Health-Care Reform 2009
Industry Is Generous To Influential Bloc
By Dan Eggen
Washington Pos Staff Writer
Friday, July 31, 2009
On June 19, Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas made clear that he and a group of other conservative Democrats known as the Blue Dogs were increasingly unhappy with the direction that health-care legislation was taking in the House.
“The committees’ draft falls short,” the former pharmacy owner said in a statement that day, citing, among other things, provisions that major health-care companies also strongly oppose.
Five days later, Ross was the guest of honor at a special “health-care industry reception,” one of at least seven fundraisers for the Arkansas lawmaker held by health-care companies or their lobbyists this year, according to publicly available invitations.
The roiling debate about health-care reform has been a boon to the political fortunes of Ross and 51 other members of the Blue Dog Coalition, who have become key brokers in shaping legislation in the House. Objections from the group resulted in a compromise bill announced this week that includes higher payments for rural providers and softens a public insurance option that industry groups object to. The deal also would allow states to set up nonprofit cooperatives to offer coverage, a Republican-generated idea that insurers favor as an alternative to a public insurance option.
At the same time, the group has set a record pace for fundraising this year through its political action committee, surpassing other congressional leadership PACs in collecting more than $1.1 million through June. More than half the money came from the health-care, insurance and financial services industries, marking a notable surge in donations from those sectors compared with earlier years, according to an analysis by the Center for Public Integrity.
A look at career contribution patterns also shows that typical Blue Dogs receive significantly more money — about 25 percent — from the health-care and insurance sectors than other Democrats, putting them closer to Republicans in attracting industry support.
Most of the major corporations and trade groups in those sectors are regular contributors to the Blue Dog PAC. They include drugmakers such as Pfizer and Novartis; insurers such as WellPoint and Northwestern Mutual Life; and industry organizations such as America’s Health Insurance Plans. The American Medical Association also has been one of the top contributors to individual Blue Dog members over the past 20 years. …
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073004267.html?hpid=topnews
One commenter to my health care posts said, “its all about power”. And some would agree that money is power. Is it all about money or does the quality of health care enter the picture?
While individuals in the health care industry have only one vote like the rest of America, the health care industry is “putting its money” where its mouth is. Money, can amplify the effectiveness of votes and help to defray the cost of elections. Money talks.
Has the health of the nation yielded to money? Is it difficult, in America, to persuade politicians to favor a business cause using money as a lure?
What is the health care goal of the health care industry? The business of health care is certainly versed in setting goals of the bottom line type.
Is it all about power or money or does infant mortality enter the health care picture?
When WHO last conducted its survey, why was America listed as number 37 in health care quality but number 2 in health care cost?
Does profits from this lopsided price-quality combination support political elections? Do the constituents of politicians who benefit from this lopsided price-quality combination care about quality health care for the country?
Will America’s ombudsmen(electorate) have to actively work at getting health care to the population? Would providing health care for America’s population be an “act of socialism”? Will America need a continuation of the “congressional process” that started in 2006?
|
*** |
