President Joe Biden faces opposition not only from Republicans but Right-wing Democrats as well.
One of these is West Virginia United States Senator Joe Manchin.
On June 7, 2021, The PBS Newshour examined perhaps the foremost issue of our democracy: The For the People Act.
Since November 3, 2020, when former President Donald Trump lost the Presidential election, he has spread The Big Lie: That the election was “stolen” from him.
On the basis of that lie, Republicans in 47 states have introduced 361 bills to make it harder to vote.
As of June 21, 2021, 17 states enacted 28 new laws that restrict access to the vote.
Among those states affected: Georgia, Iowa, Arkansas and Utah.
Georgia:
- Bans giving food and water to voters in line;
- Severely restricts mail ballot drop boxes;
- Allows Right-wing groups to challenge the eligibility of an unlimited number of voters; and
- Gives the GOP-controlled legislature sweeping powers over election administration.
Arizona:
- Wants to add new requirements for casting a mail-in ballot and make it harder to receive one.
Florida:
- Intends to ban mail ballot drop boxes.
Michigan:
- Republicans introduced eight bills adding new voter ID requirements for mail voting and forbidding election officials to send out absentee ballot request forms to voters.
Congressional Democrats have countered with the For the People Act. Among its provisions:
- Expand early voting and registration across the country in federal elections;
- Block states from purging their rolls of voters;
- End partisan gerrymandering;
- Force large donors to disclose themselves publicly.
“It is something that is obviously very critical right now,” said PBS Newshour Correspondent Lisa Desjardins. “We see rising in this country both sides talking about democracy and voting rights and what’s happening at this moment.
“[West Virginia United States Senator] Joe Manchin…would be the 50th vote that Democrats would have for this in the Senate. They have 49.
Joe Manchin
“And here’s what he said [on] why he opposed it: ‘I believe that partisan voting legislation will destroy the already weakening binds of our democracy. And for that reason, I will vote against the For the People Act.’
“Notable, he did not have any substantive problems with the bill that he raised. Instead, he said, the issue is there are no Republicans on board.”
Manchin thus ignores the reality that Republicans will never be on board.
“This Manchin decision is a body blow to this legislation. It is not dead yet, but it is in real trouble. It’s unclear if, when [New York Senator] Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader [in the Senate] will bring it back up,” said Desjardins.
Many Democrats and political correspondents have speculated about Manchin’s motives for opposing this legislation.
Some believe he’s a Right-winger in Democrats’ clothing. Others think he wants to increase his clout on behalf of his state, West Virginia.
Manchin’s motives, however, are not important. Eliminating his opposition is.
And the man who has the power to do this is President Joe Biden.
All that he needs to do is invite Manchin into the Oval Office for an off-the-record talk, which could open like this:
“Your state has two Coast Guard military bases. By this time next week, it will have only one—because I’m going to close down the other. You can also forget about those highway-repair projects you’re expecting to start. And I’ve been informed we have far too many post offices in West Virginia, considering its small population….”
Suddenly, Manchin would get the clear message: “Biden is the big dog on this block, not me.”
He would also grasp that his constituents would blame him, not Biden, for the resulting chaos and hardships they face from the upcoming closures.
This is precisely how President Lyndon B. Johnson dealt with Congressional members who dared oppose his prized legislation. And it worked.
Joe Biden has spent 44 years in Washington, D.C.—as a United States Senator from Delaware from 1973 to 2009; and then as Vice President from 2009 to 2017.
But he seems to have never read Niccolo Machiavelli’s famous warning in The Prince:
Niccolo Machiavelli
For how we live is so far removed from how we ought to live, that he who abandons what is done for what ought to be done, will rather learn to bring about his own ruin rather than his preservation. A man who wishes to make a profession of goodness in everything must inevitably come to grief among so many who are not good.
And therefore it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself, to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge and not use it, according to the necessity of the case.
Whatever his motives, Manchin is clearly willing to allow Republicans to suppress the voting rights of millions of non-Fascist Americans.
President Joe Biden now faces a moment of crisis: He can fight his enemies with the same ruthless tactics they routinely use–or face disaster.
Republicans are working to corrupt the democratic process to reinstall a proven criminal and traitor in the Oval Office.
This is no time to “fight” a party of Adolf Hitlers with the appeasement tactics of a Neville Chamberlain.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
AARON KESSELHEIM, ABC NEWS, ADVERTISING, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARRY MANILOW, BBC, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DIABETES, EBOLA, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL, HUFFINGTON POST, JAMA NETWORK OPEN, JARDIANCE, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HARVARD GAZETTE, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, X
DANCING WITH EBOLA
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Social commentary on May 22, 2024 at 12:13 amI have type 2 diabetes but I manage it well
It’s a little pill with a big story to tell
I take once daily Jardiance at each day’s start
As time went on, it was easy to see
I’m lowering my A1c
Jardiance is really swell
The little pill with a big story to tell.
Millions of Americans have heard this jingle for Jardiance—an anti-diabetes medication—whose ads flood the airways. And millions of Americans are furious about those ads.
The pharmaceutical industry is flooding the airways with ads for its products—especially at dinnertime.
Jardiance ad
Catch any of the “Big Three” national newscasts—on ABC, CBS and NBC—and you’ll see that the vast majority of their ads are funded by Big Pharma.
The United States and New Zealand are the only two countries that allow pharmaceutical companies to directly advertise prescription drugs to consumers.
In 1996, pharmaceutical companies spent $550 million on drug ads. That number increased more than 10-fold by 2020, reaching $6.58 billion annually.
In 2022, the three most-advertised drugs in the United States were:
Rinvoq (for adults with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis)
Dupixent (curbs the immune system over-reaction that results in atopic dermatitis)
and Skyriz (used to treat adults with: moderate to severe plaque psoriasis).
And that advertising didn’t come cheaply. Rinvoq spent more than $315.8 million on TV ads in 2022. Dupixent spent $305.9 million and Skyrizi spent $174.4 million.
In 2022, the industry spent just under $8.1 billion on ad campaigns, which includes all advertising areas, such as TV, print, social media and streaming channels.
Drug companies view the ads as an increasingly effective way to target viewers—especially older ones—who need more extensive medical care and treatment for potentially life-threatening conditions.
No doubt the companies would love to be able to hand out their medications on street corners—the way pushers of heroin and meth now do. But that would put them directly in the crosshairs of federal and local law enforcement.
So the best these companies can do is try to convince patients to nag their doctors: “Oh, I want that drug.”
Meanwhile, there are widespread concerns that:
The last one is especially important, given the cheerful atmosphere of so many of these ads. Take the one for Jardiance, for example.
The clearly obese woman in the ad is shown at her office. She isn’t working—because she’s too busy singing about having a life-threatening disease. Her co-workers are equally joyful as they join her in singing the praises of Jardiance.
It’s easy to imagine a parody of such commercials. If a cure is eventually found for Ebola, a similar ad could be based on Barry Manilow’s classic song, “Only in Chicago”:
I got sick
And I sat on the bed
And puked out my guts.
And oh I swear
I remember how much I bled
And I thought I’d die.
With Ebola I knew I’d lose it all
It was real, it was Death.
This would be followed by a cheery ad for a pill that eliminates the symptoms of this usually fatal disease.
Ebola virus
The Harvard Gazette, in a March 1, 2023 article, warned that most advertised medicines don’t prove much better than other treatment options:
“We’ve all seen the commercials. People relaxed, smiling, and having fun with friends and family despite having a horrible or uncomfortable — or at least chronic — condition. Their new lease on life comes courtesy of a drug. Then the fine print. Roll the list of potential side effects, some of which seem worse than the malady itself.
“So why are the spots so popular with sponsors? Because they’re so effective — at least in terms of sales. In a recent issue of JAMA Network Open, Aaron Kesselheim and colleagues published the results of a study showing that some of the most heavily advertised drugs are largely no better at treating disease than other options.”
Kesselheim, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, bluntly gave the reason why pharmaceutical companies spend billions on drug advertising:
“Direct-to-consumer advertising is really intended for consumers. As a primary care physician, people certainly come into my office with advertisements that they’ve printed off the internet or that they remember seeing during the football game the previous Sunday and say, ‘What about this drug?’
“Studies show that when patients come in and ask their physicians about particular drugs, they’re more likely to get prescriptions for those drugs. Doctors of course also watch TV, but the pharmaceutical industry spends much more money advertising its drugs directly to physicians, through visits to their offices, sponsorship of continuing medical education, support of professional society meetings, consultancies, and the like.
“Actually, the amount of money that pharmaceutical companies spend on advertising to physicians is far higher than the amount spent on direct-to-consumer advertising because physicians are the ones writing the prescriptions.”
Share this: