Let he who is without sin (prescription drug vote)

[BainsBane]

On Thursday, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont excoriated thirteen of his Democratic colleagues for opposing a non-binding budget amendment he and Sen. Amy Klobuchar proposed to create a deficit-neutral reserve fund in order to allow Americans to import cheaper prescription medications from Canada. . . .So why on earth would 13 Democrats oppose it?

Sen. Sanders thinks he knows the reason. “The Democratic Party has got to make it very clear that they are prepared to stand up to powerful special interests like the pharmaceutical industry and like Wall Street,” he said (bold mine), “and they’re not going to win elections and they’re not going to be doing the right thing for the American people unless they have the guts to do that.” It’s a facile explanation, a riff on a message he’d recited hundreds of times while on the campaign trail. . . .

Last year, during his campaign for President, Bernie Sanders received $309,575 from the pharmaceutical industry. Of the 100 members of the Senate, he ranked third in donations from the industry. . . .

Sanders’s explanation may sound good- that this was nothing more than a coup by the monied interests of Big Pharma; it certainly appeals to his base. But it’s nothing more than a petulant excuse to cover for his failure to craft smart legislation on an issue with which almost everyone agrees in principle. . . .

Well, for starters, Sanders couldn’t figure out if he wanted to create a fund to import drugs from Canada or the entire world. In its initial iteration, his amendment sought to establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for the importation of drugs from “Canada and other countries.” Amy Klobuchar subsequently cleaned up the language and eliminated “other countries” from its title.

But, aside from the confusion about the scope of this proposed reserve fund, the primary reason it failed is that Sanders misapprehended the mechanisms necessary to establish an importation process that conforms with FDA guidelines. It’s not enough to say “these drugs must be safe;” there needs to be funding for quality control and compliance, which was never addressed.

https://cenlamar.com/2017/01/14/if-bernie-sanders-cares-about-cheaper-drugs-he-should-stop-smearing-his-colleagues-for-rejecting-his-flawed-amendment/

The demand for cheaper drugs from Canada has already created a boutique industry of online pharmacies that market almost exclusively to Americans, and most of these pharmacies are fraudulent. The drugs they sell may be deadly. Recently, a Canadian drug manufacturer was caught selling fake cancer drugs to American doctors.

And that is precisely why it’s so important to get this legislation right, from the beginning.

If Bernie Sanders is serious about reducing drug prices, he should stop smearing his colleagues for rejecting his flawed amendment and instead start listening to them.

[HoneyBadger]

1. Nope

The exception is not the rule. Be perfect even if it costs more lives than it saves? No thank you.

[BainsBane]

2. I don't follow your point

What do you mean?

[Dustlawyer]

3. What's your solution?

Which Senators that you support are working on this problem?

[BainsBane]

4. My solution

is that Senators take legislation seriously, that they craft it with the goal of its being passed rather than as a club to beat the Democratic Party. As the linked piece makes clear, other legislation proposed that day did include necessary safeguards. Why didn't Sanders incorporate that into his amendment?

What does it matter "which Senator"? The GOP controls the congress. The purpose of this amendment was exactly what Sanders did with it.

My solution is that Senators quit using congressional resources to score personal political points and focus on doing the work they are paid for. That means taking legislation seriously. Clearly opening up imports from "other countries" was never a serious proposal. We saw the something quite similar with his healthcare proposal during the primary. The numbers didn't add up, even on the summary page.

Our nation is in crisis, and Sanders reserves his greatest criticism for the Democratic Party. He says we are supposed to listen to Trump voters, but he won't listen to Democrats in the Senate. The GOP voted to take medical insurance away from millions of Americans, and Sanders and his supporters directed their anger toward Democrats who didn't vote for a poorly crafted amendment that was never intended to become law. How does that help Americans losing their insurance?

[Dustlawyer]

5. What I thought.

His actions bring the issue to the forefront. They help in getting this important issue in the news and discussed. Your comments sound like they were written by the opposition.

I wish you would devote your energies to pointing out how bad McChinless and Eddie Munster are and what they are up to. They are the ones standing in the way of helping the people of this country. I bet you didn't criticize Bernie before he ran against Hillary.

[BainsBane]

7. Let me understand this

I need to just accept the fact the Bernie will attack the Democratic party frequently, that his supporters will then go on a tirade based on his comments, and never suggest there might be another point of view on the subject? You have no substantive response whatsoever. Your comment to me is that I need to keep my mouth shut.

