the ana is supposed to be reaching out on behalf of nurses , not sitting around waiting to be courted i'm sure the ana would argue they did the former rather than the latter. the ana reached out to the 100% of the politicians they supported , but they chose an overwhelming number of democrats...it wasn't the democrats who chose them i'm sure you will correct me upon this , if i misunderstand the nuances of lobbying , but i thought a lobbying group contacts all interested parties , then having identified those who supports its cause / legislation , support them 100% , whilst continuing to try to persuade their opponents , to change their response to one of support for cause / legislation. and the side-point is this; they can't then claim to be bipartisan.yes they can , if they have tried to garner support from both sides of the aisle , and as in this case , although they only obtained 7% support from republicans , they still have support from both sides of the aisle , doesn't that meet the criteria for being bipartisan ?,or do you have a different definition for what being bipartisan means ?

this is completely wrong...that is not how a lobbying functions, but it is possible that the ana thinks the same way you do, and that is why they are a consumate failure. it's not about the ana making it's own ideals match up to those of a few politicians, it's supposed to be about taking their own ideals and showing them to influential leaders ( most of whom are either politicians or those who can influence politicians , so as to advance a particular cause or legislative agenda ) (regardless their persuasion), and convincing them to act on the behalf of their constituents.

otherwise, what i seem to be reading is some approval of impropriety where the ana should only affiliate with politicians who can be 'bought.' :nono: looking back at that para i think this quote " that only 7% of their funding goes to republicans " should read ,that only 7% of their support comes from republicans .( thanks for pointing out the appearance of approval of impropriety , something i believe neither of us would condone ) .

it is my experience that they are apolitical. i have assisted them with designing a report for the state assembly. our gov't affairs office is transparent and blatantly apolitical; they pursue all avenues to promote their position and intention, and don't align themselves with one side or another...unlike the ana. nothing you say here , is other than your opinion ( even if that opinion is based upon experience , i seem to recollect in other threads , you have often pointed out to others , the error of using personal opinion to validate their arguements ) , so as i have no way of gaining an independant factual assesment of whether or not your hospitals government affairs office is indeed apolitical , i am perfectly entitled to challenge your assertion that it is apolitical.

the very act of involving both parties is by it's very function nothing else except bipartisan.( imho , i think here you answer my question above , confirming that by this definition the ana is bipartisan )

and whatever vague comment you are making about the hospital could equally be applied to the ana true.

:cheers:

just for transparency i have no affiliation with the ana .

Honnête et Sérieux

Honnête et Sérieux

Specializes in Flight Nurse, Pedi CICU, IR, Adult CTICU. 283 Posts

i'm sure the ana would argue they did the former rather than the latter.

of course they would...but then, they would be wrong.

i'm sure you will correct me upon this , if i misunderstand the nuances of lobbying , but i thought a lobbying group contacts all interested parties , then having identified those who supports its cause / legislation , support them 100% , whilst continuing to try to persuade their opponents , to change their response to one of support for cause / legislation.

you might say that, but when they go so far as to endorse candidates, it's more than just about "lobbying." when they endorse, they are not lobbying, but are rather endorsing...completely different.

yes they can , if they have tried to garner support from both sides of the aisle , and as in this case , although they only obtained 7% support from republicans , they still have support from both sides of the aisle , doesn't that meet the criteria for being bipartisan ?,or do you have a different definition for what being bipartisan means ?

uh....it's not about who they win "support from," it's about who they choose to support, and they chose to support democrats, overwhelmingly.

it is my experience that they are apolitical. i have assisted them with designing a report for the state assembly. our gov't affairs office is transparent and blatantly apolitical; they pursue all avenues to promote their position and intention, and don't align themselves with one side or another...unlike the ana. nothing you say here , is other than your opinion ( even if that opinion is based upon experience , i seem to recollect in other threads , you have often pointed out to others , the error of using personal opinion to validate their arguements ) , so as i have no way of gaining an independant factual assesment of whether or not your hospitals government affairs office is indeed apolitical , i am perfectly entitled to challenge your assertion that it is apolitical.

it's not my opinion, it's their very nature and function; unlike the ana, they endorsed no one. that's the point. they didn't try to influence any election one way or another, but instead wait for the assembly to be seated and lobby the entire assembly. there is no political aligning going on. so i am not using personal opinion, but rather fact. you are still entitled to challenge me, but you'd be wrong.

the very act of involving both parties is by it's very function nothing else except bipartisan.( imho , i think here you answer my question above , confirming that by this definition the ana is bipartisan )

and whatever vague comment you are making about the hospital could equally be applied to the ana true.

by no definition is the ana bipartisan...the fact they included a token few hardly makes them bipartisan. i voted for more than a 7% portion of democrats, but it's obvious here that people would label me a right wing extremist christian wackjob, regardless the fact that i am further left than obama on social issues, don't go to church, and haven't warmed a pew in a decade.

Mags_RN

Mags_RN, BSN

Specializes in Telemetry. 32 Posts

ugh... i hate politics....:barf02:

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.