Making Government Transparent and Accountable
The Sunlight Foundation uses cutting-edge technology and ideas to make government transparent and accountable. Underlying all of our efforts is a fundamental belief that increased transparency will improve the public's confidence in government
The Sunlight Foundation Blog
-
Is It Really Any Surprise?
Is it really any surprise that Sen. Olympia Snowe announced that she will vote for the health reform bill in the Senate Finance Committee? Last month, we did a vote analysis for the senior Maine senator and found that she is far more likely to vote with Democrats than her fellow Republicans. Despite her party affiliation, Snowe appears to have a voting record you would expect from a moderate to conservative Democrat. Her voting record shows that she is a much more reliable vote for the Democratic majority than her public Hamlet routine would suggest. You can see the visualization here and follow below.
Of the top twenty senators with the highest percentage of votes in common with Sen. Snowe, eighteen are Democrats, most of which are commonly identified as the most moderate Democrats in the caucus. Snowe holds a 70%+ vote correlation with thirteen senators, two of which are Republicans. The top twenty senators with votes in common with Olympia Snowe are:
- Sen. Susan Collins, R-ME (86.92%)
- Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE (78.46%)
- Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-AR (77.69%)
- Sen. Arlen Specter, D-PA (74.42%)
- Sen. Jon Tester, D-MT (74.03)
- Sen. Evan Bayh, D-IN (72.87%)
- Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-MN (72.66%)
- Sen. Mark Pryor, D-AR (71.81%)
- Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-ND (71.48%)
- Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-AK (71.15%)
- Sen. Max Baucus, D-MT (71.04%)
- Sen. Bill Nelson, D-FL (70.27%)
- Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-LA (70.16%)
- Sen. Herb Kohl, D-WI (69.62%)
- Sen. Mark Begich, D-AK (69.44%)
- Sen. Kent Conrad, D-ND (68.83%)
- Sen. Michael Bennet, D-CO (68.80%)
- Sen. Kay Hagan, D-NC (68.60%)
- Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV (68.31%)
- Sen. Tim Johnson, D-SD (68.00%)
When we first published this analysis back in September, I wrote:
The Democrats with the highest voting agreement with Snowe are also seen as key votes in the health care reform push. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Sen. Blanche Lincoln hold the two highest voting agreements with Snowe. Both are seen as key votes on any health reform bill and Nelson, in particular, has been a key player in all major legislation this year. Nelson was instrumental in passing the stimulus bill earlier this year and has recently echoed Snowe in her support for a public option trigger in the health care reform legislation. Lincoln is seen as one of the more conservative Democratic senators and faces a tough reelection campaign in one of the few states that trended away from the Democrats in the 2008 election. Her vote will be crucial to Democrats on health care reform and her high level of voting agreement with Snowe shows how crucial the Maine Republican’s support for a bill may be.
-
Hidden ‘Bundles’ of Lobbyist Giving Show Full Court Press by Health Care Donors
Sunlight and the Center for Responsive Politics have teamed up on a collaborative investigative project that shows never-before-seen “contribution clusters” from outside lobbyists and their health care industry clients to key members of Congress.
We found that Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the powerful Senate Finance Committee and author of the main health care reform bill now being debated in the Senate, was one of the biggest beneficiaries of this one-two punch from lobbyists and the interests they represent. Between January 2007 and July 2009 (the period we studied), Baucus collected contributions from 37 outside lobbyists representing PhRMA, the pharmaceutical industry’s chief trade association, and from 36 lobbyists who listed drug maker Amgen Inc. among their clients.
In all, 11 major health and insurance firms had their contributions to Baucus boosted through extra donations from 10 or more of their outside lobbyists. (See our visualization and the full list from CRP.)
Nor was Baucus alone—other members also received contributions from the employees, their family members and political action committees of health care firms and from the outside lobbyists that represented them. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., collected lobbyist “bundles” from 14 major health care organizations. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., actually led the list, with 22 organizations—though much of that money was directed at his presidential campaign last year. (see the full list.)
PhRMA and Amgen were the organizations with the most outside lobbyists chipping in with extra contributions. Some 32 members of Congress got money from 10 or more PhRMA lobbyists over the last two-and-a-half years. Amgen’s lobbyists did the same for 24 members.
