More change you can believe in. Not.
Nearly half of the insiders previously worked for the key committees and lawmakers, including Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), debating whether to adopt a public insurance option opposed by major industry groups. At least 10 others have been members of Congress, such as former House majority leaders Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.) and Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), both of whom represent a New Jersey pharmaceutical firm.
The hirings are part of a record-breaking influence campaign by the health-care industry, which is spending more than $1.4 million a day on lobbying in the current fight, according to disclosure records. And even in a city where lobbying is a part of life, the scale of the effort has drawn attention. For example, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) doubled its spending to nearly $7 million in the first quarter of 2009, followed by Pfizer, with more than $6 million.
[...]
Overall, health-care companies and their representatives spent more than $126 million on lobbying in the first quarter, leading all other industries, according to CRP and Senate data. PhRMA led the pack in spending and employs 49 former government staff members among its 136 lobbyists, according to The Post’s analysis. Dozens of other former insiders are employed as lobbyists by Pfizer, Eli Lilly, the AMA and the American Hospital Association, each of which spent at least $3.5 million on lobbying from January through March.
The aim of the lobbying blitz is simple: to minimize the damage to insurers, hospitals and other major sectors while maximizing the potential of up to 46 million uninsured Americans as new customers. Although many firms have vowed to help cut costs, major players such as PhRMA, America’s Health Insurance Plans and others remain opposed to the public-insurance option, a key proposal that President Obama has endorsed.
Single-Payer. Now.
Dammit.
Posted by Nunly on July 6, 2009 at 7:13 am
I read in the paper today that blue states are likely to pay more than other parts of the country under Obama’s proposed health care plan. Nothing like sticking it to the people who voted for him, eh? I wonder how many times he has to do this before the Obot’s figure this guy out? Illinois, who is already at the top of the list for the highest taxes in the country, will be taxed even more than the red states that supported McCain. Hospitals are slashing their services, such as private rooms for mothers who have had babies, home nursing care for follow up for senior and cancer patients who depend on post acute care, and mental health services.
I wonder if the question will be asked in the next Presidential campaign, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”
Posted by bluelyon on July 6, 2009 at 7:25 am
That would not surprise me in the least. Alegre’s got a post up on how Obama is telling DFA and MoveOn to cool it on going after Blue Dogs. Maybe if DFA and MoveOn (especially MoveOn) had stuck with issues instead of hitching their wagon to the Obama star I might feel sorry for them. But oh, Obama played them like a violin, didn’t he?
Do you have an online link to that article?
Posted by Nunly on July 6, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Here is one of the articles on how the blue states are ending up taking the hit with Obama’s health care plan.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-health-regionaljul06,0,4147641.story
I can’t find the article about the hospitals cutting services on the Tribune Website for some reason. Maybe it will show up on the site tomorrow. If I find it, I’ll get it right over to ya. I just got the info from the newspaper this morning.
Posted by sister of ye on July 6, 2009 at 4:30 pm
We need a new Clue game for the 2000s. Something like “CEO Claret in the boardroom with a spreadsheet.”
One of the biggest pieces of cr@p I see bandied about even on truly liberal blogs is “a company’s sole obligation is to make money for its shareholders.” Well, corporations have legal personhood in this country, so they should be bound by the same consideration of consequences as individuals.
I have the right to provide for myself. But I don’t have the right to do by taking a crowbar, bashing in people’s skulls and taking their wallets. Neither should a corporation be allowed to get away with behavior that kills people just to pad their bottom lines, whether by denying a needed product or service, making unsafe products, or spilling pollution into the environment.
If you make a defective product, you can still be sued, though Congress has been working to whittle away that possibility. But these cold-blooded, it’s-just-our-policy murders go entirely unprosecuted, and are even lauded as good business sense.