Self-Funding Chiropractor Declares CD-6 Bid

A candidate we discussed several months ago in relation to a possible Democratic bid for CD-3 announced this afternoon his intention to run for Congress–in CD-6. Back in July, chiropractor Perry Haney was sending out mail pieces with a Grand Junction PO Box as a return address, and it seemed as though he was looking at running in CD-3. And we know that House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer dropped Haney’s name after Haney eagerly made his way around an open-to-all-comers event in DC. The Statesman had a write-up on Haney last week:

“Send a Chiropractor to Congress,” reads campaign material available through Haney’s website. “There’s nothing wrong with Congress that a spine doctor with backbone can’t cure,” says one side of a brochure under a Haney for U.S. Congress logo…

Haney plans to invite chiropractors to the unveiling of the nameplate on his congressional door, which will identify him as a member of the profession. When it comes to Medicare, Haney says it should be saved, not destroyed. “One way to fix Medicare is via greater utilization of chiropractic, which is proven to save costs,” he says. “Chiropractic [also] must be included on an equal playing field in all insurance systems.”

Efforts to reach Haney were unsuccessful.

In an open letter to fellow chiropractors, Haney pledges to fight for the right of patients to access chiropractic care, including active-duty military, veterans and their dependents. “Chiropractors need to be treated fairly and I will make sure that they are,” Haney promises.

We suppose it’s Hoyer’s bad, then, that Haney has every appearance so far of an unqualified single-issue rich guy in search of a vanity campaign–which is exactly what we said about him months ago. We’ve heard nothing to suggest any institutional support for Haney running for Congress in CD-6. What we’ve heard, on the contrary, is that Haney is in the thrall of consultants who have convinced him he could viably self-fund a run for Congress; guaranteeing themselves meal tickets for as long as Haney can be made to believe it’s worth it. Politically, as many gold-dome denizens know, the chiropractic lobby is kind of toxic in Colorado–Dave Balmer finds them useful, and that might tell you much of what you need to know about their reputation.

Also, Haney’s wealth–the only reason he rated a mention last summer at all, due to a possible ability to self-fund–could be a product of exorbitant billing practices. Update that bio page!

Note we don’t really care if you think chiropractic medicine is legitimate or not: anybody who makes it central to their campaign, as Haney obviously plans to, is going to get submerged in the “woo woo” debate he’ll feed by doing so. In the end, although we note we’ve been surprised once or twice before, we really doubt Haney will make it all the way to a Democratic primary next August. For an historical parallel, we’re thinking Herb Rubenstein–not Peggy Lamm.

95 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. nancycronk says:

    but I would not write off Haney. He has a campaign manager that is well-known for managing winning campaigns and raising a hell-of-a-lot of money. I think Haney will rise quickly.

    I also need to talk to Joe about his motto. Not working under the populist wave. America wants an “average Joe”.  All this is inside baseball. I still think Joe is an outstanding candidate, and when people get to know him, they’ll see that too. I didn’t know who Barack Obama was ten years ago, either.

    • nancycronk says:

      I cannot endorse a candidate. Joe Miklosi and Perry Haney will get fair treatment by me because they are both Dems.

      • Ray Springfield says:

        Joe has worked as hard as anyone to make Colorado a Democratic state. He’s sharp, compassionate, and sincere about improving the lives of the common people. He’s not your average

        joe.

      • nancycronk says:

        Hope Terry doesn’t mind me saying so. I just got to know Terry recently. Terry handles several campaigns at the same time, and has loads of connections among the big donors in Denver. When I first met him, I was not sure about him — no one was good enough for everyone’s friend, State Rep Daniel Kagan. I got to see Terry at work with Mitch Morrissey’s campaign — it was clear I was watching a pro. Terry called me today and was very professional and thoughtful, and thanked me for being fair to Perry Haney.

        This race gets more interesting every day. Whatever happens, Coffman is going to have to learn how to work for a vote, and I think I am going to sell popcorn on the sidelines — awesome.  

        • Ah Choo says:

          That explains this aside:

          Politically, as many gold-dome denizens know, the chiropractic lobby is kind of toxic in Colorado….

          I think you’ll find a much different take from people who actually know and have worked with Terry, but I think it’s super great and awesome that he was nice to you.  

          • nancycronk says:

            but he knows a zillion bigwigs in this state and gets them out to events on weeknights in snowstorms. I’ve seen it. I find that impressive, but what do I know, I’m just a middle-aged Mom from Arapahoe County right?

            • Ah Choo says:

              Spare us your mommy martyr bullshit, even if you never get tired of it.

              Thrilled you went to an event where people showed up to give checks to a lock candidate. Who gives a shit?

              Even if he knows “a zillion bigwigs,” the ones that know Terry don’t buy his bullshit either–and he doesn’t command a lot of respect or trust.

              But carry his flag all you want. I’m sure the Haney campaign will be thrilled to have you.  

              Terry’s got a paycheck coming for a few months at least, and that’s what it’s all about. Just a wild guess, but I’m sure he bamboozled Haney into giving him a percentage of any media buys too. I’m sure it will all end well.  

              • MichaelEllis says:

                “mommy martyr bullshit” – what an asshole. The lady was simply stating an honest impression she had developed about a person she met.

                Here’s what’s really going on here: Slimeball hack Ah Choo accuses slimeball hack Terry of being a slimeball hack because slimeball hack Ah Choo is jealous that slimeball hack Terry is making more money at being a slimeball hack because slimeball hack Ah Choo isn’t even very good at being a slimeball hack.  

                • Ah Choo says:

                  It’s bullshit to attack anonymous posters like JeffcoBlue here for posting anonymously on an anonymous blog that is built on anonymity because JeffcoBlue doesn’t buy her latest flash in the pan opinion that contradicts years of history to which she clearly prefers to remain ignorant.  

              • nancycronk says:

                I’m not carrying a flag for anyone. They can carry their own flag. I just don’t see the need of trashing people left and right. There are two good Dems running in this race, and a lot of good Dems trying to help them. Sorry my opinion is not interesting.  

          • JeffcoBlue says:

            It also explains the Herb Rubenstein quip. Look it up.

            Snyder is doing exactly with Haney what he did with Herb Rubenstein. Pretty gross, but I suppose it pays the bills!

            But no, I wouldn’t take this very seriously (understatement).

            • nancycronk says:

              or there are a whole lot of posters making stuff up while hiding under anonymous names. Maybe both.

              I’m just saying Coffman ought to be concerned, and that gives me a great big smile.

              • JeffcoBlue says:

                Nobody’s going to blame you for not being familiar with the backgrounds of obscure local political consultants. I’m sure Terry was very polite on the phone and gave you no reason to suspect any problem.

                But he’s a depressingly well known commodity in Colorado politics among thse of us who have worked on campaigns. The press knows him well, too. He has many more enemies than friends, and he has earned them all.

                I didn’t know Terry Snyder was behind Perry Haney until you said it, but that really does open up a huge can of worms for him. Haney himself might not be aware of that. Unless he wants to be lumped with Herb The Robot (the laughing stock third place in the CD-7 primary in 2006), he needs to make some changes right away.

                • nancycronk says:

                  Assuming for a minute you are not making this stuff up (if I ever learned your real identity at one of our Pols meet-ups, I have long since forgotten it), I can tell you I’ve seen Snyder bring in dollars at events that only Jared Polis does better. In CD6, we’re not used to the high dollar events too much. We’re out there selling pies and Aunt Betty’s rubarb jam most of the time (okay, not literally, but only because we’ve never thought of it). The thought of real money entering this race makes me giddy.

                  • MichaelEllis says:

                    Never believe anything a slimy political hack tells you about anything.

                  • BlueCat says:

                    practice of anonymity among blog participants is wearing pretty thin. All you need to know is what a person thinks and says. If that isn’t good enough for you than choose a medium where you can “know” who everyone is.  There really doesn’t seem to be much need for positive ID to detect shills, if that’s your concern. They seem to be unable to make their true nature less than obvious anyway.  

                    As for other  advantages  you might cite for positive ID, let me say that, since I don’t know you personally, the fact that I nominally know who you are doesn’t make much of a difference to me.  It’s still the case that almost all of what I really know about you is what I can gather from your expression of your opinions. That’s more than I know about a lot of people I could identify by name and reputation or have actually met.  In fact, the idea of knowing another in an almost purely disembodied way appeals to me.  It especially amuses me when some use of pronoun reveals that someone isn’t the gender I assumed and causes me to think about what preconceptions led me to my assumption.

                    I really don’t understand why you keep harping on your disdain for anonymous posters.  It’s perfectly legitimate to remain anonymous or not according to personal preference.   We know that’s a problem for you. No need to keep needling us about it.

