Laboring for American Workers

Laboring for American Workers
Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette, August 31, 2022, p. A5
Where have all the workers gone? And what can Democrats do about it next Monday?

Had Democrats stuck with the coalition Franklin Roosevelt bequeathed them they would today be winning by wide margins every election from the local schoolhouse to the White House.

That coalition carries forward in the name, “the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party.” Not incidentally, that party controls half of Minnesota's U.S. House seats, both U.S. Senate seats, the lower house of the state legislature, and the governorship.

Both parties have watched the cost of presidential and congressional campaign expenses go from $23 million in 1952 ($257 million in 2020 dollars) to $14.4 billion in 2020 – a 56 fold increase.

In response, the Democrats tried to build a national political party with money from the east coast and voters on the left coast. The result? Flyover country became fly away country. When workers asked, “What have you done for us lately?” all they heard was crickets.

By the 2020 election 83 percent of the 3112 U.S. counties studied were solid Republican. Iowa Democrats’ results were worse: 94 percent of the counties went for Trump. (Democrats picked up the three counties with state universities plus Polk, Linn, and Scott.)

The pay and benefits of union jobs that had enabled workers to enjoy the middle-class rewards of homes, cars, boats and college-educated kids had largely disappeared. When the air traffic controllers went on strike in 1981 President Reagan shut out the union and fired 3,000 members. His message to industry leaders? Union busting is OK.

In the 1950s 35 percent of private sector workers belonged to unions. By 2012, after a half-century of Republicans’ successful efforts at union busting, it had fallen to 6.6 percent. [Photo credit: The United Food & Commercial Workers International Union.]

Union members were not just a source of funds and votes. They also used to do the most significant share of the heavy lifting – door knocking, leaflet distribution, phone calling, and taking voters to the polls.

Today much of that person-to-person campaigning goes undone.

I recall (but can’t find) a Wall Street Journal item in the early 1960s about a firm in California that claimed it could elect anyone to any office with a $100,000 TV-only campaign. With no TV competition they were quite successful. During 2019-2020 political TV, radio and digital advertising reached $8.5 billion.

But today’s TV effectiveness is not what it used to be. And mastery of political use of social media has yet to occur.

Democrats can’t magic wand their party’s problems away.

Meanwhile, what Democrats can do is to seize the ultimate teachable moment each Labor Day offers the party – starting with next Monday.

They can organize Labor Day Democratic party celebrations and rallies in communities and neighborhoods around the country. They can emphasize what the party’s elected officials have delivered to working people over the past century. Not today’s candidates’ promises. What Republicans have done to oppose them, further enriching the wealthy while ignoring, or opposing, workers’ interests.

It's no cure-all, but it sure would be a good start.
__________
Nicholas Johnson was a board member, DNC Harriman Communications Center. mailbox@nicholasjohnson.org

SOURCES Minnesota DFL. “Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party,” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Democratic-Farmer-Labor_Party (“It is currently the state's favored party, controlling half of Minnesota's U.S. House seats, both U.S. Senate seats, the lower house of the state legislature, and the governorship.”)

Campaigns cost. “$23 Million for 1952 Campaigns,” CQ Almanac [Congressional Quarterly], 1953, https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal53-1365614 (“GOP Reports $13,814,997, Democrats $6,159,844 For White House, Capital Races; CQ Lists Spending Reports Of 133 Groups, Names $5,000 Donors In 30 States

The 1952 campaign, Presidential and Congressional, cost the two major parties and other national political groups $23 million, according to reports filed with the Clerk of the House by political organizations. The total includes expenditures for Congressional campaigns. (For detailed analysis of Congressional campaign spending, see page 40.)

Republican Congressional candidates and national and special political committees spent a total of $13.8 million. Democratic groups and candidates spent $6.2 million. The remaining $3 million was recorded as expenditures by labor groups, minor parties and unaffiliated political groups.”)

Karl Evers-Hillstrom, “Most Expensive Ever: 2020 Election Cost $14.4 Billion,” Open Secrets, Feb. 11, 2021, https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/02/2020-cycle-cost-14p4-billion-doubling-16/ (“Political spending in the 2020 election totaled $14.4 billion, . . .. While the presidential election drew a record $5.7 billion, congressional races saw a stunning $8.7 billion in total spending.”)

