Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"You won't see any lobbyists running the White House when I am in office..."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:40 PM
Original message
"You won't see any lobbyists running the White House when I am in office..."
Edited on Thu Aug-06-09 02:42 PM by Bread and Circus
Famous last words.

Look, I really like President Obama. I think he means well. I think he'd be more liberal if he could but....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insure.html?_r=3&hp

White House Affirms Deal on Drug Cost

Published: August 5, 2009

WASHINGTON — Pressed by industry lobbyists, White House officials on Wednesday assured drug makers that the administration stood by a behind-the-scenes deal to block any Congressional effort to extract cost savings from them beyond an agreed-upon $80 billion.

Drug industry lobbyists reacted with alarm this week to a House health care overhaul measure that would allow the government to negotiate drug prices and demand additional rebates from drug manufacturers.

In response, the industry successfully demanded that the White House explicitly acknowledge for the first time that it had committed to protect drug makers from bearing further costs in the overhaul. The Obama administration had never spelled out the details of the agreement.




... is really, really sad.

I supported Obama all the way back to the Iowa Primary days. I don't think any of the others would be doing one wit better. Maybe Kucinich...who knows. It's just all so very sad.

It's like we traded Kings, Queens, and Vassal Lords for Corporations and McGovernment.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. yeah, well, Obama lied to us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Was it an (intentional) lie, or he is a victim of running a corrupted government?
Edited on Thu Aug-06-09 02:44 PM by Bread and Circus
That's what I'd like to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. Does it matter?
If the white house blocks this- it would be tantamount to bankrupting Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayMusgrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
33. Of course it matters! Or are you only here to make us feel bad that
Edited on Fri Aug-07-09 04:47 PM by JayMusgrove
we didn't elect Sarah Palin?

Does it matter?

Tell us your REAL motivation in asking stupid questions and not wanting reality to rain on your fantasy parade.

Only you and Sarah Palin don't want to deal with reality and want your way all the time.

6 months and you are ready for Sarah Palin to be VP... you are a true progressive.

Maturity requires patience and understanding, when you get some, send us a note, OK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quakerboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #33
44. in what way does it matter to people
who cannot afford the jumped up drug prices, or to a country that cannot afford them either?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richardo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. Will Durst re Bush: "Oooo shocking! The President lied - what's that, 43 in a row?"
Update it to 44.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. We need legislation to lower drug prices.
Let Medicare negotiate, and have the public option pay the same amount.

Promises from drug lobbyists are unenforceable and should be ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. If unenforceable and they don't behave, we have immediate cause to negotiate. Let's get beginning
legislation first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PolNewf Donating Member (388 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. So he got $80 billion
and one less enemy to fight. He did the same with the hospitals, AMA and tried with the insurance companies. Seems pretty strategic to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Change we can buy a cup of coffee with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. No, it's strategic but you knew that..
What you don't know is..the primaries are over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Dana Milbank, is that you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. No it's me..and the Obama team is trying
so hard to get the jobs done and the mess cleaned up. We need all the help we can get from good Dems..not snark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Trying to get the job done?
Is that why they took single payer off the table before negotations began? Get real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. oh yeah, they took SP off the table because people dont want it
Go ahead and quote your stupid ass poll showing support above 50% when SP and nothing are the options. But you will have to ignore that poll that showed 71% support for public option when it is introduced into the same poll.

In summary, Your candidate lost so your policies will not be implemented. (e.g. republican anger at town halls)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. The people DO want single payer, and everybody goddamn well knows it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. well, to be fair, some people do.
And i think it would probably be good. But im not going to begrudge him doing what the majority want. The only thing i care about is that some kind of care for the poor be established.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quakerboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #25
45. as to your EG
So far, as far as I can tell, the astroturfed protesters at the town halls are getting exactly what they want. Far as anyone told me, there is no health care reform passed, and what is still being batted around may not even include a public option
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #18
50. Meanwhile Rahm is telling all of us to shut up! How can you justify that?!
That ain't no hope or change. It's exactly what * did for 8 years! :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #17
41. Harriet Christian, is that you?
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 08:03 AM by geek tragedy
Or are you John Bolton?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
create.peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. at wall drug, south dakota, maybe....,nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. A promise of $80 billion, which can't be enforced, isn't $80 billion. (NT)
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff In Milwaukee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
35. Another one trillion four hundred and twenty billion....
and we'll have health care.

