US Congress

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      What’s actually in Biden’s Build Back Better bill? And how would it affect you?

      by

      US newsWhat’s actually in Biden’s Build Back Better bill? And how would it affect you? Most Americans know the price tag but don’t know what’s actually in the bill. Here’s a crash course Erum SalamMon 18 Oct 2021 05.00 EDTLast modified on Mon 18 Oct 2021 05.24 EDTIn much of the press coverage of the fight over Joe Biden’s Build Back Better bill, politicians, pundits and media talking heads often focus on its $3.5tn price tag. But all the attention to the top-line figure ignores the huge implications of what is actually in the legislation – and how it could transform millions of Americans’ lives.That seems to be doing the public a great disservice. A CBS poll found that only 10% of Americans knew “a lot of the specifics” about the Build Back Better plan (also known as the budget reconciliation bill), and 29% did not know what was in it at all.What’s in the bipartisan infrastructure bill and what’s left out – visual explainerRead moreBut as negotiations over the bill drag on, Democrats are undertaking one of the most ambitious and transformative domestic policy agendas since the Great Society of the 1960s or the New Deal of the 1930s.So what is it?The Build Back Better budget reconciliation bill, is one of two huge pieces of legislation that form the centerpiece of Biden’s domestic agenda. While the other bill is focused on infrastructure, Build Back Better focuses on a long list of social policies and programs ranging from education to healthcare to housing to climate. With Republicans unified in opposition, Democrats are using a special budgetary process known as “reconciliation” to avoid the 60-vote filibuster threshold and pass the bill on a party-line vote.What’s in it?Universal preschool for childrenBiden’s 2020 presidential platform included a guarantee of preschool for all US children aged three and four. With the legislation, Biden hopes to make that plan a reality. Families can either choose to send their young children to a publicly funded preschool program or to any number of the privately run preschool programs already available. But those who do not choose to enroll in a public preschool would still have to pay the tuition or enrollment fees associated with that private institution.For the families that choose the public preschool route, the White House estimates it would save them $13,000 a year.Free community collegeAnother life-altering education element of the Build Back Better proposal is two years of free community college, which could bridge a wide gap for those socioeconomically disadvantaged by giving them a path to an associate’s degree or to a four-year college. Several cities across the US, including Buffalo, Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle have already implemented a version of free community college, but this plan would make it the nationwide standard.Expanded Medicare services and MedicaidMedicare is the government-run healthcare program for those ages 65 and over. The passage of Build Back Better would expand Medicare services to cover vision, hearing and dental health needs, which it currently does not.Medicaid is the government-run healthcare program for low-income families and disabled people who may be unable to get private insurance. This bill would remove certain income and health limitations to allow more people to qualify for the first time.Lower prescription drug costsPrescription drugs in the US are more than 2.5 times more expensive on average than prescriptions drugs in the rest in the world. The US ranks first in the cost of prescription drugs like insulin and epinephrine. The reason? Right now, pharmaceutical companies can determine the price of drugs because the US lacks price controls. In addition to expanding Medicare services, Build Back Better would give Medicare (AKA the government) bargaining power to negotiate the cost of prescription drugs with pharmaceutical companies for the first time to bring prices down.Tax cuts for families with children and childcare supportBuild Back Better would increase the child tax credit from $2,000 to $3,000 for children ages six and older. The new tax credit for children under the age of six would be $3,600. The credit comes in the form of monthly checks, so that parents and caregivers do not have to front the cost of childcare. Poverty experts believe it would cut child poverty in half, lifting 5 million children out of poverty. The bill also offers additional childcare support based on state median income.12 weeks of paid family leaveThe US is the only industrialized country to not offer paid family leave, or paid time off after adopting, fostering or giving birth to a new child. While some private companies offer this as a perk to their employees, Build Back Better would ensure all new working parents and caregivers job security and almost three months of at least partial paid time off after these major life events.It would also guarantee all workers at least three days of bereavement leave in the event of a death in the family.Housing investmentsBuild Back Better would invest in the production, preservation and retrofitting of more than a million affordable rental housing units and 500,000 homes for low- and middle-income aspiring homebuyers, as well as increase rental assistance agreements.Tax cuts for electric vehicles and other climate incentivesA tax credit of at least $4,000 would be on offer for those buying an electric vehicle. If the car is bought before 2027, there would be an additional tax credit of $3,500. If the car was made in the US, there would be $4,500 added on top of that. In total, a taxpayer in the US could expect a maximum of $12,500 in tax credits for purchasing an electrical vehicle under these conditions – a weighty incentive to switch from a gas-fueled engine to one better for the planet.Biden’s bill also includes tax credits and grants for businesses and communities working towards clean energy initiatives. The Civilian Climate Corps, a government workforce dedicated to environment protection and conservation reminiscent of Franklin D Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps, would be relaunched and funded with $10bn behind it.Additionally, utility companies would be subject to a system of payments and fines to clean up emissions from fossil fuels. Over time, these companies would be required to phase in renewable energy to replace fossil fuels. However, much of this plan is reportedly under threat as negotiations on the bill continue.But what’s not in it?A Green New Deal, for starters. Progressives and climate advocates had hoped for sweeping climate reforms that did not make it into Biden’s Build Back Better bill – and that omission continues to be a fight between the far-left and centrist Democrats. The Build Back Better plan aims to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2050, far short of the Green New Deal’s goal of 2035. To climate activists like Greta Thunberg, it may as well be “Build back better. Blah blah blah.” But if the other budget bill for infrastructure is passed, there may be hope yet for some form of climate reform, thought not nearly as robust as those outlined in the Green New Deal.While Medicare services could expand if this bill is passed, it still does not guarantee Medicare for all, meaning the US will still lag many other nations around the world in not offering some form of universal healthcare.This bill also does not include any provisions for student loan debt forgiveness. The average student loan debt owed in the US is $37,693.Finally, there are no additional increases in social security, the federal assistance for the poor, elderly and disabled.Who is paying for this?Build Back Better is being called a “once in a lifetime investment” and it includes new tax plans that will cover its cost. Some of the tax changes include repeals on Trump-era tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations, such as: restoring the estate tax and raising the corporate tax rate from 21% to 26% (before Trump, the rate was 35%). Additionally, capital gains taxes will be raised from 20% to 25%.When is all of this happening?Democrats have set their own deadline of 31 October to vote on the bill to get it passed. Usually, a bill needs 60 votes to get passed but because this bill is related to the national budget, it can go through the process of reconciliation, which requires only a simple majority of votes to pass.The bill, which was introduced and passed in the House, is now in the Senate. The bill seems to have the support of all Democratic senators but two: Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.Without the support of these two legislators, passing this bill will be difficult, if not impossible. If Democrats are able to push the bill through, the items outlined in the plan should fully come to fruition by the year 2030, or within the span of 10 years.What’s their problem with it?As initially proposed, the bill would cost $3.5tn over 10 years, or $350bn each year for a decade. But the final package will probably be smaller, a concession to centrist holdouts who balked at the initial price tag – and without whom the measure cannot pass.Manchin previously said he would support a $1.5tn bill, which would be $150bn each year for a decade. But he has not detailed what he wants to cut, or why. Though Sinema has also not yet explained publicly what provisions and policies she is and isn’t willing to support, she has said that she would not vote for a bill that costs $3.5tn. Now, the White House and Democratic leaders are racing to trim the package in order to forge a compromise between the party and their two rogue members before their new 31 October deadline. But emboldened progressives in the party are pushing back – arguing that this version of the bill already was the compromise from an even more ambitious original vision.TopicsUS newsBiden administrationUS CongressUS politicsDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Manchin hits back at Sanders criticism in fight over Biden investment plan

      by

      DemocratsManchin hits back at Sanders criticism in fight over Biden investment planVermont senator chides Manchin over lack of support for billProgressive-centrist impasse holds up Biden’s reform agenda Edward HelmoreSat 16 Oct 2021 10.07 EDTLast modified on Sat 16 Oct 2021 10.09 EDTInternal party warfare between progressive and moderate Democrats over Joe Biden’s $3.5tn tax-and-spending package has burst dramatically into the open after Vermont senator Bernie Sanders launched a thinly veiled attack on West Virginia senator Joe Manchin in an op-ed published in the centrist Democrat’s home-state newspaper.Is Hunter Biden’s art project painting the president into an ethical corner?Read moreSanders, writing in the Charleston Gazette-Mail, described opponents of the legislation as “every Republican in Congress as well as the drug companies, the insurance companies, the fossil fuel industry and the billionaire class”.He added that opponents of the bill support a status quo “in which the very rich get richer while ordinary Americans continue to struggle to make ends meet”.Joe Biden’s proposed legislation is an ambitious package on policies such as free education, the climate crisis and healthcare provision that its proponents liken to the domestic reforms of the 1960s Great Society and the 1930s New Deal.However, it has run up against opposition from a group of centrist and conservative Democrats – often spearheaded by Manchin – who balk at its price tag and some of the programs it embraces.Sanders, a democratic socialist from Vermont, said polls showed “overwhelming support for this legislation”.“Yet, the political problem we face is that in a 50-50 Senate we need every Democratic senator to vote yes. We now have only 48. Two Democratic senators remain in opposition, including senator Joe Manchin,” he said.The other senator Sanders was referring to is Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.The column provoked swift pushback from Manchin. “This isn’t the first time an out-of-stater has tried to tell West Virginians what is best for them, despite having no relationship to our state,” he said a tweet.Last month, Manchin said he would not vote for the bill, called the Build Back Better plan, that he characterized again on Friday a “reckless expansion of government programs”.The exchange comes as the full spending package looks increasingly unlikely to pass in its current form, and the progressive-centrist impasse has paralyzed Biden’s domestic reform agenda and action to match his administration’s commitment to combatting climate change.Central to the dispute between Sanders and Manchin is the Clean Electricity Performance Program (CEPP), a $150bn program within the spending bill, designed to speed the conversion of US electric power generation from fossil fuels to renewable energy.Manchin’s home state is the second largest producer of coal, after Wyoming, according to the US Energy Information Administration, and Manchin has argued that utilities should not receive federal funds for an energy transition they are already making.Manchin is also chairman of the Senate energy and natural resources committee, and holds power over energy components in the bill. He has indicated he aims to reduce the $3.5tn price tag of the spending bill to $1.5tn.But simply dropping the clean energy provision from the proposed legislation would come as major embarrassment to the administration ahead of Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow next month, where Biden will be in the spotlight over matching verbal commitment to climate initiatives with legislative action.In taking the fight to West Virginia, Sanders is redoubling pressure on his party colleague.In comments to reporters last week, Sanders said: “The time is long overdue for him to tell us with specificity – not generalities, but beyond generalities, with specificity – what he wants and what he does not want, and to explain that to the people of West Virginia and America.”From ringside, the White House continues to express its commitment to a compromise solutions to get the economic package, even if it does not reach its full measure of spending.“I’m convinced we’re going to get it done. We’re not going to get $3.5tn. We’ll get less than that, but we’re going to get it,” Biden said Friday.White House Press secretary Jen Psaki described the impasse as an example of “democracy working.”“When it comes down to it, no bill is perfect,” Psaki said on a podcast. “It’s not going to be everything that Joe Biden wants, it’s not going to be everything Joe Manchin wants.”TopicsDemocratsJoe BidenUS CongressUS domestic policyUS politicsBernie SandersnewsReuse this content More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      We kayaked to Joe Manchin’s yacht, and we’d do it again | Angi Kerns and Loretta Young

