Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Obama Taps Dr. Seuss To Run CMS

Kaiser Health News has;

which concludes With;
"In a 2008 Journal of Health Care Management article, Tavenner said that her career has been built on embracing opportunities "outside of my comfort zone."

"When I reflect on my career, I am reminded of my favorite Dr. Seuss saying, 'Oh the places we will go.' I certainly had no idea what lay in store for me. When I finished nursing school, my goal was to be the best nurse manager ever. When I completed graduate school, my goal was to be the best hospital executive ever," she said. "I never thought beyond those goals or where the future would take me. Along the way, however, I embraced new experiences and accepted responsibilities outside of my comfort zone. All of those experiences led me to a career path that took me from nursing to hospital administration to this current arena of public policy."

CMS is entrusted with $962 Billion Public Dollars, and the person President Obama wants entrusted With those $962 Billion Public Dollars, ...... is Dr. Seuss.

Let's take the lipstick off of this, "I do not like green eggs and ham" for a peek at what's underneath.

The American Thinker has;

Obama's Problematic New Nominee For The Top Medicare/Medicaid Post

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) chief Donald Berwick will step down on December 2, three weeks before his recess appointment expires on December 31. Fortunately, Dr. Berwick left a voluminous paper trail, leaving little doubt about his affinity for socialized medicine. His controversial views on "redistributional" healthcare and rationing prompted 42 senators to vehemently oppose his nomination last spring.
Not wishing to have another fight on his hands, President Obama has nominated Berwick's second-in-command, Marilyn Tavenner, to head the agency. Tavenner will act as CMS director until her own confirmation hearings sometime next year.
As principal deputy administrator and chief operating officer of CMS since 2010, Tavenner has stayed under the radar. Unlike Berwick, the former nurse graduated from a state school, worked her way up in the private sector, and ended up as Governor Tim Kaine (D-VA)'s secretary of Health and Human Services for the Commonwealth of Virginia from 2006-2010.
Tavenner's quiet, bipartisan rise to the top makes her a strategically smart choice, but at a time when most Americans' tolerance for self-serving politicians has reached an all-time low, the Virginia native might not fare any better than Berwick.
Last March, Tavenner told the Nashville Health Care Council that if she were nominated to lead CMS, the agency would follow the five-year plan outlined in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. "Whether I'm nominated or not, we would not have a different approach." She assured the council that in the future, "the agency's priorities would not change."
In August 2010, Tavenner toed the party line, chastising critics of ObamaCare for "stoking fears" and targeting seniors with "misinformation" regarding their Medicare benefits.
The NASCAR fan from Martinsville may appeal to Republican sensibilities, but by her own admission, there is little doubt that she will be more of the same -- red flags and all.
While she was Virginia's HHS secretary in 2009, Tavenner and the governor conspired to delete certain details from a report on two state children's hospitals which Kaine wanted to close.
Psychiatric Solutions, Inc. (PSI), a private hospital group based in Tennessee with a "well-above-average numbers of founded complaints of abuse -- in one case, roughly 20 times the average of other licensed residential facilities," was interested in purchasing the facilities. PSI was a major donor to Kaine's political action committee at the time.
E-mails obtained by the Richmond Times-Dispatch in 2010 revealed communication among the governor's office, Tavenner, and the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services even before the panel's report was complete. One e-mail indicates that Tavenner personally escorted PSI officials on a tour of one of the state hospitals, where the latter displayed an interest in "treating the young people there." In another e-mail regarding the tour, Tavenner wrote that she was "trying not to make a big deal of it for obvious reasons."
Then-Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's office was involved in discussions that led to the suppression of findings that a state children's hospital he wanted to close provided an essential service.
The state Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services said a series of e-mails from Nov. 5 to Dec. 16, 2009, between the governor's office, then- Secretary of Health Marilyn Tavenner and the department discussed revisions to an expert panel's report on the care for children with severe mental illness.
The revision removed from the report a finding that no other hospitals in Virginia could care for the 800 children with serious mental illnesses treated every year at the state's Commonwealth Center for Children and Adolescents in Staunton and a smaller facility in Marion.
When contacted about the e-mails in March 2010, Tavenner, the newly appointed CMS deputy director told the Times-Dispatch that she no longer worked as Virginia's HHS secretary and would not comment. Kaine, who went on to become chairman of the DNC, has also refused to talk about his part in the quashed findings.
Prior to her tenure as Virginia's HHS Secretary, Ms. Tavenner worked for the Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), founded by former Senator Bill Frist's father. Her career spanned 25 years, from nurse manager to president of Outpatient Services Group.
Tavenner's private-sector experience has already proved controversial for some in the health care field. In April 2011, Suzanne Gordon, editor of the "Culture and Politics of Health Care Work" series at Cornell University Press, sized up the potential CMS director for the Boston Globe, citing her affiliation with HCA.
While Tavenner worked for HCA, the company was busily enhancing its profit margin by defrauding the Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE systems. In 2000, for example, HCA paid fines of $840 million for improperly billing the government and in 2003 HCA had to fork over another $631 million.
Although Tavenner may not have been personally involved in these scandals, it hardly seems wise to put her in charge of the government system her company helped defraud. The job of CMS administrator is to protect patient safety and quality, something that federal officials with close ties to the industries they are supposedly regulating and monitoring seem to have a hard time doing.
Tavenner has been called "tough," "a pragmatic moderate," a "skilled operator," and "a person who makes things work and has patients at heart."
Mira Signer, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) in Virginia, might disagree with that last description. She stated that her organization "was caught off guard" by Kaine's and Tavenner's attempt to shut down a state facility that would leave 800 children without adequate care in favor of a scandal-ridden PSI.
So far Tavenner has managed to avoid a serious vetting. Her down-home, non-elitist background contrasts nicely with most of Obama's nominees. With the First Lady's recent visit to the Homestead-Miami Speedway, the president may be trying to win over the "bitter Bible-clinging gun owners" with his choice of Tavenner.
Read more M. Catharine Evans at Potter Williams Report.

