Lot's of info that need to be put into its own website. Health care whores

[Maraya1969]

This information is not in an easy to read, CALL YOU CONGRESMEN RIGHT FUCKING NOW, type of format. I think if we could send it around to the overwhelming number of people who are not clued in to the direct link between the "NO-ers" and the sweat heart amount of money that they get, might inform them,(the ordinary citizen) that, yes indeed this is all about money and maybe you should make a phone call.


http://www.opensecrets.org/new/2009/09/committee-members-opposed-to-p.html

The Rockefeller Amendment

* The 15 lawmakers to vote against Rockefeller's version of the public option have collected $69,137 more, on average, from insurers (including HMOs and health services and health and accident insurers) through their candidate committees and leadership PACs since 1989 than the eight who voted for his amendment ($297,089 versus $227,952).
* The lawmakers who voted against Rockefeller's amendment have brought in $167,264 more, on average, from pharmaceutical and health care product companies since 1989 than those who supported it ($467,427 versus $297,163).
* The Democrats who voted against their colleague's proposal have collected $97,472 more, on average, from insurance companies since 1989 than the Democrats who voted for it ($325,424 versus $227,952).
* The Democrats who voted against Rockefeller's amendment have brought in $163,876 more, on average, from pharmaceutical and health product companies since 1989 than the Democrats who supported it ($461,038 versus $297,163).

The Schumer Amendement

* The 13 lawmakers who voted against Schumer's version of the public option have collected $93,177 more, on average, from insurers (including HMOs and health services and health and accident insurers) through their candidate committees and leadership PACs since 1989 than the 10 who voted for his amendment ($313,553 versus $220,376).
* The senators who voted against Schumer's amendment have brought in $210,470 more, on average, from pharmaceutical and health product companies since 1989, than those who supported it ($497,757 versus $287,286).
* The Democrats who voted against their colleague's proposal have collected $195,284 more, on average, from insurance companies since 1989, than the Democrats who voted for it ($415,660 versus $220,376).
* The Democrats who voted against Schumer's amendment have brought in $315,923 more from pharmaceutical and health product companies since 1989, than the Democrats who supported it ($603,210 versus $287,286).

Senate Finance Committee

* At $675,350, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the committee's chairman, has since 1989 collected more from health insurance companies, including HMOs and health services and health and accident insurers, than all but one other member of the committee -- Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.). And Kerry only collected big funds as a presidential candidate in 2004. Meanwhile, only Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has raised more from pharmaceutical and health product companies in that time ($1.6 million versus $1.1 million). Baucus voted against both amendments.
* Insurers have contributed $265,441, on average, to individual Democrats on the committee, while pharmaceutical and health product companies have donated $360,192, on average, to individual Democrats since 1989.
* Insurers have given $282,921, on average, to individual Republicans on the committee, while pharmaceutical and health product companies have contributed $466,121 since 1989.
* For a list of contributions from health-related industries to members of this committee, visit our health care tools committees database.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/health-care-reform/2009/07/health_care_continues_its_inte.html

New disclosure reports that began arriving Monday in Congress showed familiar players at the top of the health-care influence heap, including $6.2 million in lobbying by the dominant Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and $4 million by the American Medical Association.

Many health companies and associations increased their first-quarter lobbying expenditures, sometimes dramatically. The Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association upped its lobbying expenditures by a full million, to 2.8 million dollars in the second quarter; GlaxoSmithKline's spending jumped from $1.8 million to $2.3 million; Novartis grew from $1.4 million to $1.8 million; and Metlife Group reported $1.7 million, up nearly 50 percent. Allstate, which spent less than $900,000 on lobbying through March, boosted its spending to more than $1.5 million from April to June.

Others simply kept up the pace, including Johnson & Johnson at $1.6 million and America's Health Insurance Plans and Bayer Corp. both approaching $2 million in spending from April to June. The AMA has spent a total of $8.2 million on lobbying through June of this year.


Also I found out that the insurance industry gave more money to Democrats than Republicans this last year. I can't find out at OpenSecrets exactly who got what but I think it would be a good thing to make this information viral.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09

[Cleita]

1. Thanks Maraya1969.

Printed and :kick:

[BrklynLiberal]

2. You are now going to the greatest page...

[Maraya1969]

3. Wow that was quick. Michele Bachmann just said she wants some

news group to do an expose' and tell everyone who is Washington who is "Pro-American" or Anti-American"

Well forget the source and how insane that question is I would love to see a straight out list of who in Washington votes for their insurance money and who votes for the people's welfare.