

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

State medical boards have failed to discipline 55 percent of the nation's doctors who either lost their clinical privileges or had them restricted by the hospitals where they worked, a new Public Citizen analysis of data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) shows.
Of 10,672 physicians listed in the NPDB for having clinical privileges revoked or restricted by hospitals, just 45 percent of them also had one or more licensing actions taken against them by state medical boards. That means 55 percent of them - 5,887 doctors - escaped any licensing action by the state. The study examined the NPDB's Public Use File from its inception in 1990 to 2009.
"One of two things is happening, and either is alarming," said Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group and overseer of the study. "Either state medical boards are receiving this disturbing information from hospitals but not acting upon it, or much less likely, they are not receiving the information at all. Something is broken and needs to be fixed."
Hospital disciplinary reports are peer-review actions and, as such, are one of the most valuable sources of information for medical board oversight. Subsequent state medical board action against a physician's license is a crucial next step to protect patients. Boards have the authority to oversee and even limit the practice of a disciplined physician, which not only yields a more complete record for the purpose of patient safety but also serves to inform other state boards and future employers.
Public Citizen today sent the report to Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, urging the agency's Office of Inspector General to reinstitute investigations of state medical boards, something it has not done since 1993. Public Citizen also is notifying the 33 medical boards that have had the worst records in disciplining these doctors.
A physician must have serious deviations of behavior or performance to warrant clinical privilege actions. Of the 5,887 physicians who the state medical boards failed to discipline - many of whom also had a history of medical malpractice payments - 1,119 of them were disciplined because of incompetence, negligence or malpractice, 605 were disciplined for substandard care and 220 of them were identified as an immediate threat to health or safety. Other categories of serious deviations of physician behavior and/or performance that resulted in clinical privilege revocation or restrictions included sexual misconduct; inability to practice safely; fraud including insurance fraud, fraud obtaining a license and fraud against health care programs; and narcotics violations. A total of 2,071 physicians were disciplined by their hospital employers for one or more of these violations, considered the most serious.
In addition to the seriousness of the offenses leading to hospital actions but no state licensing actions, the seriousness of the hospitals' disciplinary actions against these physicians is also striking: 3,218 physicians in our study lost their clinical privileges permanently, and an additional 389 physicians lost privileges for more than one year. Thus, more than 61 percent of these 5,887 physicians lost their admitting privileges permanently or for at least a year.
The implications of this lack of licensing action against physicians with serious medical practice problems can be seen in specific examples. In Florida, a doctor had hospital privileges permanently revoked in 2002 for incompetence and racked up 10 medical malpractice reports totaling $1 million between 1992 and 2009 for, among other things, an unnecessary procedure, leaving a foreign body in a patient and misdiagnosis. Two patients died. Yet the state of Florida took no disciplinary action against the doctor.
In Illinois, a doctor had clinical privileges permanently revoked in 1999 and accumulated 10 medical malpractice reports between 1992 and 2006 totaling $7 million for, among other things, improperly managing cases, failing to diagnose and failing to identify fetal distress. One patient suffered a major permanent injury while another became a quadriplegic due to a brain injury. Yet Illinois did not discipline the doctor.
"Why have 5,887 physicians who have been disciplined by hospitals not been disciplined by state medical boards? Why have 220 physicians who have been found by peer review to be an immediate threat to health or safety of patients not had a medical board action?" Wolfe asked. "The public deserves to know."
Due to the public safety implications of the findings, Public Citizen is sending its report with supporting documentation to the District of Columbia and the following states, in each of which 50 percent or more of the physicians with clinical privilege reports in the NPDB did not have a licensure action: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000"Withholding reimbursements only further hurts patients, strains providers, and drives up costs," said one Democratic congresswoman. "We will fight this with everything we’ve got."
"Political retribution, plain and simple," was how US Sen. Alex Padilla described an announcement by Vice President JD Vance late Wednesday regarding the White House's decision to withhold $1.3 billion in Medicaid reimbursement payments to California.
Vance and Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, claimed the state's Medicaid records have generated "red flags" and demanded officials clarify $630 million in billing, $500 million that's been spent on home health services, and $200 million in what Oz called "questionable expenditures," which he claimed had been used to provide coverage for undocumented immigrants, who are not eligible for Medicaid.
The announcement came a month after Vance's federal anti-fraud task force suspended the licenses of nearly 450 hospice care facilities and 23 home health agencies in the Los Angeles area, accusing them of fraud.
Vance also warned that all 50 states could soon see federal funding for their Medicaid Fraud Control Units frozen if they fail to "aggressively prosecute Medicaid fraud."
"We can turn off other resources within their state Medicaid programs as well," said the vice president.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has frequently sparred with the Trump administration, said Vance and Oz were "attacking programs that keep seniors and people with disabilities OUT of nursing homes," which are far more expensive to run than home healthcare agencies.
Newsom said the growth of the state's In-Home Supportive Services program has saved taxpayers "$107,000 per person" by reducing reliance on nursing homes.
"MAGA hates in-home support programs—which help people stay out of costly institutional settings like nursing homes and get the care they deserve, typically from loved ones," said Newsom.
Newsom also said the Trump administration had informed state officials that the deadline to review California's Medicaid records "before deciding whether to defer funding" would be later in the month.
Democratic members of Congress warned that their constituents rely heavily on Medicaid, with seven out of 10 of the congressional districts with the highest Medicaid enrollment located in California.
Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) said that 56% of her constituents rely on "this lifesaving program," and many have already been harmed by the Republican Party's slashing of Medicaid funding in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year.
"Withholding reimbursements only further hurts patients, strains providers, and drives up costs," said Kamlager-Dove. "We will fight this with everything we’ve got."
Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) said more than 120,000 people in his district depend on the federal healthcare program for low-income households and people with disabilities.
