Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The makings of a "secret" deal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 05:13 PM
Original message
The makings of a "secret" deal
Sunlight Foundation

On March 5, the White House held a meeting with major health care industry leaders to try to bring them to the table and see what could be done to gain their support. In attendance were Billy Tauzin, president, CEO and top lobbyist for PhRMA, Pfizer CEO Jeff Kindler, Americas Health Care Plans (AHIP) Chairman Karen Ignani, Tom Donohue of the Chamber of Commerce and Robert Wood Johnson Foundations Risa Lavizzo-Mourey. A day before the White House meeting Tauzin appeared on CNBC touting health care reform and promising to work closely with the Obama administration. In the interview he touted it as an optimistic plan, acknowledging that the industry did have a few problems but was glad to have a chance to discuss these. Some were caught dumb-founded by this apparent change of heart on behalf of an industry long adverse to health care reforms.



PBS, March 5, 2009

The president gathered some 120 people representing varying facets of the industry -- from doctors to patients to health insurers to the drug industry -- along with lawmakers to discuss ways to reform the U.S. health system.


How do you make a secret deal in a publicly announced meeting?

All the WH meetings leading up to the deal being announced was reported in the news, Sunlight's release has all the links and a time line.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. It's "made" bc so many whine
about it being secret that others who don't know the facts believe it.

I really appreciate your research and reports on the facts, PS..without you and the others who do this on here..where would we be? Hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. Folks like them some "Secret Plot" more than the truth......
They think they are advancing anything but a GOP Agenda in a long run, but that is exactly what they are advancing. Some do it willingly while others are along for the ride. Ain't nothing like a good old bi-partisan tar and feather party, especially when a Democrat is involved. Why ever believe the Democrat when you can believe everyone else? Especially if that's what you want to do....for whatever the reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GentryDixon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I wish I had another heart to give.
I just wish we could get past this damn "liberal" media wall. The Dems in Congress don't seem to want to fight back, so it is up to us. But how do we do it? MSNBC does not have enough saturation to get the truth past Faux lies. :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. In the October 2008 campaign speech, candidate Obama lashed out...
at politicians who had detailed HC plans that they abandoned once they were elected and went to DC to negotiate private deals with lobbyists.

From where I sit Obama did exactly what he campaigned against and it only took a few months.

According to you if I say that, then I am advancing the GOP's agenda. Now that is convenient for those who want to remain in power and go back on campaign promises to the people ... real nice.

:(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
31. Did you see the Newport News speech in October when candidate
Obama said Enough is Enough!

He was tired of seeing politicians spell out detailed HC plans only to see them be taken over by special interests once they got to DC.

His HC plan called for everyone to have the choice of a public or private plan, that changed to the public plan to be offered to only some people and then a statement in December that he never campaigned on the public option!!! Not sure what that choice talk was???

His HC plan called for Medicare to negotiate drug prices and to allow the importation of drugs, but then he made this deal for 80 billion instead of the 300 billion Detailed in his HC plan. Did he become the person he campaigned against?

Inquiring minds want to know what happened in the span of a few short months.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. So The Deal To Limit Pharma Revenue Cuts By $80 Billion Over 10 Years
Edited on Sun Feb-14-10 05:58 PM by MannyGoldstein
Was made public by the Obama administration?

Really?

I missed it, my bad!!!

Or... maybe it wasn't made public? Maybe it was... a secret?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. That wasn't the secret meeting the biweekly meeting with Tauzin
were the closed door meetings. He met with tauzin for months and we do not know what those meetings entailed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Nonsense.
Edited on Sun Feb-14-10 06:16 PM by ProSense
there were a total of 11 meetings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Please post a link to that 500 billion saving you mentioned several times. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
83. shhhh! haha...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. According to this AP report Few WH visits were made public
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Oh brother, from your link:
Edited on Sun Feb-14-10 06:47 PM by ProSense
The White House said Friday that Obama had attended only five meetings with executives on the list, and that all five were publicized: a March 5 White House forum on health care, May 11-12 White House meetings on health care, a tobacco legislation signing ceremony June 22 and an ABC News health care forum June 24 that was televised from the White House and whose guests were invited by ABC.

Other administration officials met with health care executives on the other dates on the list, White House spokesman Reid Cherlin said. On at least five of the days White House visits occurred, Obama was out of the country.