      by

      OpinionUS news We kayaked to Joe Manchin’s yacht, and we’d do it againAngi Kerns and Loretta YoungWe needed our senator to hear how desperate West Virginians like us are for Congress to pass the Build Back Better Act Wed 13 Oct 2021 06.25 EDTFor most people, kayaking on the Potomac is a leisure activity. For us, it was a desperate attempt to have our voices heard. We left our families and jobs in West Virginia to travel to DC in order to make sure Senator Manchin heard loud and clear from his constituents: it’s time to pass the Build Back Better Act. It just so happens that one of the only ways to get Senator Manchin’s attention is to launch a flotilla of boats around his yacht, where he lives when in DC.We’re proud to be West Virginians, and we’re proud to be “kayaktavists”, as our effort was called. What we’re not proud of is how Senator Manchin is putting big money interests over the needs of West Virginians and working-class people across the country.After days of protesting on the water outside his yacht, we finally got Manchinto agree to sit down with us. And we stand by what we told him: he needs to pass the full reconciliation bill. It’s time to put the interests of working-class people first. For people like us, investments like an expanded Child Tax Credit (CTC), paid family medical leave and childcare subsidies are a matter of life or death.Angi told him about her life as a young mother, working three jobs, barely seeing her kids and still needing to use food pantries. Loretta described a mom who was able to keep the lights on only because the CTC hit her bank account just in time. She explained that CTC work requirements punish children and hurt parents who can’t afford to pay for childcare to go to low-wage jobs.Our friend Zachary Fancher told the senator about how he was denied loans and grants to finish his schooling and how free community college would help young people get good jobs and slow the rate of exodus from the state, which is the highest in the country. Katonya Hart told Manchin about her struggles to assist elderly neighbors who cannot afford home care and about others attempting to perform their own medical and dental care.West Virginians also know better than anyone that the fossil fuel industry is dying. We’re bleeding jobs, and the Build Back Better Act is a prime opportunity for us to use federal dollars to move from the fossil fuel past into the clean energy future the world is already shifting to. We would rather have thousands of good union jobs than continue sending billions of our tax dollars to fossil fuel companies.The senator expressed concern that West Virginians will have an “entitlement mentality.” Well, our children are entitled to food, clean air and clean water. Our seniors and disabled community members are entitled to dignified home care, parents are entitled to stay home with sick kids and we all are entitled to healthcare, including vision, dental and hearing. Or at least we should be.We’d like to know why our senator is one of just two Democratic members of Congress keeping these necessities from us – especially when they’re fully funded by taxing the rich.This is what Manchin can’t see from his yacht: West Virginians are working hard to make ends meet, and we’re still struggling. The rich are getting richer, buying yachts and airplanes, while working-class people like us barely get by.West Virginians know that we need this investment: whether or not the senator acknowledges the polls, a bipartisan majority of us, nearly 80% of West Virginians, want Congress to pass the full Build Back Better agenda.Give our communities good jobs, better healthcare, healthy environments, higher education, childcare, and watch what we’ll achieve.We’re done being ignored by our own senator. We’re done being told by our senator that we want too much for our children, for our neighbors, for our communities. West Virginia deserves a senator who will fight to invest in our working-class people, not protect the interests of the wealthy elite. It might have taken several days sitting in kayaks in DC to get Senator Manchin to acknowledge us, but we’re not going away until West Virginians have their voices heard: we want to Build Back Better.
      Angi Kerns is an organizer with Young West Virginia and Loretta Young is executive director of Race Matters West Virginia. Both authors took to the waters last week alongside numerous West Virginians, CPD Action and Greenpeace USA
      TopicsUS newsOpinionUS politicsDemocratsUS CongresscommentReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      House passes bill to raise US debt ceiling through early December

      by

      US CongressHouse passes bill to raise US debt ceiling through early DecemberLegislation raises government’s borrowing limit to $28.9tnHard-fought House vote passes entirely along party lines Guardian staff and agenciesTue 12 Oct 2021 19.57 EDTLast modified on Tue 12 Oct 2021 21.57 EDTThe US House of Representatives gave final approval on Tuesday to a Senate-passed bill temporarily raising the government’s borrowing limit to $28.9tn, putting off the risk of default at least until early December.Kamala Harris: European colonizers ‘ushered in wave of devastation for tribal nations’Read moreDemocrats, who narrowly control the House, maintained party discipline to pass the hard-fought, $480bn debt limit increase. The vote was along party lines, with every yes from Democrats and every no from Republicans.Joe Biden is expected to sign the measure into law this week, before 18 October, when the treasury department has estimated it would no longer be able to pay the nation’s debts without congressional action.Republicans insist Democrats should take responsibility for raising the debt limit because they want to spend trillions of dollars to expand social programs and tackle climate change. Democrats say the increased borrowing authority is needed largely to cover the cost of tax cuts and spending programs during Donald Trump’s administration, which House Republicans supported.House passage warded off concerns that the world’s largest economy would go into default for the first time, but only for about seven weeks, setting the stage for continued fighting between the parties.The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell wrote to Biden on Friday that he would not work with Democrats on another debt limit increase. McConnell was harshly criticized by Trump, the Republican party’s leader, after the Senate vote.Lawmakers also have only until 3 December to pass spending legislation to prevent a government shutdown.The Senate’s vote last week to raise the limit – which had been more routine before the current era of fierce partisanship – turned into a brawl. Republicans tried to link the measure to Biden’s goal of passing multitrillion-dollar legislation to bolster infrastructure and social services while fighting climate change.At a news conference on Tuesday, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said she was optimistic that Democrats could work out changes to reduce the cost of their social policy plans “in a timely fashion”.In another sign compromise was possible, progressive Democrats told reporters that most of them wanted to keep all the proposed programs in the multitrillion-dollar plan, while shortening the time period to cut its overall cost.Biden has suggested a range of more like $2tn rather than the initial $3.5tn target. At a briefing today, the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, told reporters: “We are at a point where there are choices that need to be made, given that there are fewer dollars that will be spent.”Psaki said that the conversations are ongoing between White House senior staff and the president as well as key Democrats such as senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona about how to trim the bill and what a smaller package would look like.Psaki was asked if the president supported Pelosi’s strategy for the “Build Back Better” bill outlined in a letter she sent to caucus members on Monday, passing a bill with fewer programs that will receive more funding. Though she wouldn’t confirm if the president supported that specific strategy, Psaki noted that the bill would be smaller versus the $3.5tn Biden originally proposed and referred to comments Pelosi made during her press conference.“What [Pelosi] said in that press conference is that ‘if there are fewer dollars to be spent, there are choices that need to be made’, and the president agrees … If it’s smaller than $3.5tn, which we know it will be, then there are choices that need to be made,” said Psaki.“A bill that doesn’t pass means nothing changes,” Psaki said.Gloria Oladipo contributed reportingTopicsUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsUS economyEconomicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 238 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Big pharma has a powerful new shill, Kyrsten Sinema, fighting drug price reform | Andrew Perez and David Sirota

