Feb 9 AMA - The  Washington Post  (2/8, Johnson) reports that yesterday, "a federal judge blocked the $54 billion merger between health insurance giants Anthem and Cigna, saying the deal would increase pri8ces and reduce competition."

The  AP (2/8, Cooper) reports, "The American Medical Association cheered the ruling, saying the merger would have created a health care behemoth too big to regulate and with too much control over consumers' lives." In a statement, AMA president Andrew W. Gurman, MD, said, "In a David vs. Goliath battle between consumers and mega insurers, a federal judge today ruled that  Anthem's proposed acquisition of  Cigna poses a clear and present threat to the quality, accessibility and affordability of health care in the United States."

The  New York Times   (2/8, De La Merced, Picker, Subscription Publication) reports that this "ruling, by Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, came two weeks after another federal judge blocked a proposed $37 billion merger between Aetna and Humana on antitrust grounds."

Judge blocks Aetna-Humana Merger

Jan 23 AMA- In a landmark win for organized medicine and the nation's patients, federal judge John D. Bates blocked the proposed Aetna-Humana merger. The judge found that the merger would have substantially lessened competition in Medicare Advantage and commercial health insurance markets. This is an extraordinarily well documented, comprehensive, fact-based ruling by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates, which acknowledges that meaningful action was needed to preserve competition and protect high-quality medical care from unprecedented market power that Aetna would acquire from the merger deal. The decision is a historic, stunning affirmation of the position urged by the American Medical Association (AMA) and the 17-state medical association antitrust coalition members, which includes the Colorado Medical Society. The court's ruling sets a notable legal precedent by recognizing Medicare Advantage as a separate and distinct market that does not compete with traditional Medicare. This was a view advocated by the AMA, as well as leading economists.

The AMA and its coalition partners worked tirelessly to oppose this merger: sending comprehensive, evidence-based advocacy letters to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and state regulators after the merger was announced in July 2015; engaging like-minded stakeholders like the American Hospital Association and various patient coalitions, as well as the National Association of Attorneys General; conducting extensive physician surveys to gauge physician concern about the merger and presenting the DOJ and state regulators with compelling survey results; testifying in or submitting memoranda in various state insurance department hearings and/or attorney general investigations, and making that, and other evidence and testimony, available to the DOJ and state regulators; securing outside experts to support arguments and strip down those of the insurers -- all demonstrating how the merger would harm patients and physicians.

____________________________________________