The meetings were public, and that is exactly what CREW revealed from the visitors' logs.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. Guess you missed the part where the facts didn't jive and CREW wasn't satisfied?
Perhaps you like this link about how things were actually done since you like the "sunlight"

http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2010/02/12/the-legac...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. CREW November:
Edited on Sun Feb-14-10 07:02 PM by ProSense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. And your point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vegiegals Donating Member (179 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #39
74. 'cut and paste' is her point. ..........
:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
28. Crickets again and again. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #8
66. As soon as Prosense says Nonsense, game over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #66
69. Or as soon as someone dares to ask if
(s)he is being paid to post here, someone hits the "delete" button.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:04 PM
Original message
It was the contents of the deal that no one could pin the white house down on.
That came out in august with a confirmation from Messina admitting that the rumors and Tauzins claims about the deal where true.

"In response, the industry successfully demanded that the White House explicitly acknowledge for the first time that it had committed to protect drug makers from bearing further costs in the overhaul. The Obama administration had never spelled out the details of the agreement.

We were assured: We need somebody to come in first. If you come in first, you will have a rock-solid deal, Billy Tauzin, the former Republican House member from Louisiana who now leads the pharmaceutical trade group, said Wednesday. Who is ever going to go into a deal with the White House again if they dont keep their word? You are just going to duke it out instead.

A deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed Mr. Tauzins account of the deal in an e-mail message on Wednesday night."

Tauzins claims:

"Mr. Tauzin said the administration had approached him to negotiate. They wanted a big player to come in and set the bar for everybody else, he said. He said the White House had directed him to negotiate with Senator Max Baucus, the business-friendly Montana Democrat who leads the Senate Finance Committee.

Mr. Tauzin said the White House had tracked the negotiations throughout, assenting to decisions to move away from ideas like the government negotiation of prices or the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada. The $80 billion in savings would be over a 10-year period. 80 billion is the max, no more or less, he said. Adding other stuff changes the deal.

After reaching an agreement with Mr. Baucus, Mr. Tauzin said, he met twice at the White House with Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff; Mr. Messina, his deputy; and Nancy-Ann DeParle, the aide overseeing the health care overhaul, to confirm the administrations support for the terms."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insur...

All confirmed by the white house, for the first time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. This puts Congress in a really bad position of either being a rubber stamp
for whatever deals are made with the lobbyists or actively fighting the President. Of course then people will accuse them of not being supportive etc. etc. ...

"...In an interview on Wednesday, Representative Raul M. Grijalva, the Arizona Democrat who is co-chairman of the House progressive caucus, called Mr. Tauzins comments disturbing.

We have all been focused on the debate in Congress, but perhaps the deal has already been cut, Mr. Grijalva said. That would put us in the untenable position of trying to scuttle it.

He added: It is a pivotal issue not just about health care. Are industry groups going to be the ones at the table who get the first big piece of the pie and we just fight over the crust?

Happy Valentine's Day

:)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Yes, as both Nelson from fl. and Dorgan found out. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Yes, either you go along with the deals or you want the status quo...
and by extension people to die.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
12. BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. From your link-
"according to a source close to the negotiations who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of White House sensitivity about the talks."


Of course anyone who took a claim by an unknown source seriously back then was raked over the coals by the same folk in this thread who are now claiming those same unknown sources are legitimate.

That's cheating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. What nonsense.
Talk about spinning. The meetings weren't secret and here you are citing anonymouse sources talking directly about it, which proves the point.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. Then you need to lay out in detail what exactly were the terms of this 80 billion
dollar deal.

We had the same conversation back in September, but you could never spell out the details.

Post links to exactly what the deal entailed.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. The meetings weren't secret.
The content was. I already posted proof of that. Messina, speaking for the president, said as much in august for the first time as a result of Tauzins demands.

The facts speak for themselves and all the twisting and turning isn't going to change that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Bingo ! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. There was nothing secret about the meetings or the deal.
It was $80 billion, 10 years. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Except the white house would not confirm until 5 months later.
You can't be this thick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. They wouldn't confirm what was announced and being reported for months?
Ridiculous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. You are. wow. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Tell us the exact details then n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. Here, warning it's not the NYT in August
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Did the WH promise not to push for their campaign promises of allowing
Medicare to negotiate directly for drug prices and for the importation of drugs from other countries?

I do not see that part of the deal mentioned, although that is what has been reported numerous times and the WH has backed off from pushing their detailed HC campaign plans.

Why? Was it part of this deal, it is not mentioned here.

With all the boomers moving to Medicare this is a big deal!





