the fact that pelosi put porter on the oversight committee instead of burying her on one with less vicibility and power is one of those things that tell me that pelosi is not our biggest problem with the house.
Rep. Katie Porter for ruler of the universe.
“Biggest” is subjective. But the fact that the DNC leadership is happy to use edgey reps to sniff out which way the popular winds are blowing and gauge their big money’s reaction to that message sure sounds like a Biggest type problem to me.
the fact that pelosi, despite criticism from several mainstream pundits and complaints from more conservative members of her own caucus, has given representatives omar, ocasio-cortez, and porter front row seats on major committees speaks of more than just knowing which way the wind blows.
Boo hoo, drug development is difficult and expensive.
That doesn’t justify charging $300 for insulin.
I don’t give a flying fuck what the costs are. Profiting off of the suffering, illness and death of people is immoral.
That’s why I’m surprised insurance corporate HQs don’t get firebombed to the ground more often.
here’s a useful resource from the perspective of a drug discovery chemist working in the pharma industry. derek lowe has been blogging for close to twenty years. this is a list under the tag–“drug prices” which has a look at the issue from the inside. despite his tendency to a more conservative politics than mine, i do tend to find his discussions of these issues to be both realistic and trustworthy. i won’t say i am in 100% accord with him but i don’t know anyone with whom i am.
derek lowe frequently calls out behavior like that for what it is: unjustified and evil.
Not so fast…my hopes for her were shattered recently.
Vice Chair Katie Porter (D-Calif.)
I see this guy, CEO of a “pharma” company, and I can only think “drug lord”. In my home, I call these companies drug sellers. We see TV adverts for these drugs and I call them out as drug pushers. Is that not what they’re doing?
I’d like to see more doing, and a little less just knowing.
Pelosi is the first Speaker of the House to oversee not just one but two impeachments of the President of the United States. She was instrumental in regaining control of congress from the GOP. She remains the only woman in American history to hold her office. She got the Affordable Care Act passed, helped repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” moved the country forward on energy efficiency and other important legislation despite facing obstructionist Republicans every step of the way. And she put people like Porter, Omar and AOC into positions where they have actual power and influence.
Pelosi isn’t perfect and neither are her policies, but characterizing her as a “do-nothing” is simply not accurate. She’s a part of the machine, yes. But it’s better to have an imperfect ally that actually knows how to work the machine than to leave the operation of the machine to those who would use it for evil.
I am not characterizing her as a do-nothing. In the context mentioned - placing certain progressive reps on committees I am addressing DOING in the form of MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE and MEDICARE for ALL, and many other primary progressive issues SHE NEEDs TO DO, and she most certainly has not.
Not to doubt the validity of the Brick House article, but I can find no other source for this claim regarding rep. Katie Porter? Can you point me towards a supporting piece? Thanks in advance.
And consequently, I looked further into the the SALT bill, it does look on the surface to be good for middle class folks, that it can be as well applied to other itemized deductions for the 1% seems true, but the same can be said for middle class.
Conclusion: One step forward, maybe two steps back…
The article is a little disingenuous. They are not calling for dropping a tax-deduction cap as part of creating a tax loophole or shelter, they are calling for the repeal of the cap that was snuck into the 2017 tax boondoggle. Many supporters, like Porter represent states with disproportionately high tax rates that directly impact middle-income homeowners. I’d have to see more information on the rates of actual SALT deductions for high-wealth individuals before I drag Porter for this. I mean, how many high-wealth owners are actually paying their taxes and not getting out of them with write downs, for instance? And what is the proportion of SALT deductions vs. other loopholes and deductions that effectively make top earners pay a lower real tax rate than middle-income earners the SALT deduction definitely impacts?
Otoh, I am all for holding elected officials to account, even when I like them.
Also, sorry for The Hill link.
More Katie Porter, please. Its such an obvious point and congress should hear it every day
The other number that should be here is the billions in NIH grants that fund R&D for drugs that end up wholly owned by Abbvie and other pharma companies
This is utter nonsense. Lots of clinical trials (close to 50%) recieve funding from NIH or other government agency and many are run by academics at non-profit institutions. There is also published analysis showing greater reproducibility and reliability of the findings of the acadmeic run trials
If I may ask, do you work on medical devices, new drugs, new indications, or something else? New drugs are where the money is and where the biggest development costs are.
Yes, I agree 100% with this recommendation. He is fairly conservative, but he is an expert medicinal chemist first and foremost with an excellent perspective on the industry.
No. Me-too drugs are less profitable because there is immediate competition with the existing drug. Pharma companies make bank while they have exclusivity. Me-too drugs happen because drugs take more than a decade to develop and multiple parties chase the new target, indication, technology etc. at approximately the same time. Nobody wants to quit early because you never know who will make it to market first or who might run into development snags.
I agree. This is a big problem that needs government intervention.
There is zero financial incentive to develop antibiotics under the existing paradigm. What we want to do with antibiotics is to invent new, mechanistically distinct versions and then to avoid using them as long as possible in order to delay the evolution of resistant strains. Under the current system, pharma companies need to sell their new products as fast as they can before the patents run out.
I like Porter, but I hope long-term she drops the visual aids.
Visual aids may be the only way some people learn and understand.
I’ll send her all the construction paper, whiteboard markers, and whatever else she needs, if she is effectively communicating and getting results.
And they often remain the only way ordinary people can really start to wrap their minds around concepts like the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars.