6 January 2019
In the 25+ years that I have worked in and around government in the Washington, DC metro area I have had a ringside seat to the power of industry money on two of three branches of government as well as the ‘fourth estate’ the media. This blog will provide a summary of evidence on one of these three areas – industry money and power brokers and the legislative branch. There are two segments of the health industry who wield serious influence on Capitol Hill – the pharmaceutical industry through their powerful trade association (PhRMA) as well as through each of the individual companies; and medical doctors and their professional trade associations. PhRMA ranks third in lobbying expenditures in 2018 behind the US Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Realtors. In February 2017, Senator Bernie Sanders said that Big
Lobbying in and of itself is not wrong or bad. (After all, I am a registered lobbyist.) In fact it is an important process for legislators and legislative staff to hear from experts about the issues of the day – a way to gather evidence on all sides of issues. The great challenge for legislators is to balance the needs of the people they represent against the desires of the industries whose representatives walk through their doors, who they rub shoulders with each week in Washington and at fund raisers across the country.
What has happened over the last two decades in the pharmaceutical industry however is much more than just straight out lobbying. Currently, there are more than 1,400 individuals registered to lobby on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry. That is almost a three to one ratio to elected officials on Capitol Hill. The industry has the power to alert this army of lobbyists each morning of their talking points of the day, and those individuals call on their former bosses, good friends, and key offices.
According to OpenSecrets.org – the amount of money the Pharmaceutical industry spent on lobbying grew from just over $60 million in 1998, to over $216 million in 2018. In 2018, the PhRMA the trade association spent more than $21 million lobbying, while top vaccine manufacturers spent the following:
- Pfizer (formerly Wyeth, and formerly American Home Products)- $9.3 million
- Merck – $5.9 million
- Novartis AG – $5.33 million
- Abbvie Inc. – $4.28 million
- GlaxoSmithKline – $3.64 million
- MedImmune LLC (AstraZeneca) – $1.57 million
- Sanofi – $3. 89 million
- Barr Labs, Inc. – $1.32 million
- CSL Limited – $990,000
- Seqirus Pty Ltd
- Protein Sciences Corporation
It was always interesting to see who would attend our hearings when vaccines or thimerosal (mercury) was going to be discussed. Whenever mercury was a subject, I could count on seeing the lobbyist for the American Dental Association in the back of the hearing room and would seem him chatting with members of both sides of the aisle before and after hearing. Anytime vaccines were the topic, there was three long-standing vaccine industry lobbyist in attendance. I witnessed an event in the Senate in which these lobbyists managed to shut down a Senate hearing related to vaccine injury legislation before it even began. Their power shut down a year’s worth of bipartisan/
Back in 2003, Congress passed legislation that included a $2 billion a year boost to the pharmaceutical industry in Medicare. This legislation went through the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. Early the next year, Committee Chairman, Louisiana Congressman Bill Tauzin announced he would be retiring at the end of the session. The day after retiring from Congress, he took over the top job at PhRMA for a reported $2 million dollar a year salary. (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/11714763/t/tauzin-aided-drug-firms-then-they-hired-him/#.XDJX81xKi70) and (https://sunlightfoundation.com/2010/02/12/the-legacy-of-billy-tauzin-the-white-house-phrma-deal/)
Donations: A second way that industries and often more powerful way that industries wield their influence is through political donations. The donations of a company’s employees and Political Action Committees (PAC) are easily tracked through legally required reporting. Some politically focused donations are more challenging to track, including event sponsorship, soft money support, and monies to local, state, and national political parties.
In 2018, $16,502,354 was donated by the Pharmaceutical industry to federal level election candidates, PACs and outside groups. Just focusing on what can easily be tracked, the following are the political contributions by the same companies, their employees and PACs also provided by OpenSecrets.org:
| Company | 2018 | 2016 | 2014 |
| Pfizer | $1,846, 612 | $2,236,666 | $1,566,961 |
| Merck | 933,303 | 896,232 | 972,009 |
| Novartis | 497,694 | 542,547 | 495,690 |
| Abbvie | 922,851 | 944,861 | 687,700 |
| GlaxoSmithKline | 479,480 | 734,619 | 622,226 |
| MedImmune (AstraZeneca) | 568,097 | 790,342 | 810,283 |
| Sanofi | 685,431 | 1,012,092 | 927,580 |
| CSL Limited | 87.006 | 86,663 | 54,540 |
| Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers Of America | 418,694 | 381,552 | 247,550 |
There are most than 1.1 million physicians in the United States. When a medical doctor or dentist reaches out to their member of Congress on a health issue, their opinion likely carries more weight than that of a single non-medical professional. In 2018, health professions spent $68 million on lobbying. The American Medical Association ranked 9th in lobbying expenditures for 2018, spending more than $15.5 million. (Exceeded by Alphabet, Inc., Blue Cross/Bue Shield, American Hospital Association, and the Open Society Policy Center.
When doctors and dentists donate to a campaign and garner donations from one or more of the dozens of professional medical associations, they are even more powerful. In 2018, health professions PAC donations to federal candidates exceeded $23 million.
The top health professions PAC was the American Society of Anesthesiologists with more than $2.85 donated in the 2018 election cycle to federal candidates, leadership PACs, political parties, and outside groups. They also spent more than a half a million on lobbying.
There are several groups who gather the data from official sources and make them available for search and analysis. They include OpenSecrets.org and FollowtheMoney.org. ProPublica has also done an incredible job of researching these issues. Take the time to look at these sites for yourself and be informed.
During big issues like health insurance reform, the Medicare reform back in 2003 and throughout the vaccine injury and vaccine-autism discussions over the last 18 years, manufacturers, their lobbyists, the trade associations of both the manufacturers and medical doctors joined together to pool their power and influence – they developed talking points and organized their members to reach out to their legislators.
During the health insurance reform (ObamaCare) process associations even funded lengthy fellowships for doctors, nurses and others to work in legislative offices to shepherd the legislation. I know this because I met with many doctors and nurses who took time off from their ‘day job’ to spend 6-12 months in Washington working in Senate offices.
Political donations and lobbying are not always bad. Legislators rely on donors to fund their election and re-election campaigns. I am not one that endorses the idea of government-funded political campaigns. Political parties rely on donors to support their activities. There is a point, however, when that financial support moves from the support of past activities and foundational values to swaying the current or future actions. Finding and maintaining a healthy balance remains a top need for the legislative branch.
Always,
Beth