                    • nancycronk says:

                      is only relevant to me when that person attempts to destroy the reputation of another. It is a statement to the readers of this blog to think critically. Before allowing that person to defame another, they need to remember that credibility is not established, and never will be.  

                    • BlueCat says:

                      Find it tiresome.  Credibility is established in many ways over time here. For the record, I enjoy the freedom of posting anonymously here but I also frequently get letters to the editor published under my own name and am happy to publicly stand behind whatever I say in that forum.  

                      If you don’t find me credible according to your requirements, I really couldn’t care less and I certainly am not interested in having you appoint yourself to teach me lessons on the subject.

                      If you disagree with what someone says or their tone or an attack you think they are making unfairly, the fact that you may not know the person’s identity is not at all relevant to me. Just argue your points. If you think the person is playing fast and loose with the facts, prove it by providing accurate ones, no self righteous demands and preaching about the concept of anonymous participation needed.  

                      And it isn’t as if lack of anonymity guarantees credibility. There are plenty of posters who are neither anonymous nor credible.  In short, forgive me but who appointed you Pols hall monitor?

                    • Aristotle says:

                      I could post under my own name, but why would that give me any more credibility? I’m still someone unknown to most activists, and there’s little way to prove that that’s my real name. It’s the interet – I could post under a woman’s name, say I’m an immigrant and that one leg is shorter than the other – how would you know that that isn’t the case. You wouldn’t know that I don’t have four other accounts, if I were careful enough about the tone and persona assumed under each one. Hell, maybe YOU created the MichalEllis account, just so you could vent some negativity and not get hit by your own flying shit. (For the record, that’s not at all what I believe – but belief, with a little reason behind it, is all I have.)

                      You used to post anonymously, too – and you still use that handle at another blog. Why don’t you use “nancycronk” over there, too?

                      As BC points out, credibility is essentially established over time. Consistency and honesty in an individual’s posts over time create a picture of a polster. A-GOP consistently criticizes Democratic victories as corruption and GOP dirty tricks as fair play, and has a way of spreading the same talking points you can find elsewhere, so he has no credibility with anyone who isn’t of the same mind. 20th Maine, another Republican, shows that he thinks independently, so I respect him a bit (too bad he doesn’t post more frequently). Ralphie, your nemesis, cultivates feuds with individual polsters (I’m sure he’d disagree but I stand by my judgment in this matter), but understands the legislative process better than almost any polster and calls a spade a spade. I value that highly. And you have a sincere and good heart, a great understanding of the horse race, and a knack for supporting sincere candidates. But you also seem unable to move on from the skirmishes and take criticisms and insults way too much to heart.

                      I keep everything I’ve learned about a polster in mind when I read that person’s posts, and judge the merit of their comments accordingly. I also keep in mind my own ignorance of the political nitty gritty and defer to people who know it better. One reason I’m comfortable with keeping the “Aristotle” handle (which I picked solely to get under the skin of a stupid con, long gone from this blog, who called himself “Socrates”) is because I’m more about the philosophy of politics – what’s right and wrong, and what our politics and policies should be trying to achieve. I’m sure people see my handle for the first time and instantly assume that either I’m really smart or I’m really full of myself – neither is accurate, and the handle is sometimes embarrassing. (I picked it out before there was a registration system, and had we been given a heads up that it was coming, I would have changed it.) But I keep it because I have an established reputation here, and I’d have to build some of that back up if I changed it. (I also like having a relatively low ID # here – pure vanity.)

                      Anyway, if you’re either bullheaded or ignorant enough to automatically deduct credibility points simply because someone keeps their real name secret, without considering the myriad legitimate reasons why someone would want to protect their identity, that’s something that costs you credibility at the same time. Not all of us are, or wish to be, neck-deep in politics and many of us can’t afford to have people in our lives and livelihoods know how we feel and what we really believe. We don’t live in a world where our friends, families, neighbors and colleagues won’t judge us harshly and unfairly for exercising our right to free speech. You choose to be out there and deal with that – great. My family can’t risk the backlash. You judge me for that, then you’re the type of person I just described.

                    • nancycronk says:

                      To answer your questions:

                      I use the other name on the other blog because long ago, after I asked them if I could change to my real name (just like I did here), I was accused of having a sockpuppet by the former site manager (he’s long since left. I would happily change the name, and have told the new owners that several times. Still never heard back from them about it. The reason I switched to my real name in the first place, was because there was another national poster using the same screen name. After being outed a few times anyway, I figured it was just as easy to use my own name. I’m not ashamed of my  political opinions, and not employed by anyone who would persecute me for them, anyway. Guess I am lucky that way.

