Another Example of Expanding Lobbyist Power via Health Care Reform
Apparently the drug companies lobbyist organization has been instructed to spend money on advertising in support of Obama’s health care.
The drug industry has authorized its lobbyists to spend as much as $150 million on television commercials supporting President Obama’s health care overhaul, beginning over the August Congressional recess, people briefed on the plans said Saturday.
Why would pharmaceutical companies be interested in supporting legislation that could eventually result in their demise?
The drug makers stand to gain millions of new customers from the expansion of health care coverage.
Here we see an example of how the state limits competition, by granting access to some companies and leaving out others. Such a setup inevitably leads to politicians having more power. If large business companies sign on to sweeping reforms in their industry, you can pretty much be assured that they stand to gain something from it. In this case we see that the pharmaceutical companies that are represented by these lobbyists stand to gain many more customers by playing along with the state’s demands.
You can’t support state health care while at the same time criticize lobbyists for exerting control over politicians. Those two positions would be contradictory at best. You support legislation that not only will expand lobbyists power, but requires expanding it right outset to even get the legislation passed into law. That is you support legislation that grants lobbyists more control by collapsing health care into the hands of politicians.
Something else I want to point out. Assuming that this legislation is passed, and it does the harm it seems likely to do, in twenty years we will have politicians and people on the left argue that worsening health care system is a direct result of the alliance between health care providers, their lobbyists, and elected officials. They will further argue that to correct this problem, more state take over is necessary. Of course this will translate into a smaller set of people with more control over health care paving the way for yet more influence over politicians via lobbyists. Oftentimes the negative results of greater state control in an industry are used to justify increased state control in that industry. In the current health care debate it’s virtually not impossible to see this proposition at work at least a little bit.