Predictably, the substance of the issue doesn't seem to matter at all to you. Instead, it's about Bernie. I don't happen to believe Bernie to be more important than any other person on this planet. I happen to believe in human equality, not a hierarchy in which one man is held above the rest of the human race.

The opposition. It's unfortunate you consider the Democratic Party the opposition. To pretend the goal of the GOP is to see the Democrats united in opposition to Trump rather than having an independent publicly and frequently attack the Democrats is devoid of logic.

I intend to exercise my right to free speech. That means I may on occasion post an article that counters someone you consider too superior to be criticized.

And no, I never criticized Sanders before his attacks on Democrats were considered gospel, and not before people like you told me to shut my mouth rather than daring to challenge someone you treat as superior to other human beings on the planet. I had no reason to criticize him before he and his supporters attacked Planned Parenthood, John Lewis, Dolores, Huerta, the Mothers of the Movement, and virtually every group and individual that put their lives on the line for the oppressed. I don't happen to see them or the lives of those they fought for as less valuable than Bernie Sanders; nor do I see his career as more important than their struggles.
And that includes the millions of people about to lose their healthcare while Sanders and his supporters direct their wrath against the Democratic Party and lowly citizens like me who dare to exercise our constitutional rights.

I find the overall trend in American politics toward absolute reverence for the individual, celebrity politician to be highly disconcerting.

[Orrex]

8. Perhaps you missed all of the memes likening Sanders to the Messiah

Notwithstanding your own reality-based attitudes about human equality, it's clear that some in Sanders' camp saw (and apparently continue to see) him as a transcendent figure who can do no wrong.

Hell, even when he does do wrong, it's invariably because someone else interfered with him doing right. See?

[BainsBane]

15. There was an OP about the amendment

Entitled how the Democrats screwed Bernie. The issue was not the loss of healthcare coverage or prescription drug costs, but Bernie. That is always the sole issue, only it's not an issue at all.

[Orrex]

17. I had posts hidden during primary season for using the c-word

It ends in -ult and isn't "catapult." Apparently the flock didn't care for that term. So be it.

By their own words did I know them; endless adulation, and the Messiah memes were only the least of it. The whole "Feel the Bern" slogan struck me as creepy from the outset. I have no desire to "feel" any of the candidates.

The mindset was also made clear every time someone suggested that Sanders would face tough scrutiny in a general election campaign, to which his acolytes invariably declared him to be irreproachable with no skeletons to be found.


In Sanders all things are possible, apparently.

[BainsBane]

19. It was off putting, to be sure

I wonder if they have any sense how many potential supporters they discouraged with that attitude?

[dogman]

22. Well we sure know how many were put off by the Clinton camapaign.

Too many. Also this bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Klobuchar. 70% of Senate Dems voted for it and even 12 GOPs did.

[BainsBane]

23. Did you read the article?

Or even the OP? It appears not since you've decided to lecture me about what I wrote. And you're correct. Ted Cruz voted for it, as the article you didn't read says.

You're also correct that people were put off by the Clinton campaign. The Kremlin made sure of it. They planted propaganda that the so-called "left' (who of course are nothing of the sort) continue to repeat to this day. They don't care it was generated and spread by the Kremlin in order to get a fascist in the White House. They value their hatred more than democracy and the lives of their fellow citizens. And now they have their revenge against the poor, women, and people of color they so badly want to see punished for refusing to vote as they demanded. (The same people they regularly expressed absolute contempt for throughout the primaries and general election). Now they have exactly what they wanted. This is their president, the fascist they chose by refusing to vote for the Democrat. The pro-Trump "left" and the alt right have become indistinguishable, thought the justifications of the former are more forced. Now every death that results from the loss of medical insurance, social security, and other social welfare programs, and every death from hate crime is squarely on their shoulders. They need only sit back and enjoy the fruits of their labor.

[BainsBane]

16. I didn't miss them

Or the Bernie Christmas tree. Did you see that one?

[R B Garr]

11. Thank you! Again I agree with every word you said, Bains. It's time that Sanders'

stop using/criticizing the Democratic party for his own self-aggrandizement, especially when he clearly holds himself to different standards than what he imposes on Democrats.

[Dustlawyer]

12. It appears that any criticism of of any of your sacred

cows means that he is against them for everything for all time. No room for any improvement of our Party, it's perfect like it is.