                      I don’t have anything against people posting anonymously, and understand and respect why many people have to do it. I am not judging you or anyone else for that. I just don’t understand why standards of fairness and decency seem to go out the window for some bloggers when they post anonymously. Maybe my Detroit upbringing is showing, but it doesn’t take much courage to shoot someone in the back. I don’t care who the person is they’re trashing — heck, I’d even defend Ralphie if I thought he was being persecuted unfairly.

                      As for the many personalities and their credibility, I can’t possibly read all the blog diairies enough to keep straight who’s who, what they’ve written before, their cities and interests, their brilliant observations, etc. I know a handful of people and get the rest pretty mixed up. I’m working, raising kids, and volunteering up the yin-yang. I also scan the other state blog and HuffPo and maintain numerous political facebook pages. It doesn’t leave me much time to read many diaries here. It’s pretty easy to pick up here in just a few blog diaries who the regular bullies are though. I have a personal pet-peeve against bullies.

                      I know blogs are havens for bullies, and if I can’t stand the heat, I should stay out of the kitchen. I probably should.

                      To Blue Cat and Ari — thanks for the interesting posts. Have a great Christmas, or whatever you may celebrate this time of year.

                       

                    • BlueCat says:

                      neither Ari nor I have spent time in the slammer.  As I recall, your sentence served was partly due to incessantly asking after posters’ identities? Pretty sure there was supposed to be a lesson learned in there somewhere.

                      Obviously if outing is strictly forbidden then you may safely assume you have no right to demand identities and have no call, whatsoever, for criticizing other posters for exercising their clearly recognized and guaranteed rights here. That’s the bottom line and how busy you think you are compared to other posters is not at all relevant to that bottom line.  If anything, it’s an argument against your taking on the added duties of self appointed Pols Hall Monitor.  Please don’t expend your valuable time and energy performing those services for us in addition to your other responsibilities. We’ll be just fine figuring out for ourselves who is credible and who is not without your help. Go ahead and get some last minute shopping done or have a nice bath instead.

                    • Ray Springfield says:

                      opposition rsearch truly existrs.

    • Ah Choo says:

      Looks like it cost a fortune. Not sure how mountain biking in Boulder is going to resonate in Aurora, but whatever.  

      • MichaelEllis says:

        First of all, the sound is horrible. It’s hard to figure what the hell he’s mumbling with that insipid clicking going on.

        And after watching that video, tell me, where does he stand on specific issues? … Um, well, he likes to ride his bicycle a lot and talk about himself and how awesome he thinks he is …

        That’s a video only a third-tier hack would think is “great.” Oh, it must be great because it “cost a fortune.”

        • nancycronk says:

          It’s all about the voter.

        • Ah Choo says:

          Not to mention rage, incoherence, inept sarcasm, pathological obsession, self-loathing, angry-at-daddy syndrome, and all the other qualities that make for a good troll?

          Because all those traits seem to be the standard by which you measure everything, and dole out your general shittiness.

          ANYWHO…ignoring the psycho…the spot is clearly an expensive, professional production. Probably doesn’t help that it’s web-only, and will be viewed only a few hundred times–few of those viewers being persuadable voters from district 6.

    • MichaelEllis says:

      of a vacuous cookie-cutter corporate Dem establishment candidate. He knows how to make it look like he’s concerned about issues the people care about and offer vague non-committal “solutions” composed almost exclusively of weasel words that actually say nothing at all but still manage to trick people into thinking they heard what they wanted to hear:

      http://www.perryhaneyforcongre

      Except for one thing, though: He forgot to kiss the right asses, grease the right palms with promises of corporate tax cuts, deregulation, etc., so he won’t be getting favorable “independent analysis” from ColoradoPols. No, the best way to do that is to first join the stables of Craig Hughes, the Capt. Lou Albano of Colorado Democratic politics.  Then by golly, you can get favorable “independent analysis” from ColoradoPols.

      • JeffcoBlue says:

        But I thought I would give you the benefit of the doubt and check. So I went to Brandon Shaffer’s Facebook Page and saw this:

        Had a great time in Greeley tonight! Thanks to all those who came. Looking forward to many more fun times in the 4th!

        December 6 at 10:15pm

        Now I think you are a lying or psychotic obsessed moron. I believe others have repeatedly asked you for proof that Shaffer would consider moving to CD-6. Got any?

