If Republicans are
her proudest enemy, what does that make Independents?
In the most recent Democratic Presidential candidates debate
at CNN, CNN's Anderson Cooper asked, "which enemy are you most proud
of?"
“In addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the
drug companies, the Iranians, probably the Republicans.”
Never has a presidential candidate demonstrated such
polarization toward an entire group of politically affiliated people as Hillary
did when she condemned the entire Republican party to being her enemy.
As for the Independents who are already fed up with
political polarization, Hillary seems to have slammed the door on them as well. Independents are already fed up with politicians
and after Hillary spoke we know why.
Most polls show 50-75% of the voters are still somewhat
undecided on who to vote for in the general election. Well Hillary sent a clear and concise message
to the Republicans and Independents in that category that she considers them
the enemy.
Of course, that is just one half of the impact from what she
said as her statement also included a holier than thou claim health insurance
and drug companies are also enemies and she is proud of it.
As you will also note from the following articles, the
health and drug companies have showered Hillary, and Bill, and the Clinton
Foundation with millions of dollars in contributions. Perhaps she should have said "now that I
fleeced the health and drug companies, they no longer serve me any purpose. I got the millions!", cackle, cackle.
Did anyone else note that she has developed a cackle like
the Wicked Witch of the West? I first
noticed it in the debate. You take
millions and condemn the donors. With
all accounts paid up why not, it keeps the progressives and liberals from
looking at her contributors since she is the newly incarnated Queen of
Progressives, at least until she wins the democratic nomination.
Once she takes the big primary prize then she will start
becoming a conservative like her husband who stole the Republican platform in
1992 to run on and to use while president.
It worked once for the Clintons ,
why not work again? Still, there is
something to be said for a little laughter in politics and the bevy of photos
in this article show you the lighter side of the Washington drama kings and queens.
Hillary
Takes Millions in Campaign Cash From ‘Enemies’
Clinton named the drug and insurance industries
among her “enemies,” but has accepted millions in donations from them.
By
Kimberly Leonard
Oct. 14, 2015 | 4:25 p.m. EDT
When asked during the Democratic
presidential debate what enemies she was most proud to have made, Hillary
Clinton named pharmaceutical and health insurance
companies at the top of her list. But that hasn’t stopped the Democratic front-runner from
accepting millions of dollars in campaign cash from both industries in the
course of her political career, financial disclosure records show.
Since her first bid for Senate in 2000, Clinton has accepted nearly $1 million from
drug and health companies and more than $2.7 million from the insurance field
and its related sectors, according to an analysis of public records from the
Center for Responsive Politics. While the analysis did not include campaign
finance figures for the 2016 cycle, some of the same donors and patterns can be
seen in Clinton ’s
lone
financial disclosure filed in July.
Contributions tied to some of the same firms that gave to
her 2008 presidential campaign appear in the latest disclosure, including
donations connected to pharmaceutical companies Pfizer Inc., Johnson &
Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.; and insurers Aetna Inc., MetLife Inc. and
Centene Corp., the latter of which is among Clinton’s largest
donors this year.
In the course of her 2008 presidential bid, records show
that Clinton
was the third-largest recipient of campaign
donations from drug and health product companies, receiving $738,359 in
donations. The industry also contributed $86,875 to her 2000 Senate run, and
spent $157,015 supporting
her re-election in 2006.
The insurance industry – which includes health insurers
and also car, life and property insurance – donated
$1,260,400 to her 2008 campaign, making her the third-highest recipient of
cash from the industry that year and also
in 2006, when she raised $397,110 for her re-election to the Senate. During
her first
bid for the Senate in 2000, she raised $167,550 from the industry.
She was the second-highest
recipient of cash in 2008 from the health services sector and HMOs,
receiving $636,670, and the highest earner in 2006, at $183,770. In 2000, she raised
$70,575.
More recently, the Clinton Foundation has also benefited
from these groups’ donations. Donors and grantors who have given between
$1 million and $5 million include Pfizer, the Procter & Gamble Co., Blue
Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina and Humana Inc.
But Clinton
seems to have turned on the pharmaceutical industry in particular in recent
weeks, releasing
a plan to improve on President Barack Obama’s health care law, the
Affordable Care Act, by tackling drug costs. The plan
includes allowing Medicare, the government’s
health plan for adults over 65 and disabled Americans, to negotiate lower drug
costs – a measure the industry heavily opposes.
Her policy
proposal also stated that she plans to reduce the amount of time a
pharmaceutical company has exclusive rights to biologics, which are drugs made
of living cells that are expensive to develop and can be difficult
for patients to afford. Though she supported the bill that led to a 12-year
exclusivity while in the Senate, her new proposals say she would reduce the
patent to seven years, allowing the drug to be copied by other manufacturers
and therefore reducing its price. Drugmakers are against this proposal, saying
they need to recoup the massive costs of developing the drugs and to invest in
new treatments and cures.
