Here’s what the resolution specified: The AMA should “support federal policy seeking mandatory disclosure of financial relationships between physicians and pharmaceutical interests, with limited exceptions. The resolution also asks the AMA to support policy that would require pharmaceutical companies and device manufacturers to report all payments, gifts, honoraria, or other emoluments with a value over $100.”

Why did the AMA’s house of delegates not adopt the resolution? Testimony was “generally unfavorable,” according to the AMA’s summary of events. There was also debate about the pending Physicians Payments Sunshine Act, which has recently garnered support among some drugmakers, after the reporting threshold was raised from $25 to $500.

“There were concerns raised about how and to whom financial information would be disclosed and regarding the logistical difficulties associated with reporting of gifts over $100,” the AMA summary states. “According to testimony, legislation surrounding the issue of pharmaceutical grants and gifts to physicians is pending and may serve to answer many of these questions, therefore (the) reference committee recommends that this resolution not be adopted.” (Here is the summary; please see pg. 18).