        I personally think you’re just an asshole, and you’re insult both Sen. Shaffer and Rep. Miklosi. If so, fuck you very much!

        • MichaelEllis says:

          Oh look, I’m just like JeffcoBlue. I can say naughty words under a fake name on the Internet and it makes me feel important. If it’ll make you feel any better, JeffcoBlue, I think you’re just an asshole, too.  

          • JeffcoBlue says:

            So, you’re not going to respond to the clear evidence directly from the source that you are making shit up.

            I definitely meant the fuck you part then.

            • MichaelEllis says:

              is “unnamed sources,” you fucking dickhead.

              What was your buddy ColoradoPols’ evidence that Romanoff was allegedly strongly considering running in CD-6? “Unnamed sources.” You pathologically hypocritical fucking asshole.

              Now why don’t you wise up and not dig yourself a permanent place on my shit list?  You bush-league over-your-head fucking moron.

              • JeffcoBlue says:

                Every media outlet in Colorado reported that.

                Seriously, you need medication. Calm the fuck down.

                • MichaelEllis says:

                  The media outlets you’re sloppily referencing were reporting that the party leadership was trying hard to persuade Romanoff to enter the race and that he was disinclined to accede to their wishes, but that he was politely “hearing them out.” And even at that, those outlets were also attributing the rumor to “unnamed sources.”

                  So, are you a deliberate liar, or just an ignorant goof who enjoys arguing when he has no fucking clue what he’s talking about? Either way, you’re an asshole.

                   

  2. MichaelEllis says:

    Like manna from heaven, Haney’s entry is something you can maybe stretch into a semi-almost-quasi-legitimate-but-still-flagrantly-bullshit pretext to get your boy Shaffer moved over to the CD6 race.

    What are you waiting for? Write it up, man. Write it up! Time’s a-wastin’. Stop being so damned indecisive.  

  3. Ralphie says:

    It makes no difference for Haney.

    Here’s a man with more desire than ethics.

  4. MichaelEllis says:

    The media outlets you’re sloppily referencing were reporting that the party leadership was trying hard to persuade Romanoff to enter the race and that he was disinclined to accede to their wishes, but that he was politely “hearing them out.” And even at that, those outlets were also attributing the rumor to “unnamed sources.”

    So, are you a deliberate liar, or just an ignorant goof who enjoys arguing when he has no fucking clue what he’s talking about? Either way, you’re an asshole.

  5. I read both candidate websites

    No mention of supporting Gay Marriage

    No mention of supporting a pathway towards citizenship for undocumented immigrants

    No mention of supporting public school teachers

    As I’ve said before, perhaps I haven’t been a Democrat long enough to deserve saying such a thing, but…… I’m sick of Democratic candidates that don’t ardently (even irrationally) support gays, immigrants, and teachers

    • nancycronk says:

      Or else I’d written about Joe earlier. Joe’s Dad was an elementary art teacher for decades, Miguel Ali. Joe absolutely shares our view on progressive education. I swear on it.

      Joe is also a strong supporter of lgbtq rights. There are few stronger in the state. Plus, he was one of the people who sponsored the bill to give tuition breaks to the children of immigrants. On all three of those issues, you could not ask for a stronger candidate. Joe has everything Morgan Carroll has going for her, going for him on those three issues… if not even stronger on immigration reform. True, he is not a beautiful woman. Please do not hold tha against him.  🙂

      CD6 is so conservative, if you put those things on a website, you’d be shown no mercy out here. Joe used to work for the Progressive Majority. On all three of your big issues (which I happen to share, Ali) he is a rock-solid progressive.

      You should pick up the phone and call him. Seriously. He’s awesome.

    • MichaelEllis says:

      who expect candidates to reveal where they stand on issues before the election.

    • sxp151 says:

      and that’s great, and apparently it’s new and you’re just testing it out, and that’s cool, but isn’t it a little unfair to complain that certain candidates don’t fit every one of your rigid constraints? Especially since they’re a pretty varied mix of far-left and far-right positions, and I’d be hard-pressed to think of any Colorado politician with the same combination of views.

      It’s like if I decide tomorrow to become a Republican (again) and complain that Mike Coffman didn’t support privatizing Social Security and a 100% inheritance tax and the abolition of all churches and the destruction by missile of all public transit lines.