Thank God McCain didn't get elected and we'd have the White House appeasing corporate lobbyists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. We still don't know how much this impacts future anything if costs don't come down.
We can't limit their advertising, etc., real cost savings to us.

Let's get this passed. We already have too much oppostion over a plan just coming together. Imagine pharma not wanting this at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. We most certainly can limit their advertising on TV
and did so for 60 years, until Clinton changed the rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. What were the rules before Clinton? NT
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. DTC (Direct to consumer) advertising required full discosure
Prior to 1997, the FDA rules said, “Advertisements promoting the medical use of prescription drugs must contain a "brief summary" of all important information about the advertised drug, including its side effects, contraindications and effectiveness. In addition, advertisements broadcast over radio, TV or through telephone communications systems must include a "major statement" prominently disclosing all of the major risks associated with the drug.”

Prior to August of 1997, print advertisements for prescription drugs were able to meet the "brief summary" requirement by including the risk-related sections of drug labeling together with the advertising copy. As the drug companies looked wistfully at the enormous marketing potential of television, they saw that there was no way to provide the required information about the drug in 30 second or one minute television ads.

You're probably seen "brief summaries" before in magazines or as inserts with your Rx.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
16. Was this done in secret? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
19. Yeah, that's about the biggest of Obama's lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Now that's a bit too harsh
Edited on Fri Aug-07-09 01:06 PM by depakid
President Obama's having a go with some very powerful forces- and unlike a parliamentary system, he not only has to play the hand that he's been dealt- but the administration also has find a way to counteract the influences that PhARMA and the the "health" insurers have in various districts.

When the president spoke some months ago about persistence and turning a large ship around, it wasn't hard for anyone who's ever taken the helm of a lil a ski boat to know what he was talking about.

That deal is called inertia- and one doesn't need a physics class to "get" what that is.

Crash into the dock one time- or watch when some other fool does.

Point being that we can do this- if we really want and people all around the world are rooting for us.

Can we do this?








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
22. What's that got to do with lobbyists running the White House?
This is fucking stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpartanDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
23. White House Says It Cut No Deal With Drug Makers
Edited on Fri Aug-07-09 01:32 PM by SpartanDem
A senior White House aide told Democratic senators Thursday that the administration did not make a deal with the pharmaceutical lobby that would prevent Congress from using the government's clout to negotiate for lower drug prices, according to three Democratic senators who were in the meeting.

The New York Times had reported on Thursday morning that the White House affirmed that a deal barring price negotiations had been struck.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) asked two top White House aides, David Axelrod and deputy White House chief of staff Jim Messina, if the administration had cut such a deal with PhRMA.

"He says there's no deal. I take him at his word," Brown told the Huffington Post

It contradicts what Billy Tauzin said told the drug makers, but Billy Tauzin has not always been all that straight with the truth," said Brown, referring to PhRMA's president, a former Republican congressman from Louisiana. Tauzin pushed through the original law that barred the government from negotiating for lower prices. Shortly thereafter, he left to lobby for the drug makers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/06/dem-senators-white-house_n_253502.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. But most in this thread puts more credence in Tauzin than Brown
Edited on Fri Aug-07-09 02:02 PM by grantcart
Curious isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
24. You seem confident that this is true
even if it is, it just sounds like he cut a deal with them to cut drug costs by $80 billion dollars. How that equates to lobbyists is beyond me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
26. ****WHITE HOUSE SAYS IT CUT NO...NO DEAL !!!!****
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. tell that to our in house MSM trolls
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
31. What is really, really sad is that you deliberately choose to believe
"March to War" New York times, and Republican Tauzin over this administration.

That's what really really sad.

It's like the Corporate media and the GOP saw your gullible ass coming from miles away.
Just gargle, swallow and repeat as they applaud the chumps and the chumpettes.
Hoodwinking can be so easy in America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clear Blue Sky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
32. "We'll close Gitmo", "We'll get out of Iraq", etc etc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laugle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. Don't forget,
We'll get rid of 'DADT,' we'll get rid of Bush's tax cuts to the wealthiest people; we'll lower taxes for the middle class except smoker's of course; we'll create 500,000 new jobs; we'll keep unemployment down @ 8%; and the list goes on............