There is no indication that the extra giving by lobbyists was part of a planned effort by the health care firms to solidify their support among key members of Congress. But whether coordinated or not, the newly-found clusters of lobbyist giving clearly illustrate the intensity of the full-court press that the industry is currently waging on Capitol Hill.
The research into the lobbyist-and-client giving was conducted by combining campaign contribution records with reports filed by lobbyists that identified their clients (read more on how we did it; full methodology here). The Center for Responsive Politics has been collecting that data for years, but this was the first time the two databases were combined to identify all cases where outside lobbyists contributed to the same members of Congress as their clients.
Overall, the research found that about 90 percent of the lobbyist donations were given by the lobbyists themselves. Another 10 percent came from members of their immediate families, mainly spouses. Interestingly, about one-third of the contributions were given not to the members’ campaign committees, but to their leadership PACs—separate funds that members control—but that get far less media scrutiny than their reelection campaigns. The leadership PACs also have higher contribution limits, enabling lobbyists to give well beyond the nominal $2,400 limit that applies to campaign committees.
To see Sunlight’s previous visualizations of health care lobbying–which also relied on data from the Center for Responsive Politics–click here.
-
Senate Finance Committee Public Option Vote and Campaign Contribution Ratios
In the continuing health care debate the public option remains as the key puzzle piece in the Democrats’ health care package. Today, the Senate Finance Committee is debating and voting on amendments to include a public option in their version of health care reform legislation. Both amendments to the bill were defeated in committee.
One of the biggest supporters of the public option is labor, a trusted ally of the Democrats. The public option has been opposed by many in the health sector. A comparison of voting behavior and campaign contributions may provide some more context to today’s committee votes.
The chart below shows Senate Finance Committee members, their contributions from the labor and health sectors from 2005-2010, the ratio of health contributions to labor contributions and their votes on the Rockefeller and Schumer public option amendments.
Ratio of Health to Labor Contributions to the Senate Finance Committee (2005-2010) and Public Option Votes Name Party Labor Contributions (2005-2010) Health Contributions (2005-2010) Ratio (Health:Labor) Rockefeller Amendment Schumer Amendment Mike Crapo R $2,000 $243,226 121.6:1 N N Jon Kyl R $13,000 $1,188,238 91.4:1 N N Chuck Grassley R $11,500 $651,627 56.7:1 N N Jim Bunning R $2,500 $112,650 45.1:1 N N John Cornyn R $27,250 $1,226,469 44.6:1 N N John Ensign R $12,000 $521,575 43.5:1 N N Orrin Hatch R $31,100 $1,020,334 32.8:1 N N Pat Roberts R $12,000 $343,849 28.7:1 N N Blanche Lincoln D $36,100 $641,004 17.8:1 N N Mike Enzi R $26,500 $423,749 16.0:1 N N Maria Cantwell D $22,500 $353,342 15.7:1 Y Y Ron Wyden D $39,000 $370,175 9.5:1 Y Y Max Baucus D $207,925 $1,763,799 8.5:1 N N Olympia Snowe R $103,750 $367,549 3.5:1 N N Kent Conrad D $253,750 $652,178 2.6:1 N N Debbie Stabenow D $284,125 $737,243 2.6:1 Y Y Bill Nelson D $241,890 $613,594 2.5:1 N Y Jay Rockefeller D $240,800 $605,400 2.5:1 Y Y Chuck Schumer D $140,500 $298,650 2.1:1 Y Y John Kerry D $103,248 $188,558 1.8:1 Y Y Jeff Bingaman D $229,500 $366,414 1.6:1 Y Y Tom Carper D $180,010 $287,406 1.6:1 N Y Robert Menendez D $400,100 $603,343 1.5:1 Y Y This data could tell us one of two things: (1) Democrats are far more likely to get money from Labor for ideological reasons; (2) The ratio of health to labor contributions effects the way senators will vote on the public option. It could also be both of these.
For senators voting on the Rockefeller amendment, 58% of those with a 10:1 or under ratio of health to labor contributions voted for the amendment. When that ratio is brought down to 3:1 and under, 67% of senators voted for the amendment.
