May 2007

COCSA 'demands' ACA, ICA merger

The Congress of Chiropractic State Associations (COCSA) ‑‑ which bills itself as a 'non‑partisan' group ‑‑ has begun a campaign that would spell the end of the International Chiropractors Association and permit only a single "mega‑organization" to represent chiropractic.

In a letter sent to the leaders of its member organizations, COCSA President R. Jerry DeGrado, DC noted that "in the absence of cohesive national leadership, your state association is left to grapple with these critical issues on an individual basis. The need for the chiropractic profession to speak with one voice has never been greater. The COCSA Board believes it is time to redesign the approach to leadership within the profession, and to that end, has drafted a Resolution for National Unity, which calls for the merger of the ACA and ICA." Dr. DeGrado has been a member of the ACA since 1996, serving on its Medicare and Alternative Health Care committees.

The resolution further noted that "the conflict resulting from the existence of two competing national associations serves as an impediment to the advancement of the chiropractic profession" and "demands that the ACA and the ICA set aside their philosophical and political differences and begin the process of merger for the greater purpose of creating a single national voice for the chiropractic profession." It also states that COCSA will "merge its functions with the resulting new association for the purpose of creating a single national voice for the chiropractic profession."

No mention was made of the World Chiropractic Alliance or Federation of Straight Chiropractors and Organizations, which are members of the Chiropractic Coalition with the ICA.

The resolution was approved by the COCSA board on Mar. 10, 2007.

Attempts to eliminate the "competing" chiropractic organizations have been going on for decades despite vehement opposition by ICA members.

In February 1987, the two groups held meetings to discuss the possibility of merger. Michael Pedigo, DC, ICA president at the time, said his vision for the future was "a completely new organization with a new constitution and bylaws."

In July 1988, the question of merger was brought before the ICA members and the proposal was defeated. At the same time, members elected Fred Barge, DC, to take over the ICA reins and he was quick to applaud the anti‑merger vote. "The message is clear," he said. "ICA represents a viewpoint of traditional, conservative chiropractic and the membership has reaffirmed the need for a forum to espouse those views."

The ICA hoped to continue working cooperatively with the ACA. When Gerald Clum, DC was elected ICA vice president, he was quick to state that "The ICA looks forward to an era of 'chiropractic glasnost'... Our associations need not return to the days of the chiropractic cold war. Rather, we must use the insight we have acquired from each other to forge policies and programs to serve our profession from our respective viewpoints."

The proffered olive branch was rejected by the ACA, however.

Then, ACA Executive Vice President Ronald L. Harris, DC, blasted the ICA for the way it rejected the merger. In a letter to the profession he complained, "The same courtesy and desire to accommodate was not reciprocated by ICA, which was repeatedly advised that ACA regarded certain issues as critical."

His message was clear: the ICA was wrong because it didn't share the ACA's priorities and didn't accommodate that group.

Immediately afterwards, ACA President Dr. Kenneth L. Luedtke noted in an article in the ACA Journal, that the ACA was going to be "more aggressive than ever in representing all of chiropractic." The organization continued to push for a merger.

In a surprise move at an ICA board meeting in Jan. 1989, Dr. Pedigo invoked a procedural provision of Roberts Rules of Order and called for a change in the board's agenda, which had been set by Dr. Barge.

Pedigo pushed to have the board put the question of merger to the members. "(His actions) dumped my agenda," Barge complained, outraged. "Completely dumped it.... It was absolutely a railroad. He railroaded it through."

Barge began an aggressive campaign to fight the merger, saying, "I could not be party to an organization which decreed that states' rights would be allowed to determine the parameters of chiropractic. I could not be party to an organization which removed the word drugless from the preamble to the constitution. I could see myself in no way, shape or form being a part of that organization."

Robert Braille, DC, chairman of the "Committee to Preserve the ICA" warned ICA members, "No matter how this disgusts, aggravates or irritates us ‑‑ it must be addressed. This insult is directed both at our President and you. You helped elect Dr. Barge and now others wish to see the respect and authority you vested in him stripped away."

In February 1989, the ICA voted to reject the merger. Recognizing that the philosophical differences dividing the groups were too great to be completely bridged, Barge reaffirmed the ICA's role "as a force of balance and moderation in chiropractic."

The ICA stressed that although it wanted to maintain its autonomy, it was interested in intra‑professional cooperation.

"I offer the ACA and other organizations our willingness to cooperate in areas of mutual concern," stated Barge, "and hope that we can move ahead in a concerted effort to deal with them."

In response, Pedigo and dozens of his pro‑ACA colleagues resigned the ICA and censured it publicly. In a letter of resignation, Pedigo criticized the ICA for "claiming to be the 'savior' and 'policeman' of the profession," and for lobbying against the expansion of the chiropractic scope of practice and proprietary drugs.

Ever the diplomat, Barge urged the profession to maintain its civility. "Let us not revert to the competition and animosity of the past. With merger no longer an option, mutual respect, cooperation and above all, bonafide collaboration has to be the best route to solving issues of mutual concern to all DCs," he said.

The ACA didn't give up.

In 2000, the ACA again "invited" the ICA to form a "unity committee" for the purpose of working out a merger plan. "The ACA remains committed to a merger with the ICA and will not give up until 'dis‑unity' within the chiropractic profession is a thing of the past," ACA Chairman of the Board J. Michael Flynn, DC said.

The ICA Board quickly decided ‑‑ unanimously ‑‑ to decline the ACA's offer. At that meeting, the ICA also adopted a motion offering operational cooperation with all chiropractic organizations on issues of common concern to the chiropractic profession and pledged to work on areas of agreement with the ACA.

At the time, ICA put forward a lengthy list of issues on which the two organizations might cooperate, including reform of the National Board of Chiropractic Examiners, legislative efforts, a profession‑wide stand opposing the destructive efforts of the National Association for Chiropractic Medicine, and in other areas, but merger was not on the table for discussion, ICA officials said.

"The response of the ICA Board should come as no surprise to anyone, including the ACA," said ICA's then‑President Dr. Robert Hoffman. "ICA has been very up‑front on its position on the issue of merger and has been crystal clear to the ACA in previous occasions that as far as the ICA is concerned, merger was not on the table as a possible option."

Today, there remains a strong determination among many ICA members to resist these repeated attempts to force the organization ‑‑ founded by B. J. Palmer and Dr. Heinrich Dueringer in 1926 ‑‑ to merge with the ACA.

Although, at press time, the ICA had made no official response to COCSA's "demand" for merger, it is widely believed the organization will continue to fight to maintain its place as a distinct and separate entity.