Bio
Nancy Watzman is a Denver-based consultant to the Sunlight Foundation. Over the course of her career as an investigative journalist and researcher,...
 
 
 
 

Most Popular

Recent Comments

The health care debate: picture it here

  • Share This Post
  • Pin It
  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

I've blogged about some useful online tools you can use to follow the health care debate--where to find the text at OpenCongress.org, how to follow the money and the lobbyist players, and how to check out where the parties are. But sometimes a picture is worth the proverbial 1,000 words. Maybe even 1,000,000 words.

Over at the Sunlight Foundation, Paul Blumenthal and Kerry Mitchell have created visualizations that demonstrate the spider web-like ties among health care lobbyists (many of them former staffers for key lawmakers), campaign contributors, and members of Congress. 

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, is a powerful player in the health care debate. Five of his former staffers work for 27 organizations that have a stake in health care policy, including the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Researchers of America (PhRMA), America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), Amgen, and GE Health Care. He's also collected millions of dollars in campaign contributions from health care interests. But enough with all the words, take a look at this picture. (Click here to see the full image.)

Of course other members of the Senate Finance Committee are also influential in the health care debate. All together, some 20 former staffers who worked for committee Democrats now represent major health care interests.  These include the American Medical Association, the American Hospital
Association, PhRMA, and various pharmaceutical, medical device and
insurance companies. Here's an interactive display of these relationships.

Democrats don't have the market cornered when it comes to cozy ties with health care lobbyists. Turning to the GOP members of the Senate Finance Committee, Sunlight found 22 staffers-turned-lobbyists. Their clients include Eli Lilly, Pfizer, PhRMA, Blue Cross Blue Shield, and Merck.

Republican Senate Finance Committee Health Care Influence Cluster

  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
nowickedwitch 5 pts

Big Pharma, and Health Insurance, may both be coercive but they are not the same thing. The insurance industry is fighting hard against a single payor public option, they do not want the competition. They are also fighting for mandatory coverage, again , just not government competition in the form of a national plan, or even public option.

I think everyone is getting their this's and that's confused. It is our job to encourage our legislators to get the health insurance industry regulated  and out of the free market - for ethics reasons. That a life or death industry is part of the free market is unethical, and that our government has allowed, over the last 25 year, for it to become such a huge part of our GDP, is also unethical. it will take a long time but without a national healthcare plan, which in my opinion we should have, that is the only way to preserve a chance for middle income American to be covered. Right now the insurance industry is making the decision on treatment, and the decision is based on stockholder profits, the government would not have  their person stockholders to answer to as the people are the stockholders.

The corporate involvement in public and national policy has grown, again especially over the last 15  years to the point that the corporation run this government not our legislators, that is something that must be changed.

cooper

Flightkeeper 5 pts

Thank you for letting everybody know.  The incestuous relationship between Big Pharma et al and our government is why I don't want the single-payer system to be the only alternative.  Big companies know that if the single-payer system went through that it would stifle competition. It would be that much harder for a small drug manufacturer to present an alternative drug because they would have no avenue to compete.  There are so many on these posts of blogher that think single-payer would fix so many things and love the fact that health care will be "free" because then they don't have to worry about how much medical care costs when it actually reduces your alternatives.  Where are you going to go for altenate solutions if the government is the only provider of health care to the public and the only buyer for health services and drugs.

Once Big Government takes over the health care system, you and your doctor will have fewer decisions regarding your care, it will be government that will make all decisions because it is only government that buys and distributes medical care.

People are reading the small print on that health reform bill and figuring out what it means for them.  Especially when times are tight and the government doesn't collect as much tax as before because the economy is so bad. People had better wake up.

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

thewildhare 5 pts

The incestuous connections of all those “stakeholders” make it very difficult to really re-craft our system, even though it is desperately in need of an overhaul.  Additionally, these connections clarify, for me, how easy it is to get inaccurate and overblown information – and how difficult it is to find the truth.  What I want, for my country, is the ability to have honest, intelligent dialog on the state of health care, to work through facts without misinformation, to truly talk and listen, and to find a way to define a solution for every man, woman, and child that is a citizen of the United States of America.  What I realize we have, instead, is quite a mess.