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. And the August article is important as well, as much as you would like
to try and dismiss what was being said and/or denied by the WH.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. The claim was that the details of the deal wasn't announced.
It was announced. No matter how much people want to remain in denial.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. Sins of omission.
The pretend deal from your link:

"The agreement, which was reached between Sen. Baucus, Administration officials, and the nations pharmaceutical companies, will ultimately reduce the price of prescription drugs by half for millions of Americas seniors. As part of the upcoming health care reform legislation, drug manufacturers that participate in Medicare Part D will either pay a rebate to Medicare or offer a substantial discount of at least 50 percent on prescription drugs to seniors who fall within the infamous "doughnut hole" payments between $2700 and $6153.75 not covered by Medicare. The deal will help close this unfair gap in coverage, providing relief for millions of seniors who have been burdened by these out-of-pocket expenses, making it easier for them to get the prescriptions that they need.
In addition to providing half-price discounts, the pharmaceutical companies will offer other discounts and savings to total an $80 billion reduction in costs. The President said this historic compromise marks a turning point in the journey towards health care reform that will lower costs for all Americans:
So as part of the health care reform I expect Congress to enact this year, Medicare beneficiaries whose spending falls within this gap will now receive a discount on prescription drugs of at least 50 percent from the negotiated price their plan pays. It's a reform that will make prescription drugs more affordable for millions of seniors, and restore a measure of fairness to Medicare Part D. It's a reflection of the importance of this single step for America's seniors that it has earned the support of AARP, which has been fighting for years to address this anomaly in the system on behalf of older Americans. AARP is committed, as I am, to achieving health care reform by the end of this year. And I'm committed to continuing to work with AARP to ensure that any reforms we pursue are carried out in a way that protects America's seniors, who know as well as anyone what's wrong with our health care system and why it's badly in need of reform.
Our goal our imperative is to reduce the punishing inflation in health care costs while improving patient care. And to do that we're going to have to work together to root out waste and inefficiencies that may pad the bottom line of the insurance industry, but add nothing to the health of our nation. To that end, the pharmaceutical industry has committed to reduce its draw on the health care system by $80 billion over the next 10 years as part of overall health care reform."



And the real deal the white house confirmed was made from a NYT article in August:

"Mr. Tauzin said the administration had approached him to negotiate. They wanted a big player to come in and set the bar for everybody else, he said. He said the White House had directed him to negotiate with Senator Max Baucus, the business-friendly Montana Democrat who leads the Senate Finance Committee.

Mr. Tauzin said the White House had tracked the negotiations throughout, assenting to decisions to move away from ideas like the government negotiation of prices or the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada. The $80 billion in savings would be over a 10-year period. 80 billion is the max, no more or less, he said. Adding other stuff changes the deal.

After reaching an agreement with Mr. Baucus, Mr. Tauzin said, he met twice at the White House with Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff; Mr. Messina, his deputy; and Nancy-Ann DeParle, the aide overseeing the health care overhaul, to confirm the administrations support for the terms."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insur...


No negotiation of drug prices and no re-importation. Nice of the president not to mention that in his statement on the white house site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #44
48. "No negotiation of drug prices and no re-importation." Stop making things up.
The President supports frug re-importation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. A person can say anything, it is what is done that counts and he changed his mind
in less than six months from taking office on major pieces of his HC plan.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #48
53. wrong.
Mr. Tauzin said the White House had tracked the negotiations throughout, assenting to decisions to move away from ideas like the government negotiation of prices or the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada. The $80 billion in savings would be over a 10-year period. 80 billion is the max, no more or less, he said. Adding other stuff changes the deal.

The white house confirmed Tauzin's statement so perhaps the white house is making things up. I certainly am not.

Giving an idea lip service and supporting through action is two different things. The president struck a deal which dropped drug price negotiation and re-importation with phrma. He forgot to mention that on the white house website statement which is why a few months later they where forced to admit it by Tauzin who wouldn't honor the deal unless the administration fessed up publicly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. This is simply revisionism
The President supports drug reimportation so claiming it's part of some deal is ridiculous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. It's NOT part of the deal, in fact not just any deal...
It's NOT part of the PHRMA deal. Who do you think decided that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. No one said re-importation is part of the deal.
No one ever did. Congress voted on two bills, they failed. The President and Congress are still going to push for its passage.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #58
65. And conveniently no one said it was negotiated away until pushed by Tauzin last august.
Might be something the american people might want to know. As far as the president and congress pushing for it's passage, isn't that what you said about the public option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulfcoastliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #48
78. So you are saying that Tauzin is lying/making things up in the article.
Where he says: Mr. Tauzin said the White House had tracked the negotiations throughout, assenting to decisions to move away from ideas like the government negotiation of prices or the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada.

