Sen. Elizabeth Warren On Why She Opposed Cures Act

[think]

Very good video interview with Warren at the link. It's towards the bottom of the page.

Keller @ Large: Sen. Elizabeth Warren On Why She Opposed Cures Act

December 18, 2016 2:11 PM By Jon Keller


BOSTON (CBS) — Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said she was proud of the work that Democrats and Republicans did together on the 21st Century Cures Act, a major medical-research bill–but she wanted more.

“The one overarching [provision] that I kept pushing for was there must be more funding for the national institutes of health, medical research,” she said. “That’s the way you really get cures.”

Sen. Warren sat down with WBZ political analyst Jon Keller last week, and explained to him why she eventually came to oppose the bill.

“After the election, the House snatched the bill back, it took out almost all the NIH funding, added in a bunch of giveaways to the pharmaceutical industry, to the tobacco industry of all things, to big donors, and it took some opioid money and said the incoming administration will decide to spend it wherever they want to spend it.”..

Read more and video interview:
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/12/18/keller-large-sen-elizabeth-warren-on-why-she-opposed-cures-act/

[elleng]

1. Thanks.

We need to hear from her, often.

[think]

2. I hadn't heard about the House gutting it after the election til this. Glad she's letting people

know what happened.

Unfortunately the MSM doesn't care to discuss actual legislation very much....

[Buckeye_Democrat]

3. I love her so much!

It figures that Republicans would funnel money to their corporate buddies. Business as usual for them.

[still_one]

4. The cutting of funding to NIH has been going on since 2013. We will be left

behind the rest of the world, that is whata will happen

[HassleCat]

5. Greater glories in store for us.

Science will be banished in favor of religion and superstition. If I had seen this coming, I would have become a homeopathic televangelist.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

6. Maybe conservative judges will rule that...

... science boards that deny inclusion of "opposing viewpoints" -- i.e., not supported by evidence -- in their science journals are violating freedom of speech?

It wouldn't totally surprise me anymore.

[Maru Kitteh]

7. Homeopathic televangelist.

There's still time. Go for it.

[HassleCat]

8. Maybe.

I have a feeling the qualification process is not what we think of as "rigorous."

[elmac]

9. I do not want Democrats working with the fascists for any reason

we must shut them down, make them as impotent as possible. I don't care how good the legislation is, there can be no working with the enemy.