      • As Democrats, we need to STAND for something

        You’ll never see a Republican support higher taxes

        Similarly, I would like to build a Democratic Party that makes gay and immigrant rights its cornerstone – well, at least I’m trying  

        • sxp151 says:

          people will find your entreaties to “STAND for something” rather hollow. It’s like how David likes to say “we Dems” only when he’s trashing Dems, or how Laughing Boy voted for Obama only so he could say, the day after the election and for months after, how disappointed he was.

          • My goal is NOT to make TABOR the cornerstone of the Democratic Party – there’s plenty of people fighting for TABOR already and my ‘love’ of it is something that differs from Party politics

            However, most Democrats I meet seem to prioritize gays and immigrants (it was a big reason for why I joined) only to watch our elected officials sell us out – that’s what I’m getting at – Democrats shouldn’t even have to question where our elected (Democrat) officials stand on those two issues, but sadly, we continue questioning and that’s where we encounter of the problem of not standing for something

        • GalapagoLarry says:

          Am wholeheartedly in agreement on Dems supporting “rights” of many kinds (including the right to get filthy rich, by the way, but the pursuit of obscene wealth seems to be a moral issue for me, rather than a civic one–much like other religions) and on Dem compassion for the struggles of others, especially the innocents.

          But I believe the absolute cornerstone of the Dem party has to be support of the middle class and improvement of poor people’s chances to extract themselves from the trap of our current capitalistic system. That old “American Dream” thing, if you will. A broad middle class, which includes the large majority of small businesspeople, and economic justice, slow and halting as its progress has been historically, are what made America the economic powerhouse of the world and the lighthouse for the world’s peoples.

          Yes, there’s a lot of (unneeded) embellishment of Her story — and some downright lies in it as well — but I think the Dems are the current best hope for America’s revival as the greatest experiment in democracy so far, and for Her survival as such. Their (our) job is to promote economic opportunity and safety for the most of us.

          And yes, they (we) have to STAND for it.

          There, now that I’ve given my pompous mid-day best (Does Gingrich need another speechwriter?) I’ll go back to taunting Repuglodytes and fellow assholes.

    • nancycronk says:

      You said:

      As I’ve said before, perhaps I haven’t been a Democrat long enough to deserve saying such a thing, but…… I’m sick of Democratic candidates that don’t ardently (even irrationally) support gays, immigrants, and teachers

      I’ve been a Democrat for 30 years. I not only agree with you completely, but I would add environmental preservation, as well.

    • Alexei says:

      I have lived Joe’s HD for a few years now and have followed his politics. He has expressed support for all of these thing very publicly during his stint in the state house.

      Perhaps he just needs more robust website.

      • BlueCat says:

        as a telling source for what a candidate wishes to put out there. Not including stands that could be controversial on a website could (but need not always) be seen as an indication of reluctance to stand strong for an issue in a public way. Does the candidate only quietly cater to a targeted group for their support while trying to avoid their issue with voters in general?  

        None of this is to express a view on the integrity or lack thereof of the candidates mentioned. It’s just that it is legitimate  to ask why something is or isn’t  explicitly mentioned as an important issue on a campaign website.  Most voters do not have intimate knowledge of candidates to go on.

  6. silverandblue says:

    Perry L. Haney, M.D., a 53 year-old physician practicing in Denver, Colorado, entered into a combined Statement of Charges and Settlement Agreement with the Board. The Iowa Board charged Dr. Haney with entering into a voluntary agreement with the Colorado Medical Board which restricted his Colorado medical license. On April 21, 2003, Dr. Haney entered into a Stipulation and Final Agency Order with the Colorado Board based on concerns regarding the excessive use of massage therapy services in Dr. Haney’s practice and that the amounts billed for procedures performed in his practice were excessive. Dr. Haney agreed to discontinue the use of massage therapy in his practice and he agreed to modify his billing system to decrease the cost for multiple procedures. Additionally, he agreed to submit to a medical chart review by a nationally recognized medical practice review company. Dr. Haney successfully completed the medical chart review and no major concerns were identified. Under the terms of the combined Settlement Agreement entered into with the Iowa Board, Dr. Haney was issued a Citation and Warning based on the action taken in Colorado.

    IOWA BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS PRESS RELEASE

    For release, July 14, 2004

  7. OldAuroraDem says:

    With all of the talk about the 6th CD being an Aurora district, I have a question. Do either of the Democratic candidates reside in the 6th CD? If not, we can all look forward to Coffman referring to his opponent as a carpetbagger.

  8. Ray Springfield says:

    I’ll have my new bifocals next week.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.