Thank You Kaiser Health News and American Thinker.

Do you Really want Dr. Seuss running $962 Billion worth of CMS?

Monday, November 28, 2011

Medicaid "Coercion" Issue To Be Settled By Supreme Court

The New American has;

Medicaid "Coercion" Issue To Be Settled By Supreme Court

FRIDAY, 25 NOVEMBER 2011 07:45

Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court approved petitions last week to hear arguments in two cases challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare. One of the issues that will be argued before the justices of the high court is the legality of the currently operating Medicaid scheme.

Admittedly, the question is a very “narrow” one, but it will have far-reaching impact on the future of federalism and on the power of Congress to raise and spend revenue.

In one of the cases filed against President Obama’s pet project, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta rejected a similar claim against provisions of Medicaid. In that suit, filed by the Attorneys General of the states of Florida, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Nebraska, the court held that the expansion of the program made under provisions of ObamaCare was constitutional.

The essence of the states’ argument is that the use of the existing Medicaid arrangement to provide expanded healthcare coverage to citizens of the states is unduly burdensome on the governments of those states. ObamaCare mandates that the states cover 100 percent of the administrative expenses associated with implementing the new Medicaid policies set out in ObamaCare.

Furthermore, the Attorneys General averred that the alteration to the Medicaid program’s partition of financing was an unconstitutional application of the so-called Spending Clause of Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Such coercion on the part of Congress is further prohibited by the terms of the Tenth Amendment, they assert.

Article I reads in relevant part: “Congress shall have power ... to pay the Debts and provide for the Defence and general Welfare of the United States.”

The Tenth Amendment reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

In ruling on the states’ claim in regard to the claim of congressional coercion in applying the spending requirements of ObamaCare, the Court of Appeals held:

Congress cannot place restrictions so burdensome and threaten the loss of funds so great and important to the state’s integral function as a state — funds that the state has come to rely on heavily as part of its everyday service to its citizens — as to compel the state to participate in the “optional” legislation. This is the point where "pressure turns into compulsion."

In the present case, they continued, the demands made on state budgets by ObamaCare’s expansion of Medicaid are not “unduly burdensome” and are thus constitutional exercises of the power of Congress to spend money.

