Trade Associations and the Growth of Lobbying

Trade Associations and collective interests

Background

Another view of contract lobbyists

Corporate headquarters

Growth of government

Did Collins earn some Pinocchios on PP statement?

Did Susan Collins make an inaccurate statement about Planned Parenthood simply opposing Republicans because of their political orientation? Two news sources have different takes:

The Washington Post

The National Review

"Hidden Money Funding the Midterms"

This article goes along with what we have been discussing in class about campaign finance transparency. With Mountain Families PAC, Republicans spent $1.3 million on the West Virginia Senate seat against Don Blankenship (with no disclosure of the source of funds). Blankenship was recently imprisoned back in 2010, and the Republicans did not want him to win the primary. "The move worked like this: Start a new super PAC after a deadline for reporting donors and expenses, then raise and spend money before the next report is due. Timed right, a super PAC might get a month or more undercover before being required to reveal its donors. And if a super PAC launches right before the election, voters won’t know who’s funding it until after they go to the polls." Overall, spending without donor disclosure has reached over $21.6 million on 78 different congressional races in this election cycle. 

Doctors

Suhas Gondi, Jonathan Kusner, and Yosef Berlyand at STAT:

Physicians do many things well. One thing they aren’t good at is showing up to vote. That bad habit starts early, and we believe it can — and must — be changed.

We don’t have data from recent elections, but studies from a decade ago show that physicians voted less often than the general population. (Lawyers, in contrast, were more likely to vote than the general population.) Given that health care accounts for almost one-fifth of the U.S. gross domestic product, and that new laws and regulations continuously alter the norms of medical practice, it is both curious and shameful that medical professionals fail to fulfill the basic civic responsibility of voting.

Several reasons have been tossed around to explain why physicians vote at such low rates. One is that doctors are so busy that it’s difficult to fit a trip to a polling place into an already packed day. Another explanation is that some physicians decide that the value of their single vote is too small to justify taking time away from patients in need. Low voting rates could also be part of broader disengagement from public life, consistent with evidence that physicians volunteer less often than other highly educated professionals and are less likely to donate to candidates.

But now more than ever physicians need to vote because the outcomes of elections are increasingly affecting their patients and their ability to care for them. Realizing this, many have called for more doctors to get politically involved. Although we’ve seen in recent years a swelling of physician advocacy on political issues, from repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act to “Dreamers” to gun violence, this engagement has largely taken the form of protests, marches, and social media campaigns. Far less energy has been invested into boosting the number of doctors who cast votes, the most fundamental form of civic engagement.

Conflicting takes on Soros and Kavanaugh Protests

While many claimed the President was tweeting conspiracy theories yet again when he claimed the anti-Kavanaugh protesters were "paid by Soros and others," this journalist maps out how Open Society (Soros foundation) grantees did in fact play a large role in the logistics and signage at the protests.

One ironic tidbit in the article: 

"Rethink Media created a “social media strategy sheet” back in August for anti-Kavanaugh protesters. One talking point: “Kavanaugh was hand-picked by dark money groups and their billionaire backers.” Rethink Media is itself a Soros grantee, and Saturday’s protests and unlawful disruptions were part of a well-funded, orchestrated network that books buses, hotel rooms and churches for such agitation."

At the same time, this Washington Post article gives the Soros-funded-protestor claim 3 Pinocchios, pushing the argument that donations do not mean influence.

While the Washington Post is right to claim that Trump and Grassley's comments that the protesters were directly paid to protest are completely false, I think a key takeaway for our class's purpose is the concluding line of the first article:

"Mr. Soros, much like the Koch brothers, funds causes he cares about. There’s nothing wrong with that, but democracy is better served if we follow the money on the right and left and find solutions where they are likeliest to lie: in the middle."

What's in a proposition Title? Could be everything.

