Pharma Spent $22M To Lobby Washington In ‘07
5 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // February 21st, 2008 // 12:50 pm
The industry trade group, that is. And that amounts to a 25 percent increase from the previous year. But while proposals aimed at lowering drug prices and restricting industry advertising fell by the wayside in Congress, lobbying experts say the road ahead for the industry looks increasingly bumpy, the Associated Press writes. “This seems to be a case where the increase in lobbying activity is defensive, not offensive,” Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics, a government watchdog, tells the AP.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America spent about $12 million in the second half of 2007 to lobby on how prices are set for seniors’ medications, rules governing drug imports and other issues, according to lobbying disclosure records filed last week. Ken Johnson, a senior vice president at the trade group, tells the AP that, while the industry faced many challenges on Capitol Hill last year, most of the increased spending went toward advertisements urging Congress to reauthorize a program that provides health care to poor children.
Democrats and Republicans agreed early in the year that the program must be reauthorized, though they continue to wrangle over its future size. “We would like to see every person in America have health insurance,” Johnson says. President Bush has twice vetoed efforts to add 6 million to 10 million children to the program over the next five years.
The drug industry, consistently one of the top spenders in Washington, has long faced criticism from some lawmakers over the safety and price of its products. But beginning late in 2006, after the Democrats regained control of Congress, drug makers faced a slew of proposals unfriendly to their interests. And the AP provides this recap showing what PhRMA advocated for and against…
- a proposal by House Democrats that would have allowed the government - not private health insurers - to negotiate drug prices for seniors in Medicare. The measure, aimed at wringing lower prices from drug makers, stalled in the House after President Bush threatened to veto it;
- legislation that would allow the US to import cheaper meds from Canada and other foreign countries, citing safety concerns. Import proponents said foreign competition would help drive down drug prices. The issue failed to gain traction in Congress, despite several high-profile hearings;
- patent-reform legislation that it argued could weaken legal protections on drug patents. High-tech companies supported the bill that passed the House last year aimed at improving the US patent system, but PhRMA argued it could weaken patent protections by reducing infringement penalties. The bill is still pending in the Senate.
- a bill overhauling the FDA’s drug-safety system. The legislation, which became law last September, gave FDA new powers to update drug safety labeling and monitor side effects after drugs are approved. But the final bill did not include restrictions on direct-to-consumer advertising opposed by the drug industry.
As you may recall, rormer Louisiana Rep. Billy Tauzin is PhRMA’s president and chief executive. PhRMA’s other registered lobbyists include: Mimi Kneuer, who was Tauzin’s former chief of staff, Amy Efantis, former legislative director for Rep. Artur Davis, D-Ala., Valerie Jewett, former legislative director for Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., and Matt Sulkala, who was senior legislative assistant to Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Fla., the AP notes.
Nathan
You state that “The drug industry [is] consistently one of the top spenders in Washington”
That’s true, to a degree. We were number 15 out of 80 industries in 2006. But don’t forget that there are 14 industries that outspent us:
Commercial banks ($26 million, #10)
Insurance companies ($31 million, #8)
Real Estate companies ($74 million, #4)
Retirees (ie AARP) ($120 million, #2)
Law firms ($121 million, #1)
Suddenly the $22 million spent by pharma companies doesn’t seem quite so bad to me…
President Bush » Pharma Spent $22M To Lobby Washington In ‘07
[...] Pharmalot wrote an interesting post today on Pharma Spent $22M To Lobby Washington In ‘07Here’s a quick excerptPresident Bush has twice vetoed efforts to add 6 million to 10 million children to the program over the next five years…. [...]
Sarah Rimmington
Nathan,
With respect, the issue to many of us isn’t that the $22 million Pharma spent on lobbying isn’t “so bad” compared to what some of the other industries spent in any given year.
The key problem with all of these big lobbying spenders, including Big Pharma, is that it is allowed to happen at all.
A system that allows this kind of lobbying to take place gives big money (which is usually large corporate interests) much more influence over our laws and our lives than other interests.
There will always be competing interests and I everyone has a right to communicate with and to try to influence our legislators to a degree.
But a system that is so skewed in favor of monied interests, including but not limited to Big Pharma, is one sick system indeed.
someone
Nathan,
I am a capitalist at heart, but not when it comes to health care. There are certain drugs that the consumer has no choice but to purchase and very often when there isn’t a generic or a competitor, they are forced into paying the price to take the drug and stay healthy.
I can choose who to bank with, who to purchase insurance from and which law firm to work with. When I really do not like the practice of one particularly business or corporation, I can stop buying their product. But that isn’t always the case with health care.
Americans in congress can be bought to accept some pretty stupid things. Take for instance dis allowing the importation of drugs from Canada because they are cheaper there. Apparently there are “safety” concerns. Personally, I can’t think of any more ludicrous. Not only is the person who perpetuated that myth a complete dolt, but even scarier is that enough people in congress actually believed it. Ladies and Gentlemen we are witnessing the “dummying” of Americans.
The biggest problems with manufacturing seem to come from American plants…Can anybody provide me one example of when there was a “tainted” drug or massive re-call that happened on drugs manufactured in Canada? Be prepared to compare it to our “great” American system’s scorecard.
Not only are we a becoming nation of liars and thieves, but we actually really believe our own baloney. I can hear our neighbors up North having a good chuckle.
If we look at how much is spent on Lobbying, CME, speaker honorariums, advertising, private corporate jets (apparently pharma CEO’s cannot travel with the regular folks…)and commission for sales reps we could cut out a heck of a lot of fat from the price tag.
Take the Graft out of the system and we just might be able to afford our health care…
Melody
SOMEONE states: “There are certain drugs that the consumer has no choice but to purchase and very often when there isn’t a generic or a competitor, they are forced into paying the price to take the drug and stay healthy.”
As you so aptly noted, in most heavily lobbied industries, the lowly consumer often retains some freedom of choice. I can choose my banker, or lawyer, or doctor. But, as an insulin-dependent diabetic–I can no longer choose the drug I need to sustain life. As a result of very effective pharma lobbying, my freedom of choice has been eliminated and the insulin cartel has been given almost-monopolistic control over my life.
To most true capitalists, PROTECTIONISM is anathema. But in the case of rDNA insulin, protectionism has worked quite nicely for the insulin cartel. For the consumer . . . not so much.