The Supreme Court has never specifically ruled on the issue, but it is set to make history in the ruling ultimately handed down in the ObamaCare cases it will hear in the spring.

The other point of view, that put forth by the President and various defendant departments of the executive branch that he heads, was advocated in a recent opinion piece published in the New York Times:

The health care reform law does just that. In expanding the number of people eligible for Medicaid and raising the minimum coverage, it requires states to pay for 10 percent of the added cost or else lose all federal financing for Medicaid. As the 11th Circuit said, Congress made clear when Medicaid was passed in 1965 that it reserved the right to change the program. It has done so many times without any court striking down any change as coercive.

The principal point of contention in the question of the constitutionality of the expansion of Medicaid is whether the Constitution (particularly the Spending Clause of Article I) limits Congress’ power to spend money.

In order to adequately settle this matter, the Court must establish a legal definition of the “general welfare” and then move on to the matter of the scope of the grant of the power to spend money as contained in Article I of the Constitution.

Certainly one important source of enlightenment when it comes to questions of constitutional interpretation is the Founder known to history as the Father of the Constitution — James Madison.

In his "Report of 1800," Madison wrote:

Money cannot be applied to the General Welfare, otherwise than by an application of it to some particular measure conducive to the General Welfare. Whenever, therefore, money has been raised by the general Authority, and is to be applied to a particular measure, a question arises whether the particular measure be within the enumerated authorities vested in Congress. If it be, the money requisite for it may be applied to it; if it be not, no such application can be made.

And lastly, as Madison wrote in a letter to Edmund Pendleton in 1792:

If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.

In arguing against the imposition of limits on Congress’ power to force states to spend money according to its dictates, the article in the New York Times declares: "It would be a serious mistake for the court to use this case to restrict Congress’s authority by placing any additional requirements for the commitment of federal money."

And it continues in that vein: "If it [the Supreme Court] accepts the coercion argument now, the Supreme Court would basically usurp Congress’s authority to determine the nature and scope of federal spending for the general welfare."

All eyes will be upon the Supreme Court, including those of the state Attorneys General who are valiantly trying to repel the constant attacks by the federal government on the sovereignty of the states.

Whether or not the decision ultimately made by the Supreme Court on ObamaCare, the Spending Clause, and the definition of “general welfare,” there is another option available to the states in their effort to resist the imposition of federal tyranny.

The most effective weapon in the war against the federal government’s plan to exercise unchecked and absolute dominion over the states and the people is the nullification of unconstitutional federal legislation by the governments of the states. 

Simply stated, nullification is the principle that each state retains the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law that a state deems unconstitutional.

Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the central government to enact laws that are applicable to the states and the citizens thereof.

James Madison is clear as to his opinion on the relative positions of the states and national government created by the Constitution. The states, he assured readers, are sovereign and they retain that sovereignty under the provisions of the national Constitution. No clause or phrase of the Constitution may be accurately interpreted to enshrine the national government in a superior position to that of the state governments.

In Federalist, No. 46, Madison reasoned that “the federal and state governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, instituted with different powers and designated for different purposes.” He notes in the same paper that “the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone.” There is no more fixed expression of the intent of our Founders as to the locus of ultimate sovereignty in the United States.

Apart from his designation as the “Father of the Constitution,” Madison may also rightly be called the “Father of Nullification.” Madison and Thomas Jefferson united in their opposition to the expansion of the federal government’s powers and gave expression to their stance in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. The impetus for the drafting of these resolutions was the passage by the national government of the Alien and Sedition Acts.

The unvarnished aim of these laws was to squash political dissension and silence foes of the administration then in power.

 In the resolutions they penned and offered to the legislatures of Kentucky and Virginia, Madison and Jefferson insisted that American jurisprudence and principles of good government preserved to the states the constitutional and natural-law right to firmly resist federal encroachments into the realms of their own sovereignty, and further to void any acts of the national government they deemed unconstitutional.

Additionally, those state legislatures were justified in refusing to implement any congressional mandate not made in pursuance of the specifically enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution of the United States.

