Obama's Health Care Industry Funded Campaign

Remember in the campaign when Obama promised that, as president, he'd "finally challenge the special interests" on health care?  Turns out that just as he was promising to challenge them, he was also piling up donations from the health care industry:

A new figure, based on an exclusive analysis created for Raw Story by the Center for Responsive Politics, shows that President Obama received a staggering $20,175,303 from the healthcare industry during the 2008 election cycle, nearly three times the amount of his presidential rival John McCain. McCain took in $7,758,289, the Center found.

A year into his presidency, the Senate has produced legislation that, according to no less than Arianna Huffington, is determined to "leave no special interest behind." Raw Story's entire report can be found here.

Comments

[Joe M]

Brilliant! He tricked them into paying for his campaign, and now he's going to stick it to them. What a man of the people.

[Paul]

Why do I feel like the one being stuck?

[setnaffa]

Smile, you're feeling the power of Hope and Change...

[rrr]

I don't think he's planning on sticking it to them since he'll need them again. Who's he going to stick it to? I've stocked up on lube and have been practicing grabbing my ankles because it's a sure as hell he's going to stick it to me.

[Mike DeSoto]

now he's going to stick it to them

Yeah, that's why they are shelling out big bucks to try to get Coakley elected. Because they love it when you stick it to them!

[?]

"Let me put it this way," he added. "Single-payer advocates literally couldn't get into the White House.

Pfft. The "healthcare industry" is a single-payer advocate. A politically created monopsony doesn't work like the theoretical "market" one. The seller can buy the price (for about $20,175,303).

[Old Mexican]

Remember in the campaign when Obama promised that, as president, he'd "finally challenge the special interests" on health care?

Hey, he did challenge them: He challenged them to dole out the most to his campaign. Sorta like a game between us friends, you know . . .

[Jeff]

Obama is starting to sound like Brittany Spears ... Ooops, I did it again ...

Obama is the Malli Vanilli President

[Johnny Longtorso]

blame it on the....
blame it on the....
blame it on the....
blame it on the....
blame it on the....

[P B]

Bushies?

[dirty_darryl]

well, now after Obama's successful healthcare legislation, we can rest easier, and continue to reform decades of big industry-benefiting policy.

[Paul]

LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!

[Editor]

You know, a simple en-dash between "Industry" and "Funded" would have been so helpful.

[Old Mexican]

[Sorry I bring up this conversation, but the economics are important to shut up anti-market ignorami]

Re: Tony,

I know you prefer market-based rationing. But it's limiting demand on something whose demand is not based on what people want to pay but what people need to pay.

Economically, there is no difference, Tony. You are however relying on emotional arguments. A price is an indicator of scarcity. If you have one MRI machine and 10 clients, and you cannot use the machine on more than one client at a time, the price for one MRI for one person will reflect this economic (and PHYSICAL) fact. The Price IS a rationing metric, it tells you just how much of something is available.

If there are suddenly 20 clients for the same MRI machine, the subsequent price WILL reflect this - because the machine still handles only ONE client at a time. The higher price sends signals to other suppliers to get into the business of offering MRI services and invest in machines. So maybe ONCE the price of an MRI may be double than at other times of lower demand, but once other suppliers make their offer, the price comes down.

Instead, a government-run system will not operate under a price system; rather, it operates on rules derived from political expediency. The true demand for services cannot be known, or more likely, may not be met, because investment will not depend on entrepreneurs but on budgets, and most budgets end up paying for pensions and other liabilities, not new machines or doctors.

The price system actually serves to SAVE lives because more machines or more services allocate through entrepreneurship to the places of higher demand.

The marketplace makes a calculation on acceptable deaths too, and it is much less favorable to human life.

Except that the market does nothing - the market being simply the name given to the network formed by everybody that freely trades. The decision is thus not centralized, but totally decentralized. Since the actors would be the same people that get sick, then the decisions are made directly by them AND their suppliers. Governments centralize the supply and cannot do more than guess on the demand (in lieu of a price system), hence the long queues.

[hmm]

They are getting what they paid for. Which makes for a sad panda.

[P Brooks]

and now he's going to stick it to them.

Yup- that's why their stocks went down up.

[Paul]

No, that's why unemployment has gone way down.

[anime]

this is all information is good and i am looking all comments also good keep it up

[louboutin shoes]

Enjoy your passion for Louboutin shoes in http://www.mybootsforsale.com You can surf our web site and feel completely safe. A wide variety of design styles . High quality Christian Louboutin Pumps cutting and sewing. We promise that you will get the cheap and high quality Christian Louboutin.

[louboutin shoes]

Enjoy your passion for Louboutin shoes in http://www.mybootsforsale.com You can surf our web site and feel completely safe. A wide variety of design styles . High quality Christian Louboutin Pumps cutting and sewing. We promise that you will get the cheap and high quality Christian Louboutin.

[charles leboweitz]

This is why other officials are going against it because not only does the individual health insurance reform bill infringe on US citizen rights it is also supporting corporations and hurting many small businesses.

As an example so citizens are forced to buy health insurance from insurance corporations that say they are being robbed do the the MLR ratio. Meanwhile the MLR allows the corporations to say to their brokers (the main source of new business enrollment) that we have to cut your income by 60%. Where did all that money go. It went right back into the corporations pockets because they don't need brokers any more because their main source of new enrollment will come from the governments health care reform bill.