Texas Governor Rick Perry wants to be elected president. But shouldn't he know how to count before entering the White House? One would hope. But during the Republican primary debate, Perry acknowledged taking only $5,000 from Merck. Yet data compiled by the National Institute on Money in State Politics show the drugmaker's political action committee contributed $28,500 between 2002 and 2010.
His ties to Merck have been a flashpoint thanks to the controversy over the Gardasil vaccine, which was approved five years ago to protect against various strains of the human papillomavirus in girls and women ages 9 to 26. Policymakers welcomed the vaccine, since HPV can lead to cervical cancer, but social conservatives and some parents continue to worry that minors do not have the judgment needed to make an informed decision (see here). Gardasil has also been linked to side-effect reports (look here).
Perry waded into the flap at about the same time Merck launched a surreptitious marketing campaign to convince state officials around the country to support mandatory vaccination (read this). In early 2007, he bypassed the Texas legislature and signed an order making Texas the first state to require school-age girls to be vaccinated with Gardasil. And his former chief of staff, Mike Toomey, was one of three Merck lobbyists in Texas when he signed the order (read this).
The issue was dormant until Perry entered the presidential race. And he recently acknowledged that signing the order was a mistake (look here). But he only acknowledged accepting $5,000, a figure that had been widely reported since 2007. For instance, during the debate last night, he said "The company was Merck, and it was a $5,000 contribution that I had received from them. I raise about $30 million. And if you're saying that I can be bought for $5,000, I'm offended."
But records show that he accepted a total of $28,500. Is that enough for him to be offended? If you look here, you will see that Perry received $23,500 between 2004 and 2010, according to The National Institute On Money In State Politics. The web site also reveals another $5,000 that was contributed by the Merck political action committee during 2002 (please look here).
It is not clear why Perry is either not current on an issue that is front and center - whether or not he likes it - or why he may have difficulty counting money. But one hopes that, if elected, Perry will either learn to pay closer attention to issues that dog his decision making or that he brushes up on basic math, especially since he would likely face a deficit that continues to multiply exponentially by the second.
12 Comments
Darn right. Rick Perry can count. Especially votes. That's why he will be the next President of the United States.
Rick Perry; Big Pharma, Big corruption, and industrial war machine corporate candidate for president....Let the crime wave continue and elect Bush/Cheney 2....
Some of this stuff going on is criminal as confirmed by all the arrests and then look at the civil suits, flying left and right.
There's more. Much more...
http://newmexicoindependent.com/71418/along-with-thousands-to-perry-merck-gave-big-to-the-governors-biggest-donor
ABC reported tonight that there was also some 300 K paid to Perry's advisor when he became a Merck lobbyist.
This is old news for most of us, but it's interesting to see it recycled, repackaged, respun, reasserted, and redenied.
If Perry can prove there really isn't solid evidence for human-caused global warming; that Creationism is credible; that he really isn't a tool of Swiftboaters, environment killers, real estate robber barons, and other Texas bottom-feeders, I will be happy do endorse him.
Otherwise, I find Perry Como a more soothing option.
See here:
http://blog.chron.com/rickperry/2011/09/perry-merck-lobbyist-are-campaign-donors/
Bush without a brain. That is scary but the scariest part are Perry's eyes. They look like he needs an exorcism.
The news has just gotten worse and worse for "Governor Merck Perry" tonight
Turns out Merck gave almost 400,000 to the Rep Governors Association while Perry was a big wig/Charmain there. http://newmexicoindependent.com/71418/along-with-thousands-to-perry-merck-gave-big-to-the-governors-biggest-donor
AND
Mike Toomy, Merck's lobbyist, organized a Super PAC for Perry that expects to raise $55 million for him. Pharma cash to buy a President I am assuming.
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/report-perry-super-pac-expects-raise-55-million
Turns out Perry is a more expensive whore than Bachman gave him credit for being.
Question: Will these states like Texas who mandate HPV vaccination be held liable and pay the individual and small business health insurance premiums if any of these girls have a short term or long term (autoimmunity for example) adverse reaction to the vaccine? Probably not. Also, how do mandates like this impact provider med mal premiums and is Merck exempt from liability?
It saddens and frustrates me to think that Americans and presidential candidates are expending such enormous resources- time and money- on a vaccine that treats a non-airborne virus and certain types of cervical cancer that do not cause a high rate of mortality in the U.S. Currently, the U.S. is in the midst of the worst cancer drug shortages and gray market cancer drug dealings that are causing rationing and scalping of drugs to treat patients with leukemia and lung cancer. I would prefer to engage in a constructive dialogue during which one or more of the Pres. candidates talks about their plan to ensure safe, legal access for US citizens to these and other vital medicines that are on shortage and in the case of Governor Perry, indicate what systems Texas has in place to deal with the drug shortages and the accompanying uptick of drug theft, gray market trading and likely increase in drug counterfeiting and adulteration.
References: http://www.fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/drugshortages/default.htm FDA statement on drug shortages: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/DrugShortages/ucm271417.htm Medwatch reporting:
Good question, AnnePME. Since Gardasil is not mandated currently in any state (although it was for new immigrant women for a time), I assume is not included in any "vaccine court."
Thus, I assume the usual drug liability options apply. In Michigan, that means that there would be no option whatsoever.
BTW, mandatory HPV vacc. almost passed in MI, mainly supported by Dem legislators and others in "association" with Women in Government. It was stopped literally at the stroke of midnight by conservatives.
Led to some "strange bedfellows," so to speak.
Today Governor Perry was petitioned to stay the execution of a condemned prisoner in Texas. I also understand that despite shortages of certain components of the lethal injection cocktail he has agreed not to substitute Gardasil to make up the shortage.
I understand the individual liberty issues being discussed here, and it's a good point. But it is hard for me to understand the narrow focus on real or unproved side effects when discussing a virus that is a well established killer 4000 women in the US each year.
Whether one chooses to believe the results of the clinical trials program in which 10k subjects were exposed to Gardisil, or to chooses instead to peruse VAERS, it's hard for me to see how one reaches the conclusion that these are risks that are even remotely comparable.
I found approximately 840 deaths total listed in VAERS between 2001 and 2010, or about 83 per year.for all vaccines combined. Even assuming that vaccines actually did play a causative role in every one of these deaths (most followup investigations reach a very different conclusion), and also assuming that every vaccine death in VAERS was specifically caused by Gardisil, you still have to also assume an extremely high level of underreporting to put these risks on comparable scales.
Yes, Anne, if any girls in Texas are injured by Gardisil, I think the state should pay compensation. it will be a good use for a fraction of what the state saves through reduced spending for chemo, surgery, and hospice care.