Posted on 10/17/2024 10:59:47 AM PDT by Heartlander
When I was growing up, the left regularly criticized Big Pharma and its influence on American politics. As recently as 2015, progressive stalwart Elizabeth Warren had “Big Pharma in her sights.” The right, meanwhile, was slow to criticize pharmaceutical companies. That dynamic was even evident in lobbying, with about 55 percent of Big Pharma’s political contributions going to Republican candidates from 1989 to 2020. Yet today, that dynamic has been completely reversed.
In 2020, Big Pharma gave over 60 percent of its political contributions to Democrats. Party leaders promptly backed COVID-19 vaccine mandates across federal and state agencies, helping pharmaceutical companies net hundreds of millions of dollars in profit during the pandemic.
The question is, how and why did America’s political parties realign themselves around one of the nation’s most influential industries? To find the answer, you have to follow the money.
Open Secrets, a tax-exempt, charitable organization that tracks financial influence on U.S. elections and public policy, reports that contributions “soared following passage of the Affordable Care Act (aka ‘Obamacare’) in 2010.” In 2009, in the run-up to Obamacare’s passage, pharmaceutical companies spent a then-record $275 million on lobbying. (In 2023, that number had ballooned to $384 million.)
Why were pharmaceutical companies investing so much money into lobbying for Obamacare? After all, that money might have been spent developing new drugs or marketing medicine to the public. What did pharmaceutical companies stand to gain from influencing federal legislation?
As it turns out, Obamacare was a huge opportunity for Big Pharma. In essence, Obamacare forced millions of Americans to buy health insurance from private corporations. The bill was so good for business that drug companies agreed to pay $90 billion to fund the expansion of insurance coverage—after all, insured patients are paying customers.
It also expanded federal drug coverage for the poor so that the federal government now pays for the prescription medications of the 90 million Americans now on Medicaid—almost double the number covered before Obamacare’s passage. With taxpayers footing the bill, Big Pharma has raked in the cash.
The nation’s most valuable pharmaceutical company when Obamacare passed, Johnson & Johnson, was worth about $175 billion in 2010. Today, the most valuable pharmaceutical company is Eli Lilly, and it is worth nearly $800 billion. That is more than a 4.5-fold increase in just 14 years.
Clearly, Big Pharma’s investment in Obamacare paid off. By forcing Americans to buy insurance, the law increased demand for medical products. Now, more than half of Americans regularly take a prescription medication, and the typical number of medications hovers at four. And that, too, can be traced back to the incentives baked into Obamacare.
Obamacare loaded healthcare professionals and insurers with about 200 million hours of paperwork each year. Included in that paperwork is reporting on merit-based incentive (MIP) criteria, which are supposed to reflect the quality of care. However, MIPs define care quality in terms of medication. The more patients are prescribed long-term medication, the better.
In addition to creating perverse incentives for doctors and drugmakers, Obamacare also built price increases into American healthcare. It did so by mandating that health insurance companies cannot earn more than a 15 percent profit. While that might sound good, it means that in order for insurers to make more money, their prices have to rise. The higher their prices, the larger their 15 percent share will be. It’s no wonder that inflation in healthcare cost inflation has outpaced inflation in the CPI by 35 percent.
Insurance companies have grown significantly as a result of this provision. The largest insurer, UnitedHealth Group, had a market capitalization of just under $40 billion when Obamacare passed. It is now worth just under $550 billion. That’s nearly 14 times higher!
Obamacare clearly was a huge gift to Big Pharma and the nation’s biggest insurers. It’s no surprise that in its wake, these powerful interests have aligned themselves with the progressives who passed it—and that progressives led the COVID-19 vaccine mandate effort on behalf of their donors.
Ironically, critics of corporate influence over American politics now have a home in the Republican Party they once deplored. Perhaps the most significant manifestation of this shift is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s recent endorsement of President Trump. This may be the beginning of a broader political realignment.
None of that is actually relevant.
The political realignment is the plurality of Independents. They have ascended and they don’t care about traditional policy.
They want the Swamp drained and they want elitism erased.
The upheaval coming will be devastating, and it was inevitable because of $36T in debt, run up by the elites.
BTTT
Big Pharma has probably killed more people than they’ve cured.
If the DimWITS CAN just let in 100 million more illegals, ALL of these problems will be solved. Killing off white Americans with vaxxxxxxxines can then proceed quickly.
They are killing me with their ads in The Pennant Championship of baseball in the National and American League. 60% of the ads are pharma.
There is also regulatory capture. Most of the big agencies are headed by people from the same industry they are supposedly regulating. And they know that if they play ball they will get very high paying jobs with those industries as soon as they leave the government.
Corporativism has moved from the right to the left.
That is a pitiful statistic. People need to stop taking whatever their doctor tells them to. Most of the time, one drug causes problems, for which they prescribe another drug, and on and on it goes. It reflects a population that relies on drugs, rather than diet, exercise, and moderation.
Quite correct. The realignment referred to in the article is occurring in the marketplace, and corporations have one agenda: to do whatever is legally necessary to return a profit to the shareholders.
The relevant realignment is indeed occurring at the political level and our society and institutions have been and are continuing to be engineered to facilitate a shift to the left.
Sorting out pharma's proper place in the market is not going to change that, and "Orange man is bad."
“”””Corporativism has moved from the right to the left.””””
I was surprised at how far left the big corporations were under LBJ, Nixon, Ford, and Carter.
Corporations are apolitical, they just side with whomever will offer them a better deal. At one time that was the right, now it’s the left.
I first noticed how left they were when they embraced affirmative action and day care laws, replacement immigration, and of course foreign governments over America.
They are run by soulless people who’s god is money and power and their work force largely abandons their personal morals they display at home, when at work.
Independents? Conservative working class want those things too.
Yep. Tired of being threatened and controlled by the government and tired of being threatened and controlled by its corporatist cronies.
In other words disloyal, turncoat, untrustworthy scoundrels.
Precisely.
Every other November, 435 US Representatives must stand for election. There should be a maximum of $10,000,000 that any candidate can accept in each election....with no individual or other legal entity contributing more than $5,000.00.
In the Senate, 33 Senators are elected or re-elected every other year.
The total spent on the 2020 election for all federal offices was 14.4 billion. Ten million each would cut and limit candidates cash inflow (aka corruption opportunities) by half.
Then, we must pass term limits. Theres way too much corruption going on these days for America to survive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.