Chris Jacobs of the Conservative Review has an interesting review of Hillary Clinton’s business income from health insurers and pharmaceutical manufacturers:
At the end of this campaign’s first debate for Democratic presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton claimed that she counted the pharmaceutical and insurance industries as her enemies. Since that time, various reports have focused on the way in which her campaigns, as well as the Clinton Foundation, have profited from contributions by drug and insurance companies. However, few have reported how Bill and Hillary Clinton personally profited from insurance and drug company largesse.
To call it mere profit would be an understatement. As the below spreadsheet shows, financial disclosure records filed by the Clintons demonstrate that since Bill Clinton left office in January 2001, he and his wife have received more than $9.3 million in honoraria for speeches before groups associated with health care, and a whopping $3.4 million for speeches paid for by groups in the drug, device, and insurance industries (bolded in the spreadsheet).
(Readers can download the spreadsheet at Mr. Jacob’s article.)
My own conclusion is that the health insurers will get what they paid for, if Mrs. Clinton is elected President, whereas the drug-makers will be reminded of the old adage that “you cannot buy politicians; but only rent them.”
Hillary Clinton’s entire health policy consists of pledging to preserve and protect the Affordable Care Act while beating up on drug-makers for the prices they charge. Polling indicates many people accept the exaggerated accusation that high drug prices, not Obamacare, are the largest factor driving premium hikes.
Recall that the drug-makers face exactly the same Obamacare excise tax as the device-makers. However, the device-markers have advocated repeal of their excise tax without taking a breath for five years now. The drug-makers agreed to suck it up and be quiet in exchange for letting the so-called “non-interference clause” (which prohibits the federal government from dictating prices in the Medicare Part D prescription benefit) stand in the Affordable Care Act. Hillary Clinton would renege on that.
The least popular part of Obamacare is the individual mandate to buy health insurance, a mandate four Supreme Court judges found violates the Constitution. It is an important piece of the partial repeal bill the Republicans in Congress plan to pass through reconciliation later this year. If Mrs. Clinton wanted to improve in the polls, she would promise to repeal the individual mandate in a bipartisan bill she would commit to sign as President. However, she is likely unable to do that because she was for the individual mandate before Barack Obama was.
The rewards to investing in politicians are fickle. So far, it looks like health insurers which invested in the Clinton family business made a good investment. Drug-makers, on the other hand, bought a lemon.