"This administration needs to stop playing politics with people’s health and lives," said Panetta. "When people commit fraud, they should be punished accordingly. However, this administration continues to punish California for political purposes, including penalizing innocent people by taking their healthcare away."
State Attorney General Rob Bonta noted that California has "not hesitated to challenge unlawful actions by the Trump administration," and suggested the state could file a legal challenge against the withholding of Medicaid funds.
He also accused the administration of targeting the heavily Democratic state "for political reasons."
The anti-fraud task force led by Vance has so far exclusively focused on rooting out alleged fraud in federal programs in blue states. The White House suspended $259 million in federal payments to Minnesota earlier this year after a scandal regarding the state's social services system.
"The Trump administration is attacking California over claims that they can't back up," said Padilla. "Let's be real, this isn't about fraud—it's about punishing a state that didn't vote for" President Donald Trump.
"The interim decision by the US judge gives me respite," said United Nations special rapporteur Francesca Albanese. "But the battle is not over."
A federal judge in Washington, DC on Wednesday temporarily blocked Trump administration sanctions targeting United Nations Palestine expert Francesca Albanese, ruling that the punitive measures violated her First Amendment rights.
"Albanese has done nothing more than speak!" wrote US District Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, in his 26-page decision granting a preliminary injunction against the sanctions, which US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced last summer. Rubio said the sanctions, which barred the UN expert from entering the US and banking in the country, were justified because "Albanese has directly engaged with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in efforts to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel, without the consent of those two countries."
But Leon wrote in his ruling that "it is undisputed that her recommendations have no binding effect on the ICC's actions—they are nothing more than her opinion."
The decision came in response to a lawsuit filed in February by Albanese's husband and her daughter, who is a US citizen. They argued the US sanctions against Albanese were "effectively debanking her and making it nearly impossible to meet the needs of her daily life."
Albanese is an Italian national who currently lives with family in Tunisia. Leon wrote in his ruling that "while the speech at issue occurred outside the United States, defendants have responded by taking action against Albanese's extensive connections to the United States—including Albanese's property within the United States and her ability to maintain professional and personal connections within the United States—because of her speech."
"Accordingly, Albanese (or plaintiffs standing in her shoes) may claim the protection of the First Amendment to challenge defendants' actions," the judge continued.
Albanese, who has vocally condemned Israel's genocide in Gaza and the countries and private corporations that have been complicit, welcomed Leon's ruling, writing in a social media post that "the interim decision by the US judge gives me respite."
"But the battle is not over," she added. "ICC judges and Palestinian NGOs remain sanctioned with no recourse to justice. The stakes are incredibly high."
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the US-based Center for International Policy, called Leon's ruling "the right decision" and said Albanese "was wrongly sanctioned for constitutionally protected speech."
"War criminals should be held accountable for their crimes," Williams wrote on social media. "Making it a crime to say that is what is illegal. We must not sacrifice our rights or the rule of law for Israel."
"The United States cannot continue to be complicit in abuses abroad. There must be accountability," said Rep. Chuy García, who co-led a letter to the Pentagon.
Backed by anti-war and human rights organizations, 20 "deeply concerned" progressives in the US House of Representatives sent a letter to the Pentagon on Wednesday demanding answers about "reports of serious human rights violations and the bombing of what appear to have been civilian facilities during joint US-Ecuador military operations conducted in northern Ecuador."
While bombing Iran and boats allegedly running illegal drugs through the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, President Donald Trump deployed US troops to Ecuador in March for a joint campaign combating "narco-terrorists" in the South American country.
Led by Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), and Sara Jacobs (Calif.), the lawmakers called for "an explanation of the administration's legal justification for the involvement of US armed forces in these operations, which have not been authorized by Congress," as well as their immediate suspension "until these incidents are fully investigated."
The Democrats' letter to US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth cites reporting that one target "appears to have been a civilian dairy and cattle farm with no known links to armed groups or drug trafficking," where witnesses said "Ecuadorian military personnel interrogated and assaulted unarmed civilians, burned homes and infrastructure, and subjected detainees to torture."
"Beyond these recent incidents, we are concerned that our military is deepening its ties with the government of Ecuador, even as it undergoes an alarming authoritarian and anti-democratic drift," the Democrats wrote, pointing out that "President Daniel Noboa has overseen the violent repression of Indigenous-led protests, publicly threatened the Constitutional Court, and frozen the bank accounts of civil society organizations."
Noboa's allies "have also pursued questionable cases against his political opponents," as "Ecuadorians have endured more than two years of a prolonged state of emergency, marked by the military's domestic deployment to combat so-called 'narco-terrorists," the letter continues. "With investigative reporting now linking President Noboa's family business to drug trafficking and the same illicit networks he claims to be fighting, an independent and transparent investigation into these allegations is warranted."
The letter stresses that "if US forces provide new or continued security assistance to units that engaged in acts such as torture, extrajudicial killings, or enforced disappearances, and there is no credible investigation or prosecution underway, this would constitute a violation of the Leahy Laws, which prohibit assistance to foreign security forces credibly implicated in gross human rights violations without effective steps to bring those responsible to justice."
The Democrats—supported by Amnesty International USA, Center for Civilians in Conflict, Center for Economic and Policy Research, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Human Rights First, Latin American Working Group, Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns, StoptheDrugWar.org, Washington Office on Latin America, and Win Without War—demanded "a prompt and complete response" to their list of questions by May 22.
"The United States cannot continue to be complicit in abuses abroad. There must be accountability," García said on social media.
As El País reported Wednesday, the letter was made public as Noboa began a two-day trip to Washington, DC, during which he is set to meeting with US Vice President JD Vance and Organization of American States Secretary General Albert Ramdin.