Pharmaceutical and medical device companies have contributed more to the campaigns of Democratic candidates than Republican candidates in the current election cycle, a "sharp reversal" from previous cycles and "one more sign of the campaign difficulties the GOP could face this November," the AP/Miami Herald reports.
In the current election cycle to date, Democratic candidates have received $7.4 million in campaign contributions from political action committees and individuals associated with pharmaceutical and medical device companies, compared with $7 million for Republican candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. During the last six election cycles, pharmaceutical and medical device companies on average contributed twice as much to the campaigns of Republican candidates than Democratic candidates.
In the presidential race, as of Feb. 28, pharmaceutical and medical device companies have contributed $639,124 to Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and $574,828 to Democratic candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), compared with $168,300 for presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.
"All three candidates have taken positions that rankle the drug industry," such as their support for proposals that would allow HHS to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies on prices for medications under the Medicare prescription drug benefit and permit prescription drug reimportation, according to the AP/Herald.
Move Toward Nonpartisanship?
Pfizer, often the largest contributor to campaigns among pharmaceutical companies, in the current election cycle has donated more than $862,000, 52% of which went to the campaigns of Democratic candidates, according to CRP. In an e-mail, Pfizer wrote, "We support candidates and policymakers in both parties who share our common goal of expanding access to medicines, improving health outcomes through medical innovation and delivering value to patients."
Billy Tauzin, CEO of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and former chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the shift in campaign contributions to Democratic candidates has resulted from a new focus on nonpartisanship by the pharmaceutical industry, as well as the increase in the number of Democratic lawmakers. He said, "It's only natural, if we adopt a nonpartisan position like we did three years ago, we'll find it easier to work with more and more Democrats who want to work with us for the good of patients."
Former HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson said that the shift in campaign contributions to Democratic candidates indicates the interest of the pharmaceutical industry in the health care debate. According to Thompson, pharmaceutical and medical device companies are "finally waking up to the fact they can't sit on the sidelines and they have to be a major player in both political parties" (Freking, AP/Miami Herald, 5/22).
Opinion Pieces
Summaries of two opinion pieces related to health care issues in the presidential election appear below.