General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJust a reminder: 13 Democratic senators voted no on prescription drug price legislation
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2017/01/a-senate-vote-on-prescription-drug-price/the divide within the Democratic party is even more striking: Yes-voting Democrats received an average of $68,855, while those who voted no received an average of more than $186,000 each. Results were much the same for Republicans: Yes-voters received an average of about $66,000 while no-voters more than doubled that sum with average receipts of nearly $133,000.
The 13 Democratic senators who voted no of the 47 Democrats and Independents who voted on the amendment collectively received 50.8 percent of the money that the industry gave to current Democratic senators since 2009.
Booker netted $276,165, but there were three Democratic naysayers who received even more: fellow New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez (about $284,000), Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey (about $291,000) and Washington Sen. Patty Murray (about $363,000). From 2011-2016, between PACs and individual donors, Murray received more than $40,500 from Amgen Inc., a pharmaceutical company that contributed over $2 million to candidates and parties in the 2016 cycle.
On the other hand, Washingtons other senator, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D) received a total of only $31,050 from PACs and individuals in the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry from 2009-2016, but she voted against the amendment. For her, at least, it appears there was more at play in the vote than money.
Meredith McGehee, chief of policy, programs and strategy at Issue One, warned about the dangers of assuming that a dollar given is a vote bought. What we know for sure is that it is a dollar given and access bought, she said. It gets you in the door, and it gets your argument heard. Any lobbyist worth their salt believes that if they can get their foot in the door, they can make a persuasive argument for their issue.
BigmanPigman
(51,590 posts)yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)I think it's more like this:
"If you cant take their money, drink their whiskey, screw their women, and vote against em anyway, you dont belong in the Legislature. -- Big Daddy Unruh
chowder66
(9,067 posts)In regards to this bill in your article;
"Simply put, if adopted by the Senate, the amendment would not have required the United States to begin importing drugs from Canada -- period, full stop," said Jeff Giertz, communications director for Booker. "It would have added language into the budget resolution that would have advised the Senate to spend money in a way that would result in this." "Giertz said that Booker supported the same goals, but wanted to see a framework for ensuring the safety of imported drugs included in the amendment."
And the other bill they did vote for;
Its important to know that every one of the 13 senators listed in the meme voted in favor of a separate amendment that did urge lower drug prices.
This other amendment effectively prevented the Senate from considering legislation that did not "as promised by (President-elect Donald Trump), lower drug prices, as certified by the Congressional Budget Office."
Like the other amendment, this did not pass -- it won only 47 votes in favor, with 51 against. But the fact that all 13 senators listed on the meme voted to support this amendment muddies the conclusion of the meme that they all "voted against cheaper medicines."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/18/other-98/viral-image-about-democratic-senators-and-big-phar/