Why Cory Bookers Late-Night Vote on Drug Importation Is Attracting So Much Negative Attention

[ehrnst]

The vote was actually one to waive a point of order against the Sanders-Klobuchar amendment for being non-germane to the bare-bones budget resolution it sought to amend. So the 46–52 margin by which it failed was actually 14 votes short of what the sponsors needed for success. Thus it failed like the other 16 amendments voted on during the Kabuki theater of the budget resolution “vote-a-rama,” a high-speed series of votes engineered by Senate Democrats to get Senate Republicans on record for casting unpopular or party-dividing votes.

It would be ironic to say the least if last night’s votes instead exposed Senate Democrats to opprobrium. But that is what may be happening as progressives excoriate the 13 Democratic “turncoats” (Bennet, Booker, Cantwell, Carper, Casey, Coons, Donnelly, Heinrich, Heitkamp, Menendez, Murray, Tester, Warner) who voted no on the Sanders-Klobuchar measure. It did not take critics too long to unearth the campaign contributions some of these Democrats received from pharmaceutical companies.

.........................................................................

It’s no secret that Cory Booker, who has been a “rising star” favorite of Democratic centrists since he took on old-school liberal Newark mayor Sharpe James back in 2002, probably sees a future president of the United States in the mirror each morning. On the Democratic Left, the prospect of Booker’s rise to the top causes a lot of angst because of his close relationship to Wall Street and his heresies on a few key issues like school vouchers. Taking him down a peg this very week for allegedly serving the interests of another hated big-money lobbying titan, Pharma, makes perfect sense politically.

More broadly, the vote last night raises a perennially difficult issue for both parties: How much slack should they give individual members of Congress for representing home-state interests? There are an awful lot of pharmaceutical companies based in Cory Booker’s New Jersey, which also views nearby Wall Street as something of a constituent. Is supporting Pharma on votes like the one last night inherently any different than opposing Pharma because you represent people who can see how much cheaper drug prices are within close driving distance of your home? However you answer that question, it is increasingly clear Booker needs to do something that looks like a clear declaration of independence from his donors. Otherwise his very name will become a spark igniting an ideological fight in his party.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/why-cory-bookers-getting-progressive-heat-on-drug-vote.html

[dogman]

1. Is Cory short for Corporate?

He is more of the same. When will the Democratic autopsy come out?

[ehrnst]

2. You mean like someone who votes against handgun regulation 5 times while getting $ from the NRA?

That kind of corporate?

[dogman]

7. No, I mean people who put corporate interests ahead of their constituents intersets.

Nice try.

[ehrnst]

8. So, if they are representing their constituents interests, their vote is OK?

Like the thousands of pharmacuetical employees in NJ?

Or does that just apply to Vermont, where they didn't want a waiting period, so Bernie voted against the Brady Bill, while coincidentally voting the way that the NRA wanted?

[dogman]

10. Do a majority of his constituents work for pharma?

Or is that where his donations come from? I would believe a majority of his constituents want lower drug prices. Bernie's vote was not based on the waiting period, it was about the liability of gun store owners. Bernie is not an NRA favorite if you check his rating with them. He is a voter favorite and remains that, we'll see about Senator Booker. I think his Presidential ambitions will suffer.

[appal_jack]

13. Show me where there is a Constitutional right to keep drug prices high & force us to bear the costs.

Your attempt to play "gotcha" regarding Bernie actually voting like the Second Amendment is, y'know, part of the US Constitution is pathetic. There is nothing "corporate" about respecting a specifically enumerated individual liberty.

On the other hand, Pharma companies would still be able to make a profit and employ people if there was a bit more competition via importation: they would just not be able to rape and pillage already-suffering people quite like they do at present. Your defense of their moral bankruptcy in the name of corporate profitability should disgust every Democrat with at least two brain cells to rub together and a moderately developed sense of right and wrong.

-app

[JHan]

3. K & R

[TheBlackAdder]

4. Booker and Menendez voted against it, since NJ is home to many pharmaceutical companies.

[ehrnst]

5. Just like Vermont was home to many people

who opposed waiting periods on gun purchases.

So their Senator voted against the Brady Bill five times. And was getting money from the NRA.

And yes, I think that it's pretty much the same thing people are accusing Booker of.

According to Sanders' campaign manager Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ reason for opposing the Brady bill was two-fold. First, he believed implementing a national waiting period was federal overreach. And second, he was doing his job.

"He wasn't opposed to states having (waiting periods) if they wanted to. The Republicans wanted to repeal waiting periods in states that had them, and Bernie voted that down," Weaver said. "He said he would be against waiting periods, and he kept his word to the people of Vermont."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/10/generation-forward-pac/did-bernie-sanders-vote-against-background-checks-/

[TheBlackAdder]

6. I lived in a rural part of NJ, sometimes it would take 1 hour for police to arrive in an emergency.

.

A lot of shit can happen in 1 hour.

And this is NJ, the most densly populated state in the country.

.

[ehrnst]

9. And more domestic abusers were able to kill their victims without some of the obstacles

that the Brady Bill waiting period would have put in their way.

[TheBlackAdder]

12. I believe his decision was more than a simplistic NRA viewpoint, but whatever. Run with it.

[ehrnst]

17. That's certainly more leeway than the Dems that voted last night were given.

Doncha think?

[otohara]

16. Not One Of These Senators Voted to Gut ACA

but when Sanders name is involved outrage ensues.

[ehrnst]

18. Yes, go figure. (nt)

[dawg]

11. Cory is 1,000,000 times better than *any* Republican.

Let's dispense with this internecine shit for now. It's getting us nowhere.

[appal_jack]

14. Well, it's getting us a head start on losing in 2020.

Cory Booker will surely run as a candidate of the people.

He will be exposed as a hypocrite and a tool of Wall Street.

What could go wrong?

-app

[otohara]

19. Did Booker Vote to Gut The ACA?

did any of the Dem Senators listed?

Or is this about Sanders and only Sanders?

There are sites out there where you can buy cheap RX - check out Health Warehouse in KY or other discounted RX sites. Awesome prices, friendly staff who will out of their way to help you and shipped right to your door.

[dogman]

15. Sorry, not on this vote.

There were actually 13 of them that voted for it. Hell, even Manchin, whom many here deride as a DINO and is a large Pharma $ recipient, voted for it. This kind of vote is the shit that is getting us nowhere.