On the Schumer amendment, 75% of those with a 10:1 or under ratio of health to labor contributions voted for the amendment. When that ratio is brought down to 3:1 and under, 89% of senators voted for the amendment.
There is perfect consistency for No votes for both amendments and in both ranges of 10:1 and over and 3:1 and over. Those senators with a 10:1 or over ratio of health to labor contributions voted against both amendments 91% of the time. Senators with a 3:1 or over ratio of health to labor contributions voted against both amendments 86% of the time.
-
Senate Finance Committee Amendments
The mark-up of the Senate Finance Committee health care reform bill is currently underway. (You can watch the proceedings on C-Span here.) While much of this morning may be filled with vacuous speech-making by the committee’s members, there are over 500 amendments to be voted on over the next few days. Slate has done an excellent job in creating a Google spreadsheet of every (or almost every) amendment to the bill. Check it out as a guide to the process.
I’d also like to flag this important comment by Karen Tumulty at Time’s Swampland blog:
One of the worst kept secrets on Capitol Hill is that “mark-ups”–the formal public sessions in which legislation is ostensibly drafted–are not where any real work gets done. Where the real deals get cut, and where the favors get traded back and forth, is in private. The mark-up itself is little more than theater, a chance for everyone to give speeches and then march toward a pre-ordained conclusion.
Whatever you’re watching has already been written and planned by the committee members. Lawmakers don’t like to take their messy discussions onto the television screens; sort of a side effect of putting video cameras into a room.
-
Baucus’ Lobbyist Complex: The Real Gang of Six?
Just going to repost the Max Baucus Health Care Lobbyist Complex in light of this AP article:
The latest health overhaul plan circulating on Capitol Hill gives health insurers, drug makers and large employers reasons to heave sighs of relief, sparing them the higher costs and more burdensome rules included in other Democratic-written alternatives.
…
But health insurance stocks jumped Wednesday at the news of Baucus’ public option-free measure. And privately, industry lobbyists acknowledged that the plan is far more to their liking than any of the other measures currently under discussion, and expressed confidence that it would improve further as senators and Obama’s team continued to haggle over its details as it approaches a Senate vote.
Senators are not an island unto themselves. They have a network of staffers and lobbyists who help inform and craft their policies. Looking at Baucus’ network of former staffers turned health care lobbyists a few months ago raised serious questions about the ability of Baucus to be impartial in his bill making process. With their clients cheering, it’s hard not to think that the final product was written by these former staffers turned lobbyists (along with the former lobbyist turned staffer, Elizabeth Fowler). It looks like this was the real “Gang of Six.”
-
Read the Baucus Bill
The missing piece in the health care reform puzzle was dropped in Congress today. After months of negotiations with Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, Chairman Max Baucus released a copy of his bill. Baucus’ Finance Committee was the last committee to introduce legislation on health care reform. As Ezra Klein notes at the Washington Post, “the Finance Committee’s Chairman’s Mark (the first draft of the bill) is written in plain English, rather than legislative-speak, so it’s actually comprehensible to the interested layman.” If you never understood the legal language of legislation, now’s your chance to read a bill that you can actually understand. Mark-up on the bill will begin on September 22.
-
AM Links
Politico looks at health care lobbyists-turned-staffers on the Senate Finance Committee with the aid of LittleSis. For a look at staffers-turned-health care lobbyists you can see our research here.
Former Abramoff lobbyist Kevin Ring is on trial in, perhaps, the most interesting corruption trial in Washington in quite some time. Neil Volz, another Abramoff crony and former staffer to Rep. Bob Ney, testified the other day and included tons of gory details:
Volz described his lobbying team’s practice of giving tickets, meals and drinks to public officials and staffers who were deemed valuable, as well as taking those individuals on trips.
“Really we just wanted to party,” Volz said about a trip he took to New Orleans with Ney, former Ney chief of staff Will Heaton, and other lobbyists. He said the group met a client and toured some homes, but those were not the main objectives of the trip, which he described as “part of the corrupt relationship” he had with Ney and his staffers.
…
Volz described a discussion he had with Ring about “getting the joke,” a term used for a lobbyist getting a staffer to prioritize an issue because the lobbyist is “taking care of them,” after the Abramoff scandal began to surface in 2004.