"Move away from ideas..." ie, we'll provide "savings" of $80 billion - but only if you agree to drop price negotiation & allowing re-importation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #41
49. And what suddenly happened to the campaign promises? They conveniently
got lost when this deal was made??? Do you have a bridge to sell ... because I'm not buying.









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #49
56. Don't you know, it's ok to lie yourself into office and exaggerate
your claims of progressive populism on the campaign trail. Everyone is expected to be sophisticated enough to know you are not telling the whole truth.

Then after you get into office you can once again make statements regardless as to whether your actions prove your words. All words are accepted as facts. Actions which contradict your statements are to be ignored.

Heads I win, tails you lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #56
60. Great summary, when people objected to the Afghanistan escalation it was
part of the campaign, if you mention other aspects of the campaign that are not being followed it is ignored...all by the same posters.


"...All words are accepted as facts. Actions which contradict your statements are to be ignored.

Heads I win, tails you lose."

:thumbsup:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #60
64. Yes, case in point
During the campaign-

Obama referring to Tauzin:

The pharmaceutical industry wrote into the prescription drug plan that Medicare could not negotiate with drug companies. And you know what, the chairman of the committee, who pushed the law through, went to work for the pharmaceutical industry making $2 million a year. The screen fades to black to inform the viewer that, Barack Obama is the only candidate who refuses Washington lobbyist money, while the candidate continues his lecture, Imagine that. Thats an example of the same old game playing in Washington. You know, I dont want to learn how to play the game better, I want to put an end to the game playing.

http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2010/02/12/the-legac... /

After the campaign -

"Mr. Tauzin said the administration had approached him to negotiate. They wanted a big player to come in and set the bar for everybody else, he said. He said the White House had directed him to negotiate with Senator Max Baucus, the business-friendly Montana Democrat who leads the Senate Finance Committee.

Mr. Tauzin said the White House had tracked the negotiations throughout, assenting to decisions to move away from ideas like the government negotiation of prices or the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada. The $80 billion in savings would be over a 10-year period. 80 billion is the max, no more or less, he said. Adding other stuff changes the deal.

After reaching an agreement with Mr. Baucus, Mr. Tauzin said, he met twice at the White House with Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff; Mr. Messina, his deputy; and Nancy-Ann DeParle, the aide overseeing the health care overhaul, to confirm the administrations support for the terms."

...A deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed Mr. Tauzins account of the deal in an e-mail message on Wednesday night.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insur...


So Obama says he supports drug importation and bargaining drug prices apparently during the campaign and afterwards BUT they are negotiated away with his ok from the get go at the behest of PHRMA.

We are now expected to ignore that he negotiated them away from the start and just accept that he supports the ideas as good enough. Forget that the president goes to the negotiations representing out best interests and proceeds to act opposite of that, forget that he is there to do the people work on our behalf and not as PHRMA's best friend and ally, forget everything he claimed to believe on the campaign trail, after all no one tells the truth campaigning, and just accept that his post election words are all we need and all that matters. There is no responsibility to live up to anything said unless it's seen as $politically$ advantageous inside the beltway bubble.

Repeat that process often enough on issue after issue and you'll have everyone's heads spinning as they try to make sense out of the illogical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #64
80. In the future when we here about entitlement spending we can look back
to this deal and wonder what would have been if Obama and the Dems had stood their ground.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrToast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. So you're okay that he made a deal with Pharma because it was public
But in this thread over here you're saying it's actually the Congress that is supposed to pass legislation: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Make up your mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. The President makes behind the scenes deals that the Congress should rubber stamp.n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff In Milwaukee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #7
79. Where should the President make these deals?
In the friggin' Rose Garden?

The Obama Administration held meetings. The whole world apparently knows about them. We know that substance of those meetings.

Some secret...I'm still trying to figure out how this becomes some nefarious plot.

The Obama Administration was trying to leverage support from the pharmaceutical industry to get health care reform done. It's not terribly different that a prosecutor who offers one defendent a lighter sentence in return for testifying against an accomplice.

So what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. What exactly do you object to:
the deal or the the fact that it saves $80 billion?

What the hell does this have to do with Congress passing legislation?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. That Medicare will not be able to negotiate drug prices and save 300 billion
well at least that is what Obama said during the campaign.

