Political favors? They're ours now when we take it
During the latest Democratic presidential debate senator and presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders said this (transcript):
SANDERS:
Thank you. As we honor the extraordinary life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., it’s important not only that we remember what he stood for, but that we pledge to continue his vision to transform our country.
As we look out at our country today, what the American people understand is we have an economy that’s rigged, that ordinary Americans are working longer hours for lower wages, 47 million people living in poverty, and almost all of the new income and wealth going to the top one percent.
SANDERS: And then, to make a bad situation worse, we have a corrupt campaign finance system where millionaires and billionaires are spending extraordinary amounts of money to buy elections.
This campaign is about a political revolution to not only elect the president, but to transform this country.
In a posting by our own OPOL..
..is a video with this screenshot I’ve posted below:
Health industry contributions: only 35 percent of campaign contributions made by individuals and institutions in the health care industry has gone to Democratic candidates in 2005-2006, but senator Hillary Rodham Clinton ranks second among the top recipients | @ minute 00:58 of the posted video.
Back then:
July 12 2006: 10:41 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The health-care industry, once a fierce critic of then-first lady Hillary Clinton's reform plans for the sector, is now lavishing campaign contributions on the U.S. senator ahead of her expected presidential bid.
According to Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group that tracks campaign finance filings, Clinton has received $781,112 in contributions from the health-care sector during the current election cycle, which makes her the No. 2 recipient of funds from that sector, behind only Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who received $977,354.
More recently:
— Clinton named the drug and insurance industries among her “enemies,” but has accepted millions in donations from them | By Kimberly Leonard Oct. 14, 2015, at 4:25 p.m.
When asked during the Democratic presidential debate what enemies she was most proud to have made, Hillary Clinton named pharmaceutical and health insurance companies at the top of her list. But that hasn’t stopped the Democratic front-runner from accepting millions of dollars in campaign cash from both industries in the course of her political career, financial disclosure records show.
Since her first bid for Senate in 2000, Clinton has accepted nearly $1 million from drug and health companies and more than $2.7 million from the insurance field and its related sectors, according to an analysis of public records from the Center for Responsive Politics. While the analysis did not include campaign finance figures for the 2016 cycle, some of the same donors and patterns can be seen in Clinton’s lone financial disclosure filed in July.
Contributions tied to some of the same firms that gave to her 2008 presidential campaign appear in the latest disclosure, including donations connected to pharmaceutical companies Pfizer Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.; and insurers Aetna Inc., MetLife Inc. and Centene Corp., the latter of which is among Clinton’s largest donors this year.
This is exactly what Bernie Sanders warned of. The status quo. “Wall Street owns congress”. The heavy influence of corporate lobby money on our politicians today. Why our government answer to those lobbyists and not to the people.
It’s just the way it is and has always been. “We’ve got to work withing the system we have” blah, blah, blah
We can talk about pragmatism, inevitability, poll numbers, endorsements and a whole bunch of stuff.. and have done so. But I’ve always believed that our goal as progressive activists was to elect more and better Dems. To set a higher standard and fight for it. To seek transformational change. Not transactional efforts watered down with compromise to suit a political foe with an agenda based almost exclusively on the directive of opposing compromise. All compromise
Both leading Dem presidential candidates agree that universal healthcare is the very best way to protect the people of this country. The vast majority of people agree. It has been polled many times over many years.
Yet only one of today’s democratic presidential candidates believes in fighting for universal single-payer healthcare; that it is a right of all people, and is willing to end the dominance of the private-for-profit insurance cartel that while controlling access to medical services and siphoning off $billions in profits, adds zero medical value to the delivery of those services. In fact, the profit motive acts as a negative incentive to providing needed medical care.
There are other fundamental differences in visions for the future from our leading democratic presidential candidates; Glass-Steagall redux is one. Breaking up the biggest banks another. Working to over-turn Citizens United. Campaign finance reform. Creating jobs investing in infrastructure and clean renewable energy as a public (not private) utility, A ‘New Deal’ type redux (WPA, CCC etc.). Reining in massive military spending, tackling the enormous wealth disparity, There are many more. Some major. Some less so but all of them important
Both of out leading democratic candidates are infinitely more qualified than the bloviating con artists making up the republican field of corporate shills running for the oval office.
The country is calling for change on both the right and the left of the spectrum. It seems to me that if elect-ability is as, or more important than the goals sought, we should consider the enthusiasm that is taking hold all over the country for a candidate that promises to challenge the status quo like we’ve not seen in many years. And also consider what positive effects that will carry all the way down ballot too.
Why not help ourselves to some of those “political favors” for a change (?)
— imo — and will be back in a while :)
Comments are closed on this story.