"Bribes Which Got The HC Bill Passed"... Dick Moris

OBAMACARE ENDORSEMENTS: WHAT THE BRIBE WAS

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on TheHill.com on November 6, 2009


As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the '09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these -- and the other endorsements -- his package has received are all bought and paid for.


Here are the deals:

* The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians' reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill...or else!

* The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP -- which supposedly represents them -- will make more money. (If this galls you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact sbarton@americanseniors.org. This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .)

* The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

* Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don't buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn't go along with Obama's blackmail. So the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.

So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.
 
I think I'll add to the sources on this one just to make sure their credibility gets busted somehow.

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/front/D...ect=105&sid=11398481&cKey=1256647666000&ty=st

Swiss pharmaceutical giants Roche and Novartis are spending millions of dollars in an effort to influence United States politicians tackling health care reform.

The companies are among the top ten drug manufacturers lobbying the White House and Congress, having spent upwards of $7 million (SFr7.05 million) combined during the first half of 2009 to influence policy.

Roche, Novartis and other groups lobbying Washington spent a total of nearly $400 million lobbying lawmakers on health care reform, President Barack Obama's biggest domestic priority. Congress is currently working on several bills that tackle the issue.

"This year could be a record in the history of lobbying," said David Levinthal, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan research group based in the US capital that tracks money and its effects on elections and politics.

In Congress, Representative Tammy Baldwin, a Wisconsin Democrat and co-chair of the Friends of Switzerland Caucus, acknowledges that pharmaceutical and health insurance companies are a force to contend with.

"Their lobbyists are very active and present in the House and Senate," she said. "They try to get meetings, they seek to persuade, they are more vocal and have a lot more resources than the proponents of a universal system and public health insurance."

Better than insurers

"Our health system is largely based on profit and many people are making good money from it," Baldwin said. "That is why there is great resistance to change."

But if media coverage is focused on insurance company efforts to block a fundamental overhaul, it appears that the drug companies are doing more than insurers in terms of lobbying.

In this game, the two Swiss drug manufacturers are playing a lead role.

Roche was the fifth most active pharmaceutical company in Washington and the first most active foreign drug maker to try to woo the US government during the first half of 2009.

Other companies such as Sanofi-Aventis (France), Merck (Germany), Bayer (Germany) and GlaxoSmithKline (Britain) are also among the top lobbyists. Novartis ranks tenth.
Efforts to pay

Roche declined to comment, but the global head of pharmaceuticals at Novartis, Joe Jimenez, stressed that Novartis "supports the initiatives of the Obama administration to expand coverage and improve quality of care for all Americans".

Jimenez said the pharmaceutical industry had made a "significant commitment" to reduce costs of the US system, the world's most expensive, especially since drug prices are 40-60 per cent higher than in other developed countries.

"We reached an agreement with the White House and the Senate that we will return $80 billion over ten years in the form of discounts to patients covered by Medicaid and Medicare, public programmes for the poor and those over 65," he said.

The effort seems somewhat relative, however, since the US accounts for half of the global pharmaceutical market, with annual sales close to $300 billion.

The drug companies' lobbying efforts appear to be paying off in other ways, too. No bill being debated in Congress provides for a cap on drug prices. None proposes to reduce how long a company can hold a patent, which keeps generic manufactures from making the same drug for less.
Defending Novartis

Consumer advocates blame pharmaceutical companies for trying to preserve the status quo. Roche spent more than $4 million on lobbying efforts during the first half of 2009. Novartis spent more than $3 million during the same period.

"These companies are concerned about their turnover and wish to keep prices as high as they want," Levinthal said. "So far in the health care reform debate, they have got what they wanted."

Novartis, for its part, contends that prices in the US reflect production costs and allow for further research.

"We invest 20 per cent of our turnover in research, and when people accuse us of only being concerned with revenue, we say that we are protecting our investment and we ensure that innovation is rewarded," Jimenez said. "Otherwise, the number of medicines being developed will be reduced and science won't advance."

Marie-Christine Bonzom in Washington, swissinfo.ch (Translated from French by Tim Neville)
 
this is a perfect example of biz in DC,all the knuckleheads who think there are seperate parties, take note , different carnies ,the rides are the same
 
Exactly, if you want to influence, don't vote, become a lobbyist.

We live now in an age of Corporatism and it isn't going to change without a fight.
 
Quote from ammo:

this is a perfect example of biz in DC,all the knuckleheads who think there are seperate parties, take note , different carnies ,the rides are the same


You can't say there is no difference in the parties over this. Only one Republican voted for it and it was some coon ass from Louisiana.
 
Back
Top