“We thought, ‘Boy, it would be pretty difficult to defend the idea of getting the joke,’” he said of his conversation with Ring.
Over the weekend, the New York Times posted this great visualization of Clean Water Act violations and the lack of enforcement in all 50 states. One of the primary reasons why government data needs to be online and in accessible formats is for news organizations, designers and coders to create visualizations or databases that can concisely explain an issue, or reveal a problem, to the public at large.
-
Gang of Six: Who Votes With Whom?
Since the end of July the Senate Finance Committee has been the focus of health care reform discussions. More specifically, the bipartisan “Gang of Six,” organized by Sen. Max Baucus, has been working to formulate a health care compromise that some Republicans may be able to support. An analysis of voting agreement between the six senators involved in these discussions shows the likely futility of this effort as only one Republican shares similar voting patterns with the majority Democrats.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (subject of a voting agreement analysis here) is the only Republican in the “Gang of Six” with a substantial voting agreement with the Democrats involved. Snowe’s agreement with the three Democrats, Sens. Baucus, Jeff Bingaman and Kent Conrad, is above 60% for all three, but below 60% for the other two Republicans, Sens. Mike Enzi and Chuck Grassley. This continues to underline the key role that Snowe can play in the health care reform plan’s final structure.
Neither Grassley nor Enzi shares much in voting agreement with the Democrats in the “Gang”. They both have voting agreements of 35% or less with the three Democrats. The lowest voting agreement for both is with Sen. Bingaman (23.4% for Enzi, 25.8% for Grassley).
Recently, Democrats have focused on only attracting one or two Republicans, Snowe being the highest target, to vote for the bill rather than pursuing the strategy that Baucus sought with the “Gang of Six” talks. These voting agreement numbers show that, aside from Sen. Snowe, the “Gang of Six” is intensely polarized in their voting patterns. The likelihood of bipartisan compromise was unlikely from the start of this process.
The above graphic was created using the New York Times Congress API and based on Nodebox code from Juice Analytics.
-
What’s Up With the Baucus Bill?
The health care reform debate has reached the final stretch and all eyes are Sen. Max Baucus and his bipartisan negotiations in the Senate Finance Committee. During the last few days, details of Baucus’ plan have leaked through various outlets, often coming with differing details. Some initially reported that the plan would contain neither a public option or a cooperative system, but later reporting showed that the plan did contain a health care cooperative system. To make matters worse, it appears that lobbyists were given copies of the health care plan before the White House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and, well, everyone else.We can probably deduce who some of those lobbyists are by viewing this graphic. Baucus has many former staffers working as lobbyists for the health industry. He also has two former health industry employees working on his committee staff. Baucus’ chief health aide Elizabeth Fowler is a former executive with Wellpoint, one of the nation’s largest health insurance companies. Fowler is also the apparent author of Baucus’ health reform plan according to the properties of the .pdf file uploaded to his web site.
So, let me get this straight. A former lobbyist for a health insurance company writes a health reform plan, which is then leaked to lobbyists, some of whom were likely former Baucus staffers, and public disclosure is delayed by a couple of days — the plan was released to the media and lobbyists over the past few days but only posted to the Finance Committee web site today. To paraphrase the late, great Bill Hicks, it just doesn’t sound good when you walk it out.
It’s almost like they don’t want the public to really play a role here or know what’s going on. One can only hope that this won’t be the case with the actual legislation that Baucus’ committee comes up with.
-
Key Democrat in Health Care Talks Receives Large Health Industry Contributions in 2009
As the summer of the Democrats’ discontent winds to a close, the head count for health care reform in the Senate begins in earnest. One of the key Democratic senators on the fence is Sen. Blanche Lincoln, a member of the Senate Finance Committee and one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the 2010 election. Lincoln jumped into the news today with a quote to a reporter stating her opposition to a public option plan in a health care reform bill. “I would not support a solely government-funded public option. We can’t afford that,” Lincoln said. The senior Arkansas senator is also the 2nd highest recipient of campaign contributions from the health industry among senators this year.According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Lincoln has received $325,350 in contributions from the health industry, as of June 30. The large amount in contributions underlies a constantly shifting position by the senator on health care reform.
(Continue reading…)