When Clinton
was secretary of state, she supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which
includes provisions that strengthen patent protections for drugmakers. Last
week, however, she said she
opposes the deal.
When
asked for a response to Clinton calling the pharmaceutical industry
“enemies,” Tina Stow, a spokeswoman for the Pharmaceutical Research and
Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, said the group has a long history of
supporting and working with candidates and policymakers on both sides of the
aisle.
“We will continue to do so as we look to advance a
pro-patient, pro-innovation, pro-jobs agenda,” she wrote in an email. PhRMA has
publicly
come out against Clinton ’s
plan for prescription drugs, saying it would restrict patients’ access to
medicines, result in fewer new treatments, would cost jobs and would end the
country’s standing as a leader in biomedical innovation.
It’s unclear to what extent insurers and drug companies
will continue to support her campaign, particularly after the comments during CNN’s
debate, although it would not be the first time Clinton has been at odds with the industries.
Asked to explain the financial relationship between Clinton ’s campaign and the industries, campaign officials
pointed to the contentious war fought against Clinton when she was first lady and head of
the Task Force on National Health Care Reform in 1993. The health insurance
industry ran millions of dollars of ads against a health care plan she
championed that would have overhauled the system, playing a large role in
ultimately killing it. They also point out that her positions to tackle drug
costs have been unpopular among pharmaceutical lobbying groups, which could
help to demonstrate she ultimately isn’t beholden to the industry’s interests.
In total, Clinton
raised $245.8 million for her 2008 presidential run, $51.6 million for her 2006
Senate campaign and $30.2 million for her 2000 Senate bid.
Pharmaceutical companies and insurers are typically
generous with members of both parties, giving slightly more to Republicans.
Clare Krusing, press secretary for America's Health Insurance Plans, says its
political action committee supports candidates of both parties and, in
particular, candidates who support policies aligned with the industry's
priorities around affordability.
In recent years, both industries have contributed more to
Democrats. Obama was the top recipient during the 2008 presidential election,
and again during his re-election in 2012, with his Republican opponents – first
Mitt Romney, then Sen. John McCain – receiving slightly less from
pharmaceutical companies.
Democratic
Debate 2015: Hillary Clinton’s ‘Enemies’ In Pharmaceutical and Insurance
Industries Have Supported Her Campaigns, Foundation
By
on October 14 2015 12:42 AM EDT
on October 14 2015 12:42 AM EDT
Bill Clinton famously tried to parse what the
meaning of “is” is -- and now his wife, Hillary Clinton, seems to be
challenging the precise definition of “enemies.”
In an exchange toward the end of the
Democratic presidential debate in Las
Vegas on Tuesday, the candidates were asked who their
biggest enemies had been over the course of their careers. Clinton responded by saying, “In addition to
the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians --
probably the Republicans.”
It is true that the National Rifle
Association and the Republicans have been Clinton ’s
nemeses, and she has been involved in tense
negotiations about international policy toward Iran . But health insurance
companies and drug companies have been some of her biggest financial
supporters.
In 2008, Clinton was the among the three biggest
recipients of campaign cash from pharmaceutical-related companies,
according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. In all, the
watchdog group reports that she raised $738,000 from employees of
pharmaceutical manufacturers and companies classified as “Pharmaceuticals /Health
Products.” The center reports that Clinton
also raised more than $1.2 million from
the insurance industry -- which includes health insurers.
On top of those campaign contributions,
the Clintons
and their family foundation have benefited from their ties to the
pharmaceutical and insurance industries.
In 2011, the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) -- the primary trade association
representing drug companies -- paid Bill Clinton $200,000 for a speech, as the
organization was lobbying the Hillary Clinton-led State
Department. Last year, the Drug Chemical and Associated Technologies
Association, a trade group whose members include major pharmaceutical
companies, paid her a
$250,000 speaking fee.
Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation has
received between $1 million and $5 million worth of donations separately from
drug manufacturers Pfizer and Procter & Gamble,
and from health insurers Humana and Blue Cross Blue Shield of North
Carolina. Some of those companies made donations as
recently as this year, according to the foundation’s website.
That largesse was part of a friendship
forged after those
industries opposed her 1993 health care initiative -- and which continued after
she won reelection to the Senate in 2006.
As secretary of state, Clinton repeatedly championed the Trans-Pacific Partnership,
which critics say
includes provisions that strengthen patent protection for drug manufacturers.
(Last week, she declared that she now opposes the trade
deal.) As a presidential candidate in 2008, she promoted the idea
of a federal mandate effectively requiring Americans to buy private health
insurance.
Those Clinton positions were strongly supported by
the same drug and insurance industries that she now calls “enemies.”
No comments:
Post a Comment