I never told anyone to "shut up," but I was told here on DU to "Shut up and get over it" right after the Primaries. Neither of us are responsible for everyone who supported our candidates and there was ugliness on both sides.

The Democratic Party needs to be more responsive to our needs, and our politicians taking corporate money is in the way. Personally I don't care if Bernie or someone else leads the charge, only that it happens. I try to be objective about all of this. I do not think Bernie is perfect as I do not believe anyone of our representatives are. I want fairness, equality and justice. I want the ideals of our Constitution to mean something and anyone fighting for that I will support.

The biggest problem, the root problem, in our Democracy is that we allow bribery of our representatives. This is my main concern and anyone fighting against the rich and powerful and their ability to buy our politicians I will support. We are about to be ruled by the king of what that corruption has produced. I don't want to tear down anyone opposed to the money in our politics!

[R B Garr]

13. You obviously didn't even read the link. This just shows the downright vapidness

of cheerleading for a single person without regard to weaving it into reality in any meaningful way. "Taking corporate money" is so overused that it is just meaningless. And why the heck would a political party withdraw from competition so that your opposition has all the advantages, as if the GOP doesn't already. The sooner this silliness is put into perspective, the better. You can just buy Sanders' book.

[BainsBane]

18. Notice how campaign finance as an issue

To be addressed by policy change or SCOTUS has been abandoned entirely in the process of all of this. They now it make it all about individual fundraising (Bernie vs. everyone else) rather than policy reform. Even Bernie now says all politicians should raise money like he does, which is of course impossible because most people running for public office don't have his celebrity and regular TV appearances. That's especially true at lower levels of public office where the influence of money is the greatest. The result, in my view, has been to do damage to the prospects for reform, especially wen they prefer to see it waged as a talking point than a substantive policy proposal.

We saw millions of people vote in the GE against a candidate who ran on specific proposals to address the issue of money in politics because, they insisted, she was too "corporate." So they turned everything directly over to billionaires,. They now insist those billionaires represent some sort of opposition to the oligarchy. It's fucking insane.

[R B Garr]

20. Exactly, and it is absolutely fucking insane. Yet it's okay if Bernie is not held

accountable to his own transparency standards that he imposes on others, as we see with his dodging of FEC reporting requirements. Who even knows whether some of his contributions came from the opposition just trying to upset Hillary's momentum. And politician's at the lower levels aren't going to get away with his overpromising just completely unrealistic policies that he couldn't even get enacted in his own home state (since they were so unrealistic!). At some point, someone has to stop the political performances and get back to reality.

And, yes, the result is that the true billionaires are now in charge, and Bernie is saying he wants to work with them. How duplicitous can you get! When criticizing Democrats, it's his way or the highway, but the GOP should be given a chance. It's unreal.

[BainsBane]

14. You didn't read the article

It says Bernie took over $300k from Big Pharma, the third highest in the Senate. Hence the title of the OP. Rather than reading, you decided to come into the thread and 1) first ask me what Senator I was a fan of ; and 2) shut up and not criticize Bernie. And even now you have nothing to say about the issue and rely on a talking point refuted by the article you didn't read.
You can't even manage pretend to care about the issue.

[mcar]

6. K&R

[ismnotwasm]

9. Oh hell yes

Both my Democratic Senators voted against it, because it was a sloppy, grandstanding piece of work--one Sanders didn't even write--just attached his name to. 12 Republicans, including the odious Ted Cruz, voted for it--Are we supposed to admire Cruz now?

[Cha]

10. "Its also complete nonsense and a public smear against his colleagues, whose opposition had

nothing to do with protecting the pharmaceutical industry and everything to do with writing a law that actually works, not just one that grabs headlines for a single politician."

Thank you shining some light on this, B.

[brer cat]

21. Thank you for this OP, Bains.

Entirely too much of the conversation/debate is not about the issues involved but the people. The issue is obtaining affordable and safe drugs for US citizens, and how we can achieve that, not whether we walk in lockstep with one particular senator. To disagree with that meaningless and useless amendment Bernie attached his name to is the right of every senator and every citizen. That Bernie chose to use that disagreement not to refine his argument but to bash democrats who disagree with him, opens him to criticism not only for the merits of his proposal but for his distasteful reaction.

I agree wholeheartedly with this comment about Bernie in the article cited: "...it’s nothing more than a petulant excuse to cover for his failure to craft smart legislation on an issue with which almost everyone agrees in principle. . . "

[betsuni]

24. K&R