Published by Lindsay Renick Mayer
Today was not a good day for supporters of a government-sponsored
health care plan.
Two senators, John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.),
offered two amendments that would add such an option to the the Senate
Finance Committee's version of the massive health care legislation
Congress has been considering for months -- and the committee handily
knocked each down today.
CEOs of insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies, who tend to
oppose the public option, might sleep a little easier tonight. These
industries have been implementing a variety of strategies to thwart
amendments such as these, including spending big bucks on lobbying and
campaign contributions. Lawmakers who sided with these industries have
collected more money, on average, than those who voted for these
amendments, the Center for Responsive Politics has found.
Here are the details:
The Rockefeller Amendment
The 15 lawmakers to vote against Rockefeller's version of the public
option have collected $69,137 more, on average, from insurers
(including HMOs and health services and health and accident insurers)
through their candidate committees and leadership PACs since 1989 than
the eight who voted for his amendment ($297,089 versus $227,952).
The lawmakers who voted against Rockefeller's amendment have brought
in $167,264 more, on average, from pharmaceutical and health care
product companies since 1989 than those who supported it ($467,427
versus $297,163).
The Democrats who voted against their colleague's proposal have
collected $97,472 more, on average, from insurance companies since
1989 than the Democrats who voted for it ($325,424 versus $227,952).
The Democrats who voted against Rockefeller's amendment have brought
in $163,876 more, on average, from pharmaceutical and health product
companies since 1989 than the Democrats who supported it ($461,038
versus $297,163).
The Schumer Amendement
The 13 lawmakers who voted against Schumer's version of the public
option have collected $93,177 more, on average, from insurers
(including HMOs and health services and health and accident insurers)
through their candidate committees and leadership PACs since 1989 than
the 10 who voted for his amendment ($313,553 versus $220,376).
The senators who voted against Schumer's amendment have brought in
$210,470 more, on average, from pharmaceutical and health product
companies since 1989, than those who supported it ($497,757 versus
$287,286).
The Democrats who voted against their colleague's proposal have
collected $195,284 more, on average, from insurance companies since
1989, than the Democrats who voted for it ($415,660 versus $220,376).
The Democrats who voted against Schumer's amendment have brought in
$315,923 more from pharmaceutical and health product companies since
1989, than the Democrats who supported it ($603,210 versus $287,286).
Senate Finance Committee
At $675,350, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the committee's chairman, has
since 1989 collected more from health insurance companies, including
HMOs and health services and health and accident insurers, than all
but one other member of the committee -- Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).
And Kerry only collected big funds as a presidential candidate in
2004. Meanwhile, only Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has raised more from
pharmaceutical and health product companies in that time ($1.6 million
versus $1.1 million). Baucus voted against both amendments.
Insurers have contributed $265,441, on average, to individual
Democrats on the committee, while pharmaceutical and health product
companies have donated $360,192, on average, to individual Democrats
since 1989.
Insurers have given $282,921, on average, to individual Republicans on
the committee, while pharmaceutical and health product companies have
contributed $466,121 since 1989.
For a list of contributions from health-related industries to members
of this committee, visit our health care tools committees database.
No comments:
Post a Comment