Finally, the New York Times warns: "Curbing Congress’s power to impose conditions on the disbursement of federal money would upend settled precedent."

Constitutionalists hope so, but if not, that's not the end of the road that leads back to state sovereignty.

Thank You New American and Mr Wolverton II

Merck/Vioxx To Plead Guilty To Misdemeanor, & Pay $950 Million Penalty

Bloomberg has;

By Jef Feeley and David Voreacos - Nov 23, 2011 9:44 AM ET
"Merck & Co. (MRK), the second-largest U.S. drugmaker, will pay $950 million and a unit of the company will plead guilty to a criminal misdemeanor charge to resolve a U.S. probe of its illegal marketing of the painkiller Vioxx.

Merck Sharp & Dohme will plead guilty to one count of misbranding Vioxx, the company and U.S. prosecutors said yesterday. The company will pay a $321.6 million criminal fine and $628.3 million to resolve civil claims that it sold Vioxx for unapproved uses and made false statements about its cardiovascular safety.

The “resolution appropriately reflects the severity of Merck’s conduct and is yet another reminder that the government will not tolerate misconduct by drug companies that bend the rules and put patient safety at risk,” Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. attorney in Boston, said yesterday in a statement. Prosecutors in her office led the seven-year investigation into the company’s Vioxx marketing tactics."

Continue reading Bloomberg coverage here.

Bloomberg Also has; (from July 27, 2010)

Merck Paid 3,468 Death Claims To Resolve Vioxx Suits

"Merck & Co. paid claims to the families of 3,468 users of its Vioxx painkiller who died of heart attacks or strokes, a court-appointed administrator told a judge today.

A $4.85 billion settlement fund made payments to the families of 2,878 Vioxx users who died of heart attacks and 590 who died of strokes, according to Lynn Greer of BrownGreer LLP, a law firm in Richmond, Virginia, that analyzed 59,365 claims.

Merck pulled Vioxx from the market in 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attacks and strokes. Merck set up the fund, which covers claims of death and lesser injuries, in 2007 after reserving $1.9 billion to fight 26,600 Vioxx suits. U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon in New Orleans has overseen Vioxx lawsuits since February 2005 through a process known as multidistrict litigation."

a criminal misdemeanor charge

after paying on 3,468 Death Claims


Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Donald Berwick, Rationing Advocate, Quits, FINALLY!

LifeNews.com has;

Donald Berwick, Rationing Advocate, Quits Obama Admin Post

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 11/23/11 1:53 PM

Donald Berwick, the rationing advocate President Barack Obama nominated to head the U.S. Medicare and Medicaid programs in the face of opposition from pro-life advocates, has quite his post in the Obama administration.

Because he is unable to get enough votes in the Senate to approve his nomination, his recess appointment will end and Berwick has decided to stop down from his position as the chief implementor of Obamacare, the health care law pro-life groups opposed because its prompts concerns about abortion funding, rationing, and fails to protect the conscience rights of medical workers.

Senate Republicans had blocked Berwick’s confirmation as chief of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Although Berwick had been heavily criticized by his glowing endorsements of the British National Health Service, which has come under fire for rationing medical care in the UK, Berwick denied he favored rationing during questioning from senators.

Berwick, according to Bloomberg News, will step down from his position December 2, and he will be replaced by his chief deputy, Marilynn Tavenner. His recess appointment would have ended December 31.

Obama previously used a recess appointment to place Berwick in the prominent position after the Senate couldn’t find enough votes to overcome a Republican-led filibuster against his nomination. A recess appointment can be used when the Senate is not in session but the appointment is temporary – he could serve through this year in his current role but not beyond that.

At the time,

Ed Morrissey, a conservative writer at Hot Air, panned Obama’s move.

“Barack Obama spent Tuesday night telling the American people that he understood the midterm message as the electorate demanding that Democrats and Republicans need to work together in the final two years of his term as President. He spent the rest of the week talking out the other side of his mouth,” he said.

“Even some Democrats at the time objected to the recess appointment. Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) would have voted to confirm Berwick but slammed the White House for bypassing the Senate entirely. Berwick hadn’t even filled out the standard questionnaire that forms part of the basis for confirmation hearings, which is why Baucus had yet to schedule a hearing for Berwick,” Morrissey noted.