It's not surprising that people are starting to lose confidence in the POTUS and his policies.........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clear Blue Sky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #34
37. Another typical politician with empty promises...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. Another typical DU whiner. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #32
39. You live in a fact and analysis free world.
1) Congress defunded any attempt by him to close Gitmo.

2) His promise was to withdraw from Iraq carefully, not carelessly as you would like him to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #39
48. But....ummmm....
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 03:23 PM by polmaven
It's been 6 1/2 whole MONTHS? Where are those 500,000 jobs?


:sarcasm: (I figured, with my avatar, I'd better use this)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. I assume Hillary supporters are Obama supporters.
After all, they are part of the same party and administration.

The PUMAs were false Clinton supporters--they supported the symbol, not the real political figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. Thank you...
you are correct. Hillary supporters are Obama supporters. There are still many here, however, who will never put the primaries behind them, so I just find it easier to be sure. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
36. Some in W.H. say there was no deal, one person says there was. Congress says...
doesn't matter if there was...they didn't make a deal, so they wouldn't honor it, and they don't care if there was a deal.

I suspect there was some sort of agreement reached. Tauzin went to the press to report it. You gotta ask yourself...if there WAS a deal, would he really do that? Nah. He wouldn't. That would spoil the deal.

And that's the name of that tune.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aragorn Donating Member (784 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
38. kneel serf
I am your king - and you chose me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
invictus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
42. Obama is a chess player. LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newinnm Donating Member (323 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #42
46. Actually, I think he is an illusionist
What he has done is taken what is a very important issue, healthcare, and successfully used it as a shield to block peoples view to everything else that is going on in the country. What many dont see is the corporitism that is going on in the background.

Hey america..look over hear at healthcare while I do the bidding of the corporations where you arent looking.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #42
55. Chess....
A game where The Pawns are sacrificed to protect The Royalty.

Well YES! It does appear that Obama is playing Chess!

Sucks if you are a Pawn like me,
but the Wall Street Royalty and the Kings in the Health Insurance Industrial Complex like it just fine.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
43. that was a blatant lie. List of lobbyists in the Obama administration:
just as of February 3, 2009:

* Eric Holder, attorney general nominee, was registered to lobby until 2004 on behalf of clients including Global Crossing, a bankrupt telecommunications firm .
* Tom Vilsack, secretary of agriculture nominee, was registered to lobby as recently as last year on behalf of the National Education Association.
* William Lynn, deputy defense secretary nominee, was registered to lobby as recently as last year for defense contractor Raytheon, where he was a top executive.
* William Corr, deputy health and human services secretary nominee, was registered to lobby until last year for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a non-profit that pushes to limit tobacco use.
* David Hayes, deputy interior secretary nominee, was registered to lobby until 2006 for clients, including the regional utility San Diego Gas & Electric.
* Mark Patterson, chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, was registered to lobby as recently as last year for financial giant Goldman Sachs.
* Ron Klain, chief of staff to Vice President Joe Biden, was registered to lobby until 2005 for clients, including the Coalition for Asbestos Resolution, U.S. Airways, Airborne Express and drug-maker ImClone.
* Mona Sutphen, deputy White House chief of staff, was registered to lobby for clients, including Angliss International in 2003.
* Melody Barnes, domestic policy council director, lobbied in 2003 and 2004 for liberal advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the American Constitution Society and the Center for Reproductive Rights.
* Cecilia Munoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs, was a lobbyist as recently as last year for the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group.
* Patrick Gaspard, White House political affairs director, was a lobbyist for the Service Employees International Union.
* Michael Strautmanis, chief of staff to the president’s assistant for intergovernmental relations, lobbied for the American Association of Justice from 2001 until 2005.

This doesn’t count Tom Daschle, who never registered as a lobbyist but got paid millions for his political connections in pursuit of preferential treatment for his clients in the health-care industry.


http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/03/the-list-of-lobbyists-in-the-obama-administration/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newinnm Donating Member (323 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #43
47. Not sure Id be using that source
Hotair.com is run my Michelle Malkin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. oops, sorry. I did not know that. my apologies.
I googled and it was in a convenient list. There might be another source with a more up-to-date list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinb1212 Donating Member (76 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #49
52. Whatever...Was the list wrong.
You can hate the source,but.... is this list correct????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
53. Unrec. Blaming the white house for legislature.
Fundamental failure to understand US government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC