Week in review: in case you missed it

FEDERAL NONSENSE ROUND-UP FOR WEEK ENDING OCTOBER 21 2017.

Week in review compiled by:
​ Shalin M., Represent Maryland Volunteer, Baltimore City
and Cristi D., Represent Maryland Chair.

 1.)
​**President Trump says 'massive' campaign spending fuels rise in drug prices.**
​
About:
President Donald Trump renewed his attack on the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. He complained that drug prices are too high and said campaign contributions to Congress are partly to blame. In an informal press conference with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Trump said the drug industry's political contributions helped explain the high costs of prescription drugs.

Excerpt:
"They contribute massive amounts of money to political people — I don't know, Mitch, maybe even to you," Trump told reporters. "But I have to tell you: Me? I'm not interested in their money. I don't need their money."

Read More:
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/10/16/trump-says-massive-campaign-spending-fuels-rise-in-drug-prices.html

Additional Info:
-McConnell was among the top 10 biggest recipients of contributions from drugmakers in the last four campaign cycles, according to OpenSecrets.org, which tracks campaign finance.
-Other top recipients include Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., and House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc.
-In the 2016 presidential race, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton received $990,338 in contributions from drugmakers. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who ran as a Democrat, took in $128,140. Trump received $127,505.

Our Thoughts:
Another set of evidence that the pharmaceutical industry is simply too cozy with our politicians who are supposed to represent us.  Pubic financing would put an end to corporate influence like this. Thank you President Trump, for bringing this issue to light.

2.)
​**Democrats plan to name lobbyists, operatives as super delegates.**
​
About:
The Democratic Party plans to name 75 people including lobbyists and political operatives to leadership posts that come with superdelegate votes at its next presidential convention, potentially aggravating old intraparty tensions.

​Excerpt:
"They include lobbyists for Venezuela’s national petroleum company and for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., according to a list obtained by Bloomberg News. At least three of the people worked for either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders in 2016 while also casting ballots as superdelegates.​"

​​Read More:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-18/democrats-plan-to-name-lobbyists-operatives-as-superdelegates​

Our Thoughts:
The appointment of corporate lobbyists to superdelegate positions undermines the principle of one person one vote. We oppose this decision fully.

3.)
**Your Tax Dollars Support Troops of Defense Contractor CEOs**

About:
​Weapons manufacturers who are cashing in on taxpayer money are more concerned with their bottom line and profit shares than national security.

Excerpt:
"much of it is then wasted on useless overhead, fat executive salaries, and startling (yet commonplace) cost overruns on weapons systems and other military hardware that, in the end, won't even perform as promised.  Too often the result is weapons that aren't needed at prices we can't afford.  If anyone truly wanted to help the troops, loosening the corporate grip on the Pentagon budget would be an excellent place to start.
[...]
And remember: the Pentagon buys more than just weapons.  Health care companies like Humana ($3.6 billion), United Health Group ($2.9 billion), and Health Net ($2.6 billion) cash in as well, and they're joined by, among others, pharmaceutical companies like McKesson ($2.7 billion) and universities deeply involved in military-industrial complex research like MIT ($1 billion) and Johns Hopkins ($902 million).
[...]
The real question is: How much of this money actually promotes the defense of the country and how much is essentially a subsidy to weapons makers and other corporations more focused on their bottom lines than giving the taxpayers value for their money?"
 
​Read More:
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/42213-your-tax-dollars-support-troops-of-defense-contractor-ceos

Our thoughts: 
Cost of defense systems is complex issue, but what isn't complex is that, much like other industries, the defense sector has a long history of influence over politicians.  At times, politicians encourage the purchase of products or services that even the DoD says they do not need or want, in order to secure votes by "providing jobs"!  And average taxpayer get stuck with the bill.