At the time, Baucus said, “Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power and protects Montanans and all Americans by ensuring that crucial questions are asked of the nominee, and answered.”

In a November Senate committee hearing, Berwick backed away from the pro-rationing positions he’s taken previously. Berwick told senators he has long opposed rationing health care and said he believed people who are near death still have a right to medical treatment.

He said his guiding principle is that patients should get “all the care they want and need, when and where they want and need it.” Berwick also told lawmakers he doesn’t think a one-size-fits-all scheme is appropriate for the United States because it is such a large and diverse nation.

Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, calls Berwick “the most important man that you’ve never heard of” and he called on lawmakers to ask about “his radical plans for health care.”

“Berwick, whom the President entrusted with $962 billion dollars, heads up the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid–a job he was never approved by Congress to do,” he said. “Instead, the White House, sensing that his pro-euthanasia socialist views would pose problems even for his own party, made Berwick a recess appointment.”

Berwick is an outspoken admirer of the British National Health Service and its rationing arm, theNational Institute for Clinical Effectiveness (NICE).

During a 2008 speech to British physicians, Berwick said “I am romantic about the National Health Service. I love it,” and calling it “generous, hopeful, confident, joyous, and just.”

Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, wrote about the problems with Berwick in an opinion column at the Daily Caller.

Recalling that opponents of the government-run health care bill were blasted for bringing up “death panels,” Tanner writes: “But if President Obama wanted to keep a lid on that particular controversy, he just selected about the worst possible nominee.”

In his comments lauding the British health care system, Tanner says “Berwick was referring to a British health care system where 750,000 patients are awaiting admission to NHS hospitals.”

“The government’s official target for diagnostic testing was a wait of no more than 18 weeks by 2008. The reality doesn’t come close. The latest estimates suggest that for most specialties, only 30 to 50 percent of patients are treated within 18 weeks. For trauma and orthopedics patients, the figure is only 20 percent,” he writes.

“Overall, more than half of British patients wait more than 18 weeks for care. Every year, 50,000 surgeries are canceled because patients become too sick on the waiting list to proceed,’ he continues.

“The one thing the NHS is good at is saving money. After all, it is far cheaper to let the sick die than to provide care,” Tanner adds.

NICE is at the forefront of the rationing in the British health care system.

“It acts as a comparative-effectiveness tool for NHS, comparing various treatments and determining whether the benefits the patient receives, such as prolonged life, are cost-efficient for the government,” Tanner explains. “NICE, however, is not simply a government agency that helps bureaucrats decide if one treatment is better than another. With the creation of NICE, the U.K. government has effectively put a dollar amount to how much a citizen’s life is worth.”

Tanner points out that Berwick has already admitted health care rationing is coming.

“It’s not a question of whether we will ration care,” the Obama nominee said in a magazine interview for Biotechnology Healthcare, “It is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

Liberal writer Nat Hentoff has also criticized Berwick’s views.

Thank You LifeNews and Mr Ertelt. Photo creds to LifeNews / thepeoplescube.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Pharma/Healthcare Lobbying Expenditures, 2012: $181,673,492

Open Secrets has;

Pharmaceuticals / Health Products: Lobbying, 2012

Total for Pharmaceuticals/Health Products: $181,673,492
Total Number of Clients Reported: 400
Total Number of Lobbyists Reported: 1,497

Pharmaceutical Rsrch & Mfrs of America$14,060,000
Pfizer Inc$10,740,000
Amgen Inc$7,310,000
Merck & Co$7,125,000
Eli Lilly & Co$6,865,000
Biotechnology Industry Organization$5,960,000
Novartis AG$5,259,948
Johnson & Johnson$4,876,000
Bayer AG$4,850,000
AstraZeneca PLC$4,540,000
Roche Holdings$4,061,281
Medtronic Inc$3,893,409
Abbott Laboratories$2,990,000
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries$2,770,000
Bristol-Myers Squibb$2,410,000
Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals$2,300,000
Mylan Inc$1,987,123
Merck KGaA$1,970,000
Eisai Co Ltd$1,965,000
Kv Pharmaceuticals$1,850,000
CH Boehringer Sohn$1,845,936
Watson Pharmaceuticals$1,700,000
Endo Pharmaceuticals$1,660,000
Baxter International$1,607,000
Generic Pharmaceutical Industry Assn$1,503,908
Pharmaceutical Care Management Assn$1,494,821
McKesson Corp$1,490,000
Covidien Ltd$1,430,000
Biogen Idec$1,290,000
Vertex Pharmaceuticals$1,270,000
Genzyme Corp$1,260,040
Gilead Sciences$1,260,000
Boston Scientific Corp$1,220,000
Advanced Medical Technology Assn$1,211,585
Cardinal Health$1,200,000
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co$1,160,000
Astellas Pharma USA$1,118,000
Millennium/Takeda Oncology Co$1,080,000
Sunovion Pharmaceuticals$1,020,000
Cephalon Inc$1,010,000
Talecris Biotherapeutics$920,000
Cubist Pharmaceuticals$880,000
Edwards Lifesciences$860,000
Allergan Inc$840,000
Invacare Corp$832,000
Nestle SA$823,000
Healthcare Distribution Management Assn$768,000
PharmAthene Inc$751,128
Amylin Pharmaceuticals$720,000
Celgene Corp$715,000
Colgate-Palmolive Co$690,000
Prasco Labs$680,000
AmerisourceBergen Corp$659,000
Consumer Healthcare Products Assn$655,000
Lundbeck Inc$618,000
Council for American Medical Innovation$590,000
Zimmer Inc$589,090
Apotex Inc$580,000
Life Technologies Corp$580,000
Academy of Managed Care Pharmacies$558,000
Herbalife International$540,000
Ranbaxy Inc$520,000
Medicines Co$510,000
Advanced BioHealing$505,000
Hospira Inc$500,000
Daiichi Sankyo Inc$490,000
St Jude Medical$490,000
Alere Inc$471,000
Plasma Protein Therapeutics Assn$466,500
SCOOTER Store$461,000
Varian Medical Systems$450,000
Genomic Health Inc$450,000
Diabetes Access to Care Coalition$440,000
Bavarian Nordic$430,000
Becton, Dickinson & Co$430,000
Smith & Nephew$430,000
Biomet Inc$400,000
Council for Responsible Nutrition$380,000
Mela Sciences Inc$380,000
Henry Schein Inc$370,000
Intuitive Surgical$360,000
KCI USA$360,000
CSL Ltd$360,000
Steris Corp$360,000
Purdue Pharma$350,000
Welch Allyn Inc$330,000
Dendreon Corp$320,000
Mobile Medical International Corp$320,000
Pharma Industry Labor Management Assn$320,000
Pacific Pulmonary Services$320,000
Alexion Pharmaceuticals$315,000
Cook Group$300,000
Healthcare Institute of New Jersey$296,053
Martek Biosciences$295,000
Medical Device Manufacturers Assn$270,000
Council on Radionuclides & Radiopharm$270,000
Bracco Diagnostics$270,000
Affymax Inc$270,000
Kinetic Concepts$265,000
Shire Plc$260,000
Infinia Corp$242,000
Alfred Mann Foundation$240,000
Vivus Inc$240,000
Quality Implant Coalition$230,000
Pride Mobility Products$230,000
Sepracor Inc$210,000
Abercrombie & Fitch$210,000
Biocryst Pharmaceuticals$210,000
Catalyst Health Solutions$210,000
Hill-Rom Holdings$210,000
Orexigen Therapeutics Inc$208,000
Mead Johnson Nutritional$200,000
Perrigo Co$198,000
Otsuka America$190,000
Isis Pharmaceuticals$190,000
Hologic Inc$180,000
Hoveround Corp$180,000
Djo Inc$180,000
CCS Medical$175,000
Academy of Radiology Research$170,000
Forest Laboratories$170,000
Leo Pharma$160,000
Intersystems Corp$160,000
Medical Device Competitiveness Coalition$160,000
Mentor Corp$160,000
Stryker Corp$160,000
Alkermes Inc$151,339
America's Specialty Medicine Companies$150,000
Acorda Therapeutics$150,000
Millennium Pharmaceuticals$150,000
Momenta Pharmaceuticals$150,000
Morton Grove Pharmaceuticals Inc$150,000
Grifols Inc$150,000
Hill Rom Co$150,000
Verax Biomedical$150,000
Translational Genomics Research Inst$150,000
American Orthotic & Prosthetic Assn$149,850
Organogenesis Inc$148,000
PDP Holdings$148,000
Apollo Advisors$144,629
APP Pharmaceuticals$140,000
Bioscrip Inc$140,000
Resurgent Health & Medical$140,000
Onyx Pharmaceuticals$130,000
Independence Medical$130,000
Natl Coalition For Assistive/Rehab Tech$126,274
Medical Imaging Contrast Agent Assn$120,000
Intl Contrast Ultrasound Society$120,000
Calypso Medical Technologies$120,000
Canada International Pharmacy Assn$120,000
Sanovas Inc$120,000
SIGA Technologies$120,000
NxStage Medical$113,472
Hearing Industries Assn$110,000
Accuray Inc$110,000
Product Partners LLC$110,000
Ziopharm Oncology Inc$110,000
United Natural Products Alliance$105,000
Orexigen Therapeutics$104,000
iPierian Inc$100,000
Biotech Research & Development Center$90,000
American Assn for Health Freedom$90,000
CR Bard Inc$90,000
DSM North America$90,000
C-Path Institute$90,000
Breckenridge Pharmaceutical$90,000
Cell Therapeutics$90,000
Clasado Ltd$90,000
iRhythm Technologies$90,000
Insulet Corp$90,000
Health Industry Distributors Assn$90,000
Illinois Institute of Technology$90,000
Immediate Response Technologies$90,000
Gordian Medical Inc$90,000
Pdi Inc$90,000
Medicines for Malaria Venture$90,000
MedImpact Healthcare Systems Inc$90,000
Merit Medical Systems$90,000
Temp Time Inc$90,000
Vista Partners$90,000
Texas Biomedical Research Institute$90,000
Riverain Medical$90,000
ACC Capital Holdings$85,000
Natural Products Assn$83,200
Nanotherapeutics Inc$80,000
Mobilex USA$80,000
PatientSafe Solutions$80,000
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals$80,000
Calspan-Univ of Buffalo Research Center$80,000
Safe Life Corp$80,000
SonoSite Inc$80,000
Sorenson Communications$80,000
Cyberonics Inc$75,000
Tessarae Inc$72,000
Advanced Infusion Services$70,000
ARCA Biopharma$70,000
Assn of Clinical Research Organizations$70,000
Osmotica Pharmaceuticals$70,000
Orthocare Innovations$70,000
National Alliance for Infusion Therapy$70,000
Healiance Pharmaceuticals$70,000
IOGEN Corp$70,000
Intercell USA$70,000
Merz Pharmaceuticals$69,750
Pozen Inc$68,000
AccuDial Pharmaceutical$66,000
Myriad Genetics$65,000
Minnesota Thermal Science$60,000
Natl Assn Public Health Stat & Info Syst$60,000
Natl Cltn of Pharmaceutical Distributors$60,000
Millennium Laboratories$60,000
Novavax Inc$60,000
North American Rescue Products$60,000
Meda Pharmaceuticals$60,000
General Electric$60,000
EO2 Concepts$60,000
Fate Therapeutics$60,000
Assn of Medical Device Reprocessors$60,000
Concert Pharmaceuticals$60,000
Covance Inc$60,000
Coalition for Plant & Life Science$60,000
Cochlear Corp$60,000
Cerus Corp$60,000
Cetero Research$60,000
Salix Pharmaceuticals$60,000
Tethys Bioscience$60,000
Philadelphia Health & Education Corp$55,054
Mendel Biotechnology$50,000
National Disease Research Interchange$50,000
Exact Sciences$50,000
Massachusetts Biotechnology Council$50,000
Intl Partnership for Microbicides$50,000
Bone Growth Stimulator Coalition$50,000
Amyris Biotech$50,000
Aethlon Medical$50,000
Scrips America$50,000
XDX Inc$45,000
Deka Research & Development$45,000
Cleveland BioLabs$45,000
Medicis Pharmaceutical Corp$45,000
Boiron USA$44,000
Cellerant Therapeutics$40,000
Direct Supply Inc$40,000
Doctor Diabetic Supply$40,000
Elusys Therapeutics$40,000
National Center for Genome Resources$40,000
Morphotek Inc$40,000
Jackson Laboratory$40,000
Jarrow Formulas$40,000
Incitor Llc$40,000
Spectrum Pharmaceuticals$40,000
Solvay SA$40,000
Pontifical Catholic Univ of Puerto Rico$40,000
Iovate Health Sciences$37,503
Semprus BioSciences$36,099
Somnomed Inc$30,000
Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse$30,000
Questcor Pharmaceuticals$30,000
Redfield Corp$30,000
InstantLabs Medical Device Corp$30,000
Lion-Vallen Industries$30,000
Pharma Services Acquisition Corp$30,000
Otonomy Corp$30,000
Ohio Willow Wood$30,000
Orasure Technologies$30,000
Dymedix Corp$30,000
Body Media$30,000
Bioprotection Systems$30,000
Burnham Institute for Medical Research$30,000
American Herbal Products Assn$30,000
Advanced Cancer Therapeutics$30,000
Aduro BioTech$30,000
Advanced Analytical$30,000
Arteriocyte Inc$30,000
Biotech-Pharma Advisory$30,000
Bioject Medical Technologies$30,000
Research Corporation Technologies Inc$27,000
Spacelabs Healthcare$24,000
Thornhill Research$20,000
Zimek Technologies$20,000
Athena ISG/GTXtreme$20,000
Ablitech Inc$20,000
Agios Pharmaceuticals$20,000
Advanced Init in Medical Simulation$20,000
Advanced Life Sciences$20,000
Cryolife Inc$20,000
CyberKnife Coalition$20,000
Onconova Therapeutics$20,000
Conceptus Inc$15,000
Blood Cell Storage Inc$10,000
Biovest International$10,000
Advaxis Inc$10,000
Airlift Research Foundation$10,000
Advanced Diabetes Supply$10,000
Jazz Pharmaceuticals$10,000
Trident USA Health Services$10,000
Trius Therapeutics$10,000
Pyng Medical$10,000
Pharmaceutical Printed Literature Assn$10,000
Healthcare Waste/Emer Preparedness Cltn$5,000
Consortium for Plant Biotech Research$5,000
Cytomedix Inc$0
Electro Medical Systems$0
Dispensing Solutions$0
DME Coalition$0
Blackrock Microsystems$0
CoDa Therapeutics$0
Clinical Data Inc$0
Cellular Bioengineering Inc$0
Abraxis BioScience$0
Advanced Cell Technology$0
AxoGen Inc$0
Azevan Pharmaceuticals$0
Biomedical Systems$0
Bioniche Life Sciences$0
Asterand Inc$0
Analiza Dx$0
American Society for Microbiology$0
Idaho Technologies$0
Fujirebio Diagnostics Inc$0
Genencor International$0
FluGen Inc$0
Estill Medical Technologies$0
Graceway Pharmaceuticals$0
Lannett Co$0
Masimo Corp$0
Integrated Medical Systems$0
Innovative Biotherapies$0
Par Pharmaceutical Companies$0
Physician Diagnostic Services$0
Natl Assn Adv of Orthotics & Prosthetics$0
MedNet Healthcare Technologies$0
Pulmatrix Corp$0
Soluble Systems$0
Schering-Plough Corp$0
Retractable Technologies$0
Tissue Regeneration Technologies$0
Vaxin Pharmaceuticals$0
Sorenson Group Management$0
STB Corp$0
Theragenics Corp$0
Therapure Biopharma Inc$0
T2 Biosystems$0
View our complete Lobbying profile for Pharmaceuticals / Health Products

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center.