Keep on ignoring that fact.

HC promises are dismissed, Afghanistan campaign promises are kept.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
40. So it was with pharma and it was open..BFD.
President Obama made a deal to save $80Billion and the self annointed purists are complaining because it was with pharma :scared:Boo :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
13. But, but, isn't this just like the secret meeting that Cheney held
with the energy companies that the Sec of the Interior was not even allowed to attend and that Cheney tried to hide? Aren't they the same? Isn't Obama just like Bush?

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Isn't that what we are supposed to believe?
Cause that will help us a whole lot more than anything else.
It will do _____________ ?, we don't really know.
That 's not the point of course,
the point is that a Bipartisan witchhunt is always so much more fun.
In fact, it may be all we know!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
42. Look how many arguments are being presented
to avoid the fact that up to now some people were trying to claim the meetings were secret.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Where did I say that? nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. Is your name in the comment? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #46
54. Good to know my arguments are valid and based on facts. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. The DETAILS of the deal were not revealed...big difference, but when
anyone points that out you just ignore it and have your own conversation with your own facts.

Some things never change.









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. All you do is talk in circles. The deal was announced in June. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. You cannot even comprehend what is being said and just continue
with the administration can do no wrong talk.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #47
59. "Details", you mean like what refreshments were served?
The results were released. A blow by blow account is unnecesary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. Going back on campaign promises does matter, refreshments not so
much and no reason to reduce the actions to trivial matters.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Remember, you're the one that mentioned "details". Now you're
changing your argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #62
63. I was not talking about drinks, reportedly the deal meant the WH would
not push for drug negotiation by Medicare and importation of drugs in exchange for 150 million in ads to support HC reform.

That is not mentioned in the WH links posted by Prosense.

So tell us what did the administration give away in return for the ads supporting reform?

I could care less about details such as refreshments!









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
20. Aside from the miserable public policy that resulted- Obama's pandering created a problem with
public perception that no amount of tome deaf spin will alleviate.

Taken with public statements and similar deals, the administration now has serious credibility issues that aren't likely to ease any time soon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-14-10 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
45. Rahm Emmanuel pulled them aside and gave them a contract under the table.
I don't know how it works. Maybe they do voodoo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
67. "How do you make a secret deal in a publicly announced meeting?"
How do you do that? You HOLD the meeting behind closed doors after announcing the fact that it's taking place.

Get a grip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
68. how do you make a secret deal in a public meeting?
easy. Just don't tell anyone you made the deal. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
70. Thanks, ProSense. KnR for a clearly unpopular opinion and facts...
... since my Rec still leaves you in negative territory.

Hekate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vegiegals Donating Member (179 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #70
73. At least some here on
DU have learned to think for themselves rather than to fall for a misleading cut and paste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeanpalmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 03:11 AM
Response to Original message
71. Bottom line is
we won't be getting any real health care reform. But the threat of it strung out over nine months scared up millions of dollars in campaign contributions, which was probably the real goal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vegiegals Donating Member (179 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
72. During the campaign Obama was on the stump complaining about the
donut hole and mocking congress --then he makes a deal with big Pharm so that the donut hole is protected once he is President.
That is a betrayal and you cut and paste OP is misleading at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
75. Thanks Proey. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vegiegals Donating Member (179 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
76. "On Christmas Eve, the bill passed the Senate with the PhRMA deal fully intact......"...
Edited on Mon Feb-15-10 09:13 AM by vegiegals
This is what we get for Obama going back on his word!!



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-blumenthal/the-legac...


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid introduced the final bill, with the cap in place, on November 19. Debate began on Dec. 3, and with it come one more attempt by members to change the terms of the deal. Senator Byron Dorgan introduced an amendment that would allow for drug re-importation, but as the date for voting drew near, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) released a letter objecting to the proposal that echoed pharmaceutical industry talking points: "...as currently written, the resulting structure would be logistically challenging to implement and resource intensive. In addition, there are significant safety concerns." Dorgan's amendment was defeated with numerous Democrats previously in support of reimportation switching to "no" votes.

On Christmas Eve, the bill passed the Senate with the PhRMA deal fully intact.////////// ;( ;( ;(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #76
77. Glory days!!1!
Welcome back...again.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
81. Crickets again Prosense - see #11. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-15-10 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
82. It's absurd for the WH to grovel for the"support" of an industry it needs to regulate...
Edited on Mon Feb-15-10 06:38 PM by polichick
How amusing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Dec 27th 2014, 03:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC