Perry Underestimated Merck Donations in Debate

The Corner ^ | 9-13-11 | Katrina Trinko

[afraidfortherepublic]

When Rick Perry joked last night that the $5,000 he had received from Merck wasn’t enough to buy him off, the line failed to charm the audience as he’d expected. Turns out, the line also significantly low-balled how much he’d received from Merck. “Merck PAC—the company’s D.C.-based political action committee—has given Perry $28,500 since 2001, according to Texas Ethics Commission filings. The bulk of that money came prior to 2007,” the Los Angeles Times reports today. Even so, that doesn’t make Merck one of Perry’s top donors: the LA Times notes that he’s received over the years donations totaling more than six figures from over 200 sources.

[Carling]

What is the evidence of this quid pro quo? Plus, since the vaccinations never happened, did Perry have to return his money to Merck?

[Deb]

I know the Democrat's mantra against Perry is "crony capitalism", but how is it unethical for Merck to support Perry after Perry campaigned to throw trial lawyers out of Texas? If I was a pharmaceutical, I'd do it.

Should medical and drug companies not support candidates who saved them from trial lawyers? You'd prefer they support the Democrats?

Use your brain if you have one.

[CharlesWayneCT]

As perry detractors have explained to me ad nauseum, it’s not just that you get a donation, it’s whether the donation comes right before the action. So Perry was correct to only take into account the donations that happened in close proximity of the action he took.

What’s worse about this whole argument is that Merck stopped lobbying for these vaccine mandates after the uproar. They went another route, one of advertising and getting federal programs to finance the drug. Those programs were implemented in a lot of states, including Alaska during Palin’s term. While they were paid for by taxpayer dollars, they were strictly voluntary, so you didn’t have to “opt-out” of them.

[AHerald]

That $2850. per year. OMG...THE HORROR, THE HORROR.

Perry's off by $23,500 and that's your response?

[bwc2221]

As Michelle Malkin writes, Perry had personal reasons that may have been more important than a Merck contribution.

There was an “ex-chief of staff lobbying for Merck and a staffer’s mother-in-law serving as a state director of an advocacy group bankrolled by Merck to push legislatures across the country to put forward bills mandating the Gardasil vaccine for preteen girls.”

[gov_bean_ counter]

CoS => Lobbiest => mandate

Appearance of impropriety

Not even arguable and no evidence of wrong doing needed.

Plus I resent the hell out of people here who argue his Scouting and Military background somehow exempt him from this type scrutiny.

Expect more to come out.

[free me]

She didn’t smear him. She told the truth.

Perry is for sale.

[Brett66]

The “I can’t be bought for $5,000” line was terrible. You immediately thought-so you need more than $5,000 dollars?

[brytlea]

What bothers me about this whole thing is that Perry said he did this to force the insurance companies to pay for the vaccine. He is willing to use govt to make companies do what he thinks they should do. THIS is big govt meddling. And this is what no one is talking about.

[MrEdd]

Poor Former Democrat Perry.

True conservative have no time for someone with his record, and the Left hates anyone to the right of Stalin.

Not enough milksops to make him viable.

More and more it becomes noted that Perrybots use exactly the same methodology as Mittbots, perhaps because their candidates are so much alike.

Both insist that if you are voting for a real conservative instead of their socialist drone you must want Obama to win.

Both have a contingent vociferously squawking ad hominems at their rivals. With Mitt, the clucking is that all of their opponents hate Mormons, with a very klu klux klan sort of hate. In a similar vein, we see the Perrybots attempting to insist that people supporting Herman Cain or Michelle Bachmann are really all Ron Paulistas.

Really, they have no choice. The scandals regarding Perry are longstanding and the people who opposed him when they happened are not likely to overlook them now.

[TexasFreeper2009]

much like capitalism, Perry is the worst candidate... except for all the rest.

[free me]

As Michelle Malkin writes, Perry had personal reasons that may have been more important than a Merck contribution.

There was an “ex-chief of staff lobbying for Merck and a staffer’s mother-in-law serving as a state director of an advocacy group bankrolled by Merck to push legislatures across the country to put forward bills mandating the Gardasil vaccine for preteen girls.”
__________________________________________________________

Yes this is what Palin was talking about on Greta.

[SoJoCo]

I believe that he understated the amount, not underestimated. But regardless, assuming that the $30 million in campaign funds collected is correct, the Merck amount is less than one-tenth of one percent. I doubt that that makes them that influential of a contributor.

[cookcounty]

"It’s ridiculous, and Sarah Palin is being dishonest accusing Perry of crony capitalism."

Except for one big thing. His Chief of Staff could have gone to work for 10,000 different companies or organizations. But he was at Merck. The one company that got the executive order exception.

To me, it isn't so much the money, it's the likely call from Merck, "Good morning Rick, hey I was wondering if you could do me a little favor, y'see there's a vaccine called Gardasil that got left out of the school vaccine protocols, it's really a great little potion, and it would be a shame if it got left out. Merck really wants to help with addressing this issue and....."

[normy]

No she didn't get the words wrong. She deliberately smeared Perry so Greta and her new buddies at Fox would love her. It was pathetic. She knew exactly what she was doing.

Perry will prevail here because he is the actual true outsider. Fox is using Sarah the useful idiot to trash the only candidate that can beat Romney.

After last night I will vote Romney for sure should Perry fade, unless Cain steps up. Bachman, done, Palin, fraud.

[Carling]

What benefit does Perry get when his Chief of Staff goes to work for Merck, and what benefit did Merck get when the so-called “mandate” was never put into effect?

It’s silliness. I expect gutterball shots from Bachmann, since she has about 3 months left as a candidate if she is luck, but to hear Palin’s smear of Perry was a disappointment to me.

[dragnet2]

Anyone else notice the facial expressions, demeanor, and behavior of Perry?

It scary similar to Bush and they were just discussing this on KFI Los Angeles and several others mentioned this last night, right here

[dragnet2]

What benefit does Perry get when his Chief of Staff goes to work for Merck

You'll likely never know. That how corruption works...Behind closed doors, with payoffs, graft, influence, favors etc, etc.

[Carling]

You do realize that there are over 700 pages of documentation on Perry’s EO, right?

Educate yourself.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0811/The_HPV_files_In_emails_Perry_mostly_absent.html

[casinva]

Those programs were implemented in a lot of states, including Alaska during Palin’s term. While they were paid for by taxpayer dollars, they were strictly voluntary, so you didn’t have to “opt-out” of them.

This is not meant as a slam against Alaska because after researching this a little more, I discovered numerous states were implementing the Gardiasil vaccine and more were close to starting to insert it into mandatory or at least recommended vaccines. The CDC and health organizations were putting on a great display of its greatness and need and pushing to have states get in on the bandwagon. 18 states including Alaska opted to use the federal tax-payer funds to provide free vaccines and Alaska specifically beginning in 2007 used the federal money to fund vaccines for 9 to 18 year old girls. (And yes, it does look like the federal regulations that came with the accepted federal oversight did not include the parental involvement required as did insurance companies if done without tax payer money.) My point being, Alaska was recommending it and giving it to the girls free-of-charge but did not have to present it as a necessary vaccine which the parent could then opt out of.)

However, I discovered that Alaska, in the midst of the federal and health care propaganda (or perhaps just 'misunderstanding of the vaccine at that time') that Alaska was not only recommending it to 8 - 18 year old girls but was also encouraging women 18 to 26 years old to get the vaccine. In fact, the State of Alaska had developed a financing plan in association with Merck & Co. Inc., the vaccine’s manufacturer, so that those older college aged girls and young women not covered for the vaccine free of charge (older age) could make loan payments to Merck.

Now I'm not saying there was anything there, but I am trying to indicate that this situation was ripe for bad decisions and even ripe for possible abuse in so many different places throughout our country at that time.

Now I started this post with my description of that time period, believing it would soften the Alaska role as well as all the other states' roles in this issue. I'm not trying to blame Alaska or give undue credit to Perry here.

I'm just saying our governors all over the country were being provided with health information that seemed very credible to all of them, at least for the most part, and they were either implementing programs or would have implemented them soon.

I think we need to remember this when this very same issue arises with many more of our governors at some point. There were 18 states alone that took the federal tax-payer money to fund the vaccines. Rick Perry had the exact same idea as the other states, that this was a miracle drug and just needed to get out there (just like so many more governors out there were thinking). He just funded the program differently.

From:

http://hss.state.ak.us/press/2007/pr053107fed-funding-hpv-vax.htm

Excerpt:

The CDC recommends the vaccine for girls and women 9 through 26 years old, but the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services only has funding to cover the vaccine for those ages 9 through 18. Women ages 19 through 26 may be able to receive some coverage through Medicaid, their health insurance companies or a special financial aid program set up by Merck & Co. Inc., the vaccine’s manufacturer.