“$1 in 1952 is Worth $11.18 Today,” CPI Inflation Calculator, https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1952?amount=1#:~:text=Value%20of%20%241%20from%201952,cumulative%20price%20increase%20of%201%2C018.02%25 [based on U.S. Bureau of Statistics data] (“Value of $1 from 1952 to 2022. $1 in 1952 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $11.18 today, an increase of $10.18 over 70 years. The dollar had an average inflation rate of 3.51% per year between 1952 and today, producing a cumulative price increase of 1,018.02%.”) [Thus, the 2020 value of $23 million in 1952 would be $257 million.]

Republican counties. Samuel Wonacott, “87% of Americans Live in a County That Has Voted For the Same Party in the Past Three presidential Elections,” Ballotpedia News, news.ballotpedia.org/2022/04/18/87-of-americans-live-in-a-county-that-has-voted-for-the-same-party-in-the-past-three-presidential-elections/ (“After the 2020 presidential election, 288 million Americans lived in either a Solid Democratic or Republican county, 87.2% of the 330 million covered in this analysis.” map of counties; 459 solid Democratic, 2368 solid Republican)

“Donald Trump Won in Iowa,” Politico, Jan. 6, 2021, https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/iowa/ (map showing counties)

Percentage in unions. Mike Collins, “The Decline Of Unions Is A Middle Class Problem,” Forbes, Mar. 19, 2015, https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/03/19/the-decline-of-unions-is-a-middle-class-problem/?sh=5b0d78667f2d (“President Reagan - Reagan Kicked off the era of union busting by successfully shutting out the air traffic controllers union in 1981. After a nationwide strike 3,000 workers were dismissed by Reagan. This was a signal to industry that union busting was o.k. It was also a signal to future presidents and politicians that taking an anti-union stance was not necessarily a political liability.”

“In 2013 the unionized workforce in America hit a 97 year low. Only 11.3% of all workers were unionized. In the private sector unionization fell to 6.6%, down from a peak of 35% in the 1950s. American corporations have made a concerted effort to get rid of unions and reduce labor costs since 1980, and they have been very successful.”)

“Unions by the Numbers,” Barnes & Thornburg, Jan. 24, 2022, https://btlaw.com/en/insights/blogs/labor-relations/2022/unions-by-the-numbers-2022-edition (“In 2021, the number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions continued to decline (-241,000) to 14.0 million, and the percent who were members of unions was 10.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The rate is down from 10.8 percent in 2020 . . ..” crediting U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.)

TV ads. Howard Homonoff, “2020 Political Ad Spending Exploded: Did It Work?” Forbes, Dec. 8, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardhomonoff/2020/12/08/2020-political-ad-spending-exploded-did-it-work/?sh=7fa848d3ce0d (“In the 2019-2020 election cycle, total political advertising spending reached $8.5 billion across TV, radio and digital media. This was 30% higher than the $6.7 billion projected earlier this year, and 108% more than spending in 2017-2018, which was a record at that time. We saw 9.3 million of TV ads alone in more than 4300 federal, state and local elections ….”)
# # #

Taxes

Don’t Start A Discussion With Tax Cuts
Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette, November 10, 2021, p. 6A
Random thoughts about taxes.

1. Years ago I researched what political campaign donors get for their money. It turns out to be 1,000 or more to one.

An example: The Department of Agriculture sets milk prices. Imagine it refuses producers’ request for an increase. The industry makes a $200,000 “contribution” to the president. The milk price is increased. Next year Americans pay $200 million more for their milk. That’s a 1,000-to-one return on their “investment.”

You needn’t imagine. It happened. Except we paid $500-$700 million more.

Returns can include government contracts, tariffs, merger approvals, tax cuts and more.

This is an example of when increasing our taxes — to pay millions for publicly funded campaigns — could save us billions in family expenses.

2. Don’t mess with the tax code. If a business is to get taxpayer money make it a transparent appropriation on the table, not a hidden, manipulation of the tax code.

3. There are 12 or more categories of reasons why TIFs are objectionable.

For example, it’s backward. If a city or school board wants to spend tax money for legitimate public purposes, it needs voters’ approval. If it wants to distribute taxpayers’ money to for-profit private ventures, voters have no say.

We shouldn’t have different standards. But if we’re going to, aren’t taxpayers’ gifts to private businesses the ones requiring voter approval?

4. Our conversations should begin, not with taxes, but with the kind of life we want for ourselves and others. What our founders called “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Let’s pursue why the citizens of Finland and Denmark are number one and two on the worldwide happiness index while Americans are 18th. (Photo credit: Tiia Monto, Happy People road sign, Muuratsalo, Muurame, Finland, commons, wikimedia.org)

Only the most hardhearted among us will bad-mouth Jesus’ appeal for food, water, shelter, clothing, and health care for the poor (and prison visits). Matthew 25.

What to do? Economist Milton Friedman once told me, “There’s nothing wrong with poverty that money can’t cure.”

Money, yes. And taxes are one source. President Richard Nixon joined Friedman in the negative income tax idea. In 2019 Stockton tried a guaranteed basic income experiment. Forty cities followed, including Los Angeles and now Chicago.

5. But taxes aren’t the only source.

Some employers have voluntarily provided employees what Democrats are proposing: full health care, retirement packages, family leave, on-premises child care — and company housing or wages that can cover rent.

Foundations such as Bill Gates’ fund social programs. So do churches and nonprofits. And consider the economic value of volunteers’ efforts. It’s estimated to be the equivalent of all cash contributions and major philanthropy combined.

6. Public policy discussions should progress through: What do we want? What are the alternative ways of accomplishing it? What is the most efficient and effective way to do it? If personnel and funding are needed, what are the alternative sources of both? What are their pros and cons?

Fiscal responsibility? Of course. But please, no more starting off backing up with talk about “taxes.”

_______________
Nicholas Johnson, Iowa City, maintains nicholasjohnson.org. Comments: mailbox@nicholasjohnson.org

SOURCES Nixon & Milk Producers.
See heading and three relevant pages of notes on these events below.

TIFs.
Nicholas Johnson, “TIFs: Links to Blog Essays (2006-2015), https://fromdc2iowa.blogspot.com/2014/03/tifs-links-to-blog-essays.html

Nicholas Johnson, “Talking TIF: Costs Outweigh Possible Benefits,” The Gazette, April 13, 2014, pp. A9, A12, https://fromdc2iowa.blogspot.com/2014/04/tussling-over-tifs-pros-and-cons.html

TIFs often unnecessary. Dave DeWitte, “Ft. Madison Picked for Wind Turbine Blade Plant,” The Gazette, August 18, 2006, p. 7B (Of interest to rain forest followers because it involves “Earthpark’s corporate partner” (having declared its love but offered no dowery), Siemens (from whom nothing has been reported as having been heard since the “partnership” was announced) mentioned only one factor in its selection of Iowa for manufacturing these 146-foot-long, 11 ton blades. “Siemens conducted a nationwide site search . . . [and] the Iowa site’s proximity to the more northerly year-around navigation port on the Mississippi River at Keokuk was critical to its success.” Nonetheless, $5 million was provided by the state, county, city, and a community college.

Happiness index.
“Finland ranked happiest country in the world – again,” BBC, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56457295, and “Happiness report:

“Finland is world’s ‘happiest country’ – UN,” BBC, March 15, 2018, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43414145 (includes US at 18th place)

Nicholas Johnson, “World Happiness Index 2021; We're Number One?” April 19, 2021, https://fromdc2iowa.blogspot.com/2021/04/world-happiness-index-2021-were-number.html -- provides links to our Declaration of Independence assertion “among these (unalienable rights is) “the pursuit of happiness” and to: Thomas Jefferson wrote the Maryland Republicans, “the care of human life and happiness … is the only legitimate object of good government.”

“Why are Danish people so happy?” Denmark Ministry of Foreign Affairs, https://denmark.dk/people-and-culture/happiness (“Denmark citizens pay some of the world’s highest taxes – up to 56% of their income, plus a 25% value added tax and up to 150% on automobiles. Yet most think it a bargain for what they get in return.”)

Nikolaj Skydsgaard, “Denmark’s high tax consensus wobbles as Danes told to spend,” Reuters, June 23, 2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-denmark-economy/denmarks-high-tax-consensus-wobbles-as-danes-told-to-spend-idUSKBN23U1SE (“Denmark rivals France among advanced economies for the heaviest tax burden on its citizens – who by and large accept it as the price to be paid for their cradle-to-grave welfare state.”)

Basic income.
Mark Guarino, “Chicago poised to create one of the nation’s largest ‘guaranteed basic income’ programs,” The Washington Post, Oct. 25, 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/10/25/ ritica-poised-create-one-nations-largest-guaranteed-basic-income-programs/ (Stockton; 40 cities; LA and Chicago)

Employee benefits.
Jillian D’Onfro and Lucy England, “An Inside Look at Google's Best Employee Perks,” Inc., Sept. 21, 2015 https://www.inc.com/business-insider/best-google-benefits.html (free gourmet food; free fitness classes and gym (with showers); free transportation to and from work; free one-hour massages (rewards for good job); can bring dogs to work; matching 401Ks; post birth of child, moms get 18 weeks paid leave, dads 6 weeks (while continuing to receive stock and bonuses) and “baby bonding bucks” for supplies; on-site daycare; surviving spouse gets half the employee’s salary for 10 years plus $1000 a month for each child; 80/20 rule (80% of time for on primary job, 20% on “passion projects”); libraries and limited gifts of books; presentations and lectures; 3-month unpaid leaves (with healthcare up to 3 months)

Bill Gates Foundation. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, https://www.gatesfoundation.org/

Economic value of volunteers. Eleanor Brown, “Assessing the Value of Volunteer Activity,” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, March 1999, pp. 3-17, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0899764099281001 (“”there are estimates suggesting that its dollar value today is at least on par with personal gifts of money and financial assets”)

# # # President Nixon and Milk Producers
Nicholas Johnson, “Campaigns: You Pay $4 or $4000,” Des Moines Register, July 21, 1996, https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/rcntpubl/campaign.html

“Milk Price Support Program,” Farm Service Agency, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, July 2004, https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/mpsp04.pdf

“Starting shortly after Richard Nixon took office, bad money began gushing into the Nixon coffers. It sometimes came to Washington in big bundles of cash. The Nixon impeachment charges included as supporting material references to payoffs from ITT and other large firms, and from special interests, including $2 million from milk producers, $200,000 from a criminal (Robert Vesco) to block legal action, and even $200,000 from McDonald’s in return for permission to charge more for a quarter-pounder at a time when wage and price controls were in effect. Item after item cites criminal fraud and conspiracy, bribery and extortion.” Barry Sussman, “A Watergate lesson: Secret money means payoffs, bribes and extortion,” Nieman Watchdog, October 19, 2010, http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=49

“Chronology of Watergate Developments in 1973,” Oct. 23, 1973, CQ Almanac 1973, https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal73-867-26366-1225636

“Dairy Letter. A letter to Nixon promising a $2-million 1972 campaign contribution from a dairy industry group in return for action to curb dairy imports was leaked to the press. Signed by a representative of Associated Milk Producers Inc. of San Antonio, Texas, the letter was dated Dec. 16, 1970. Two weeks after that, Nixon imposed quotas on certain dairy products. The letter reportedly had fallen into the hands of Archibald Cox shortly before he was fired as special prosecutor. The dairy industry's financial support of Nixon's campaign had been linked previously to a 1971 increase in milk price supports.”

Ditto, Nov. 17, “ilk Prices. None of his interrogators asked Nixon about the milk price supports case, so the President brought up the subject himself. It had been alleged that in exchange for a $422,500 donation to the Nixon reelection campaign from the dairy industry, former Secretary of Agriculture Clifford Hardin reversed himself in March 1971 and ordered increased price supports for milk producers. The increase was estimated to add $500-million to $700-million in income for dairy farmers.