Despite early polling finding a majority of Californian's opposed to increases in the gas tax, new polling finds that a majority of Californian's oppose Proposition 6. While some credit the millions of dollars spent by construction firms and labor unions for swaying public opinion against Proposition 6, others believe the ballot title may be playing a role as well. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra gave Proposition 6 the title, "Eliminates certain road repair and transportation funding. Requires certain fuel taxes and vehicle fees to be approved by the electorate." Note that this title does not describe Proposition 6 as a repeal of gas taxes. When asked a more general question about repealing the recent gas tax increases, more likely voters (50%) were in favor than in opposition (46%) according to the PPIC. Repeal proponents sued on the basis that the title was misleading and  Superior Court judge Timothy Frawley agreed. However, Frawley's ruling was overturned by the state court of appeal, thus keeping the ballot title as is.

Your Weekend Getaway Packet 10/5 ed.

Murkowski is a no.  You heard it here first: http://gov106.blogspot.com/2018/09/items-for-very-busy-news-week.html

Here's a BIG reason why my gut has been that Murkowski would be no on Kavanaugh (though I did NOT expect her to be no on cloture)...https://t.co/FibzBkeJkO

— Jennifer Bendery (@jbendery) October 5, 2018

This documentary, which features a certain CMC alum who fought dark money in court when he was MT AG, is available for free online streaming for the rest of this month.
http://www.pbs.org/pov/darkmoney/video/darkmoney/  (Not mandatory viewing for this week.)




Nicholas Florko reports at STAT:

A Republican lobbying firm, the CGCN Group, is behind this week’s launch of the shadowy drug pricing organization, Alliance to Protect Medical Innovation, a partner at the firm confirmed to STAT Thursday.

It is still unclear who is funding the organization, but the group admitted Thursday it relied on some “seed money from people inside the [drug] industry.” The brand drug lobby BIO also said in a new release on its website Thursday that it is joining as one of APMI’s first members.

“APMI is our client and is in the process of naming the executive director,” Ken Spain, partner at CGCN Group, told STAT. “We are helping them with the rollout of the organization.”

Rebecca Robbins at STAT:

In 26 years in Congress, Rep. Anna Eshoo has always won reelection by at least 20 points. The Democrat is virtually certain to win big once again in November, buoyed largely by voters in her wealthy Silicon Valley district who do not struggle to pay for their prescription drugs.

So why is a political action committee focused on high drug prices bothering to sink $500,000 into attack ads against her?

The ad blitz from Patients for Affordable Drugs highlights the unorthodox tack the group is taking in the 2018 midterm elections: intervening in races in which there is no hope of altering the outcome.

Of the nine congressional and gubernatorial races in which P4AD has supported or opposed candidates to date, just three or four are competitive, according to STAT’s analysis of election forecasts from the website FiveThirtyEight.

And of the at least $8 million the group has spent in total, as much as $6 million has gone to the races in which the outcome has long been determined.

P4AD, which is funded mainly by the billionaire Houston couple John and Laura Arnold, says that where its money can’t help decide a race, it can still send a message: that politicians running campaigns funded by drug companies will face retribution. But that, too, is a dubious strategy, experts say.

If the goal is to make politicians hesitate before accepting a check, “pharma’s not at the stage of the NRA,” said Bob Blendon, a Harvard professor who studies the politics of health care. “It’s going to be years before somebody runs in this state or that with a major biotech presence [and says] they’re not going to accept [drug industry] funding. I’m not sure it’s a realistic goal.”

From from Politico Influence:

TARIFF LOBBYING CAN’T STOP, WON’T STOP: Lobbying against the Trump administration’s tariffs continues to be a huge business driver for K Street. Here’s a rundown of the latest registrations: Twin Enterprises Inc. (dba ’47 Brand),a sports licensing and apparel company based in Massachusetts, hired Crowell & Moring to lobby on tariff exclusions; TricorBraun, a St. Louis packaging company, hired Husch Blackwell to lobby on tariffs; Edelman / Char-Broil hired Robert Carlstrom Jr. to lobby on tariffs on Chinese products; and Air Master Awning, a Puerto Rican company, hired Sorini Samet to lobby on Chinese trade actions.

— The lobbying comes as trade associations and coalitions continue their broader push to stop the tariffs. The Tariffs Hurt the Heartland campaign will hold a town hall Thursday with former Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) in Indianapolis. The town hall will also feature Brian Kuehl, executive director of Farmers for Free Trade; Steve Bohman, vice president of global production for Vera Bradley, and others.