Oh, That’s Where Eshoo and Barton Were in the NYT Story!
Earlier today, I noted the curious absence of Anna Eshoo and Joe Barton in the NYT story about Genentech writing speeches for those supporting biologics in the health care reform bill.
(Note two people missing from this list: Eshoo and Barton, the measure’s co-sponsors.)
Thankfully, LittleSis figured out where Eshoo and Barton were hiding in that story.
But the Times misses a key piece of the puzzle: two of the Genentech lobbyists at the firm that wrote the pharma-friendly talking points are ex-staffers to Anna Eshoo and Joe Barton, co-sponsors of a key measure in the bill designed to benefit Big Pharma.
Nick Kolovos, a former legislative aide to Eshoo, and Jeffrey Mackinnon, former legislative director in the office of Joe Barton, have both lobbied on behalf of Genentech this year for the firm Ryan, Mackinnon (of which Mackinnon is a co-founder).
Oh, that explains it!! Their revolving door staffers were some of the people writing the speeches for those 42 parrots.
Click through to see how Bart Stupak has a tie here, as well.
Update: I asked the folks at LittleSis about Jay Inslee’s involvement in all of this. And got directed to Nick Shipley–Jay Inslee’s Legislative Director for the last several years, and now lobbying on biologics for Roche with the McManus Group.
crap.
Explains why Eshoo isn’t addressing substantive queries from her constituent. She’s really giving Baron Hill a run for worst representation in my life.
Jesus H. Christ! What Lobbyist isn’t working for Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech?
Arbusto asked:
“Jesus H. Christ! What Lobbyist isn’t working for Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech?”
Up here in Canuckistan it would appear that those would the ones that are instead working for GlaxoSmithKline.
The (opposition)Liberals and NDP also zeroed in on the contract the government entered into with GlaxoSmithKline to produce the H1N1 vaccine.
“Getting 50 million doses from one company is like trying to fill 50 million cups of water from the same tap,” NDP health critic Judy Wasylycia-Leis charged.
There are five different suppliers of the vaccine in the United States.
And then she pointed out that former (Conservative Prime Minister Stephen) Harper aide Ken Bossenkool is a lobbyist for GSK.
“Is he the person who has been reassuring the government that GSK would have no problem delivering a speedy supply of the vaccine?”
They’re everywhere…..
.
.
Per Opens Secrets:
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientlbs.php?lname=Roche+Holdings&year=2009
And this is why term limits for elected representatives are bad.
Because staffers with longer institutional memory would end up running the office for short-term representatives, and there would be no term limits on staffers.
Imagine all Congressional staffers being former lobbyists with an escape hatch via revolving door back to lobbying, running Congress…
Updated the post with Jay Inslee’s revolving door lobbyist, Nick Shipley.
What should a Firepup say to Inslee (who normally promotes the progressive perspective) if such a ‘Pup were to drop a dime on their rep…?
The comments in the last thread were helpful. I see that the discussion centers around the period of exclusivity and the language differences between Schumer and Eshoo. I suppose Inslee’s interest lies with the UW-Pharma nexus. Would it be reasonable to suggest that the University would benefit from a revenue-sharing arrangement as opposed to a Pharma monopoly?
I’m pretty ignorant about biotech even though my neighbors are research docs.
OK new thread and it’s a doozy!
Sigh. Yet more evidence that we are sliding into Fascism (Government by the corporations, for the corporations, and of the corporations).
Bob in AZ
Yet more evidence of why all of us should contribute to the “Marcy Fund.”
I hope as folks draw up their “Christmas lists,” however short or long they may be, they will say, “instead of giving me another piece of useless crap that will just further clog up my house [and cost you time, $$ and gas to find], just donate to the Marcy Fund — in my name or in yours.”
I’d sure like to see that “thermometer” hit $150,000 by Jan. 1.
People behaving with this sort of naked Corporate and personal financial interests at stake only do so when public disclosure presents no Risk to themselves or their employing corporation.
It’s a very important initial step for this society to have the nytimes, chaparoned by jane hamsher, emptywheel, littlesis, et al., cut on the lights to reveal this industry/congress bank-account copulation.
Now that we have full exposure,
What I want to know is what is the congressional leadership going to do about this use of the congress for an anti-bill-of-attainder?
My god they really are an incestuos bunch of dirtbags aren’t they.
No wonder I’ve all but given up on America……
This is how things have been done in Washington, for donkey years. None of it stands close scrutiny. Good, tho, for building an airtight case against Eshoo tossers.
Oooooh, revel in the transparencyness!
Soon they will be arguing over who has the best lobbyist to write their bills. Sorta like hairdressers. :)
Oh, I thought they all shook their hair for the same stylist acc. to Marcy’s next post…Don’t hate them because they’re pitiful.
I showed up late this morning. Hope I can still get me a copy of those talking points!
Maybe there should be a law against revolving doors for staffers as well as politicians…that no Congressional staffer may join up with an organization that lobbies Congress for 2-4 years….and that no staffer may lobby their former employer.
Oh wait…maybe that’s why Eshoo and Barton are not on “the list”. They had to abide by some sort of restriction. But one can guess that both Eshoo and Barton definitely got the message, by voice, at some Starbucks somewhere.
is jane harman filing supportive CRecord stuff for pharma?
This is precisely why Republicans push term limits for Congresscritters — they (or their corporate backers) can afford to subsidize Congressional staffs to the point where it literally doesn’t matter who officially holds a given office. The actual representative can be someone as dumb as a post. In fact, the dumber the reps are, the better, from the GOP/corporate point of view: It makes them more dependent on the staff (and therefore much less likely to switch parties or even deviate much from the party line).
Anyone for tennis?
I thought everyone had gone back to sleep.
Welcome to the Corporate States Of America or USA Inc.
Woah. You mean the NYT might actually be worth reading again? Thanks for pointing that out–now that IS news!