Nothing of the sort occurred, said the President. He related that he had accepted Hardin's original recommendation not to raise price supports, but that three weeks later, “Congress put a gun to our head.” He agreed to an increase when his legislative advisers told him that members of Congress, mostly Democrats, he said, wanted the increase and could override his veto if he tried to prevent it. (Earlier action, Oct. 23)

Ditto, Dec. 17, “Milk Tape. U.S. District Judge William B. Jones agreed to a Justice Department request to temporarily seal all subpoenaed documents and tapes related to a civil suit brought by consumer advocate Ralph Nader against the Nixon administration for alleged- favors to the milk industry. Jones acted after a Nader attorney, William A. Dobrovir, admitted in court that he had played one of the tapes at a party. Dobrovir apologized for what he called the “very foolish mistake.” The tape he played contained a March 31, 1971, conversation between Nixon and dairy industry representatives, which White House attorneys had turned over in response to a subpoena.”

Jan. 8 ITT and Milk Statements. The White House released two lengthy papers detailing the President's rebuttal of charges that he granted favors to the dairy industry and to the International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation (ITT) in exchange for large campaign contributions. The papers showed the allegations to be “utterly false,” said a statement accompanying them.

Political and national economic considerations, but not campaign financial needs, guided the administration's decision to approve higher milk price supports in March 1971, the White House contended in the milk background paper. The paper denied any connection between the milk support decision and the fact that dairy industry groups contributed $427,500 to the Nixon campaign in 1972.

The White House, however, acknowledged that Nixon knew as early as September 1970 that dairy groups planned to contribute large sums to his 1972 campaign. According to the White House, the President was informed in a 1970 memo of a $2-million campaign pledge from the Associated Milk Producers Inc., the largest dairy cooperative. But at no time, the statement added, did Nixon discuss the contributions with the dairy industry.

Jan. 11 Milk Case. Lawyers associated with consumer advocate Ralph Nader filed a motion in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., asking for access to more White House tapes and documents relating to their suit charging that the Nixon administration based a 1971 decision to raise milk price supports on political considerations, including campaign contributions from milk industry groups. The brief included a quotation from a White House recording of a March 23, 1971, discussion between Nixon and industry representatives, which the attorneys said brought into question Nixon's contention that he did not refer to campaign contributions during the meeting. According to the brief, Nixon said: “And I must say a lot of businessmen and others I get around this table, they yammer and talk a lot but they don't do anything about it. But you and I appreciate that. I don't need to spell it out.” (Nixon milk statement. Jan. 8.)

Jan. 23 More Hearings. The Senate select Watergate committee voted four to three along party lines to hold six days of additional hearings into the $100,000 given by billionaire Howard Hughes to Nixon's friend, Charles G. (Bebe) Rebozo, and the $427,500 given to the Nixon campaign in 1971 by milk producers. # # #

Ask Your Doctor

NOTE: In one of those uncany coincidences that occasionally occur, on the same day The Gazette published this column, below, its lead story -- page one, above the fold -- was the FDA's approval of the sale of Biogen's version of the Alzheimer drug aducanumab they call Aduhelm, "despite a scathing assessment in November by the FDA’s outside panel of neurological experts." The price of this questionable drug? $56,000 a year. Matthew Perrone, "FDA approves much-debated Alzheimer’s drug panned by experts," Associated Press, June 7, 2021, https://apnews.com/article/science-government-and-politics-business-health-2147d824af9cfde629041d83d9ca7a8d

Ask Your Doctor About Big Pharma Ads;
Another Example of Americans Paying Corporations to Join Their Sales Force

Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette, June 8, 2021, p. 6A
“Ask your doctor if your purchase of this over-priced, patent-protected, copy of a generic drug, with its possible hazardous side effects might be right for our shareholders.”

In 2001 global pharmaceutical sales were $390 billion. In 2020 they were $1.27 trillion.

In 2018 the pharma industry spent $6.46 billion on direct-to-consumer (DTC) “ask your doctor” TV commercials – enlisting you and me to help boost their sales. (It also spent nearly $30 billion wooing doctors with speaking fees, travel, meals, free samples and “education.”)

When I was young, companies paid people to walk around downtown Iowa City wearing small advertising billboards. Today people pay companies to display company names and logos on their hats, shirts, pants and shoes.

Persuading doctors to write prescriptions for drugs we don’t need, may cause harm, or with no more significant benefits than generics, may be another example of our paying corporations to join their sales force.

But it’s much more serious. The West Health Policy Center reports “If current drug pricing trends continue [some patients’ inability to pay those prices] will result in the premature deaths of 112,000 beneficiaries a year, making it a leading cause of death in the U.S., ahead of diabetes, influenza, pneumonia, and kidney disease.”

Once again, “We’re Number One!” We’re number one in defense spending, and percentage of persons in prisons – and now “ask your doctor” commercials.

But this time we’re not just number one, we are almost the only one. Only two countries permit advertising drugs directly to consumers. (New Zealand permits it, but robust opposition continues.)

We go to doctors because few patients are equipped to self-diagnose or choose remedies. The American Medical Association made a strong case for banning the ads. It was unsuccessful. [Photo credit: patients asking their doctor; Rhoda Baer, commons.wikimedia.org]

How can this be? Every year between 1999 and 2018 the pharmaceutical industry spent an average of $1.5 billion on political contributions and lobbying.

Isn’t it kind of weird to advertise a product to those legally forbidden to buy it? We can’t go into a drug store and buy this stuff. We must nag our doctor for the permission slip called a “prescription.”

Want an analogy? Think about TV ads for toys on children’s programs. Aside from a handful of young, energetic entrepreneurs – and kids with advanced degrees in parental manipulation – children cannot buy what the capitalists are advertising.

That’s like big pharma’s “ask your doctor” TV spots – except we’re now the children and the doctors are our parents.

Listening to the FDA-required itemization of side effects makes you question whether it is “right for you” – or anyone else. But you don’t listen, because the commercial keeps telling you, “Oh, look at the squirrel.” See the happy grandparents with their happy grandchildren; the couple fishing or swimming in the lake or lovingly watching the sunset from the deck of their $400,000 summer cabin.

There are things capitalism can do better than public programs. Providing the pharmaceutical portion of our nation’s healthcare is not one of them.
_____________
Nicholas Johnson, former co-director, Institute for Health, Behavior and Environmental Policy, is the author of What Do You Mean and How Do You Know? mailbox@nicholasjohnson.org

# # #
Sources Embedded in Text
“Ask your doctor if your purchase of this over-priced, patent-protected, copy of a generic drug, with its possible hazardous side effects might be right for our shareholders.”

In 2001 global pharmaceutical sales were $390 billion. In 2020 they were $1.27 trillion.

“Revenue of the worldwide pharmaceutical market from 2001 to 2020,” Statista, May 4, 2021, https://www.statista.com/statistics/263102/pharmaceutical-market-worldwide-revenue-since-2001/

In 2018 the pharma industry spent $6.46 billion on direct-to-consumer (DTC) “ask your doctor” TV commercials – enlisting you and me to help boost their sales. (It also spent nearly $30 billion wooing doctors with speaking fees, travel, meals, free samples and “education.”)

“Direct-to-consumer spending of the pharmaceutical industry in the United States from 2012 to September 2019,” Statista, Sept. 24, 2020, https://www.statista.com/statistics/686906/pharma-ad-spend-usa/

Roopal Luhana, “Pharmaceutical Companies Paid Billions to Doctors in 2018: Influencing Prescriptions?” New York Injury Law News, Legal Examiner, Aug. 2, 2019, https://newyork.legalexaminer.com/health/pharmaceutical-companies-paid-billions-to-doctors-in-2018-influencing-prescriptions/

When I was young, companies paid people to walk around downtown Iowa City wearing small advertising billboards. Today people pay companies to display company names and logos on their hats, shirts, pants and shoes.

Persuading doctors to write prescriptions for drugs we don’t need, may cause harm, or with no more significant benefits than generics may be another example of our paying corporations to join their sales force.

But it’s much more serious. The West Health Policy Center reports “If current drug pricing trends continue [some patients’ inability to pay those prices] will result in the premature deaths of 112,000 beneficiaries a year, making it a leading cause of death in the U.S., ahead of diabetes, influenza, pneumonia, and kidney disease.”

“More than 1.1 million deaths among Medicare recipients due to high cost of drugs,” West Health Institute, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), EurekAlert!, Nov. 19, 2020, https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-11/whi-mt1111820.php

Once again, “We’re Number One!” We’re number one in defense spending, and percentage of persons in prisons – and now “ask your doctor” commercials.

Aran Ali, “Mapped: The World’s Top Countries for Military Spending,” Visual Capitalist, May 15, 2021, https://www.visualcapitalist.com/worlds-top-countries-for-military-spending/

“Countries with the largest number of prisoners per 100,000 of the national population, as of May 2021,” Statista, June 2, 2021, https://www.statista.com/statistics/262962/countries-with-the-most-prisoners-per-100-000-inhabitants/

But this time we’re not just number one, we are almost the only one. Only two countries permit advertising drugs directly to consumers. (New Zealand permits it, but robust opposition continues.)

Susan Kelly, “U.S. doctor group calls for ban on drug advertising to consumers,” Reuters, Nov. 17, 2015, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pharmaceuticals-advertising/u-s-doctor-group-calls-for-ban-on-drug-advertising-to-consumers-idUSKCN0T62WT20151117 (“The United States and New Zealand are the only two countries that allow direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs.”)

Beth Snyder Bulik, “Doctors in New Zealand—the only non-U.S. country that allows DTC advertising—call for bans,” Fierce Pharma, March 20, 2017, https://www.fiercepharma.com/marketing/doctors-new-zealand-only-other-country-allows-dtc-advertising-hate-it-too

“Statement from New Zealand Public Health Experts on Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs (relating to Consumer NZ Poll),” Media Release from University of Otago, New Zealand Doctor, August 7, 2019, https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/article/undoctored/statement-new-zealand-public-health-experts-direct-consumer-advertising

Joel Lexchin, David B. Menkes, “Can Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs be Effectively Regulated?” New Zealand Medical Journal, no date, dates on footnoted material go to 2019, https://www.nzma.org.nz/journal-articles/can-direct-to-consumer-advertising-of-prescription-drugs-be-effectively-regulated (Conclusion: “Taken together with international evidence that regulation has consistently failed to prevent the inappropriate promotion of prescription drugs, these findings suggest that DTCA is more likely to cause harm than benefit and should be banned.”)

Raktim Kumar Ghosh, Samhati Mondai Ghosh, “Drug advertisements: what a physician should know,” The New Zealand Medical Journal, vol. 123, no. 1314, May 14 2010, https://assets-global.website-files.com/5e332a62c703f653182faf47/5e332a62c703f6f72e2fd7ea_kumar.pdf

We go to doctors because few patients are equipped to self-diagnose or choose remedies. The American Medical Association made a strong case for banning the ads. It was unsuccessful.

Dan Mangan, “Americans Oppose Fast Approvals, Want Drug Ads Off TV: Survey,” NBC News, May 11, 2016, https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/americans-oppose-fast-approvals-want-drug-ads-tv-survey-n572301 (“the American Medical Association, the nation's largest physicians' group, called for a ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs and medical devices.”)

How can this be? Every year between 1999 and 2018 the pharmaceutical industry spent an average of $1.5 billion on political contributions and lobbying.

Olivier J. Wouters, “Lobbying Expenditures and Campaign Contributions by the Pharmaceutical and Health Product Industry in the United States, 1999-2018,” JAMA Internal Medicine, March 3, 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054854/

Isn’t it kind of weird to advertise a product to those legally forbidden to buy it? We can’t go into a drug store and buy this stuff. We must nag our doctor for the permission slip called a “prescription.”

Want an analogy? Think about TV ads for toys on children’s programs. Aside from a handful of young, energetic entrepreneurs – and kids with advanced degrees in parental manipulation – children cannot buy what the capitalists are advertising.

That’s like big pharma’s “ask your doctor” TV spots – except we’re now the children and the doctors are our parents.

Listening to the FDA-required itemization of side effects makes you question whether it is “right for you” – or anyone else. But you don’t listen, because the commercial keeps telling you, “Oh, look at the squirrel.” See the happy grandparents with their happy grandchildren; the couple fishing or swimming in the lake or lovingly watching the sunset from the deck of their $400,000 summer cabin.

There are things capitalism can do better than public programs. Providing the pharmaceutical portion of our nation’s healthcare is not one of them. # # #