      by

      OpinionPharmaceuticals industryBig pharma has a powerful new shill, Kyrsten Sinema, fighting drug price reformAndrew Perez and David SirotaIn the 2020 election cycle, pharmaceutical political action committees suddenly funneled more money to her than they did the whole six years she served in the US House Mon 11 Oct 2021 06.18 EDTLast modified on Mon 11 Oct 2021 12.42 EDT“The pharmaceutical lobby is very savvy,” Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat from California, said earlier this week. “They pick the one or two people they need to block things, on the relevant committees or at the relevant time.”“It may differ from Congress to Congress,” explained Khanna, who is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “We try to get 90-95% [of the caucus]. They are focused not on 90% , but the blockers.”In the current Congress, Big Pharma appears to have zeroed in on Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Democrat from Arizona, as one of their lead obstructionists to help kill or gut the Democrats’ drug pricing plan. In the 2020 election cycle, pharmaceutical political action committees suddenly funneled more money to her than they did the whole six years she served in the US House.Pharmaceutical companies can charge up to four times as much in the United States for name-brand pharmaceuticals than in other countries, in part because Congress barred Medicare from using its bulk purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices. President Joe Biden and most Democrats support lifting that prohibition in their reconciliation legislation, a move that would save hundreds of billions of dollars – but Sinema has emerged as the party’s most prominent opponent to the plan.Her heel turn on drug pricing is a dramatic shift. A one-time progressive activist, Sinema campaigned on lowering drug prices in her 2018 Senate race, and she was still calling on Congress to address rising drug costs as recently as last year, boasting on her Senate website that she was fighting to “ensure life-saving drugs” would be more affordable.But it’s clear now that the pharmaceutical industry has been courting Sinema for some time. Indeed, in March 2021, as pharmaceutical Pac money was flooding into her campaign coffers, drug lobbyists were already bragging to Beltway reporters that they may have found their lead blocker in Sinema.Sinema has studiously avoided giving the public any details about where she stands on virtually any of the policy proposals in Democrats’ reconciliation legislation – refusing to speak with activists, reporters, or even other Democratic lawmakers.We only know Sinema opposes Democrats’ drug pricing plan thanks to a Politico report, which cited anonymous “sources familiar with her thinking”. Sinema reportedly told Biden she opposes the party’s proposal and won’t support a weaker offering from conservative House Democrats either.With the Senate split 50-50, her opposition imperils the whole endeavor.It makes sense that Sinema would be reluctant to publicly explain her opposition to Democrats’ drug pricing plan – because she would sound absolutely ridiculous, like a craven hypocrite straight out of Veep.During her 2018 Democratic primary campaign, Sinema released a direct-to-camera ad noting that her family had struggled with healthcare costs when she was younger. “We need to make healthcare more affordable, with access to the lowest-cost prescriptions, and fix what’s broken in the system,” she said in the ad.Sinema’s 2018 campaign website featured similar language: “Kyrsten is committed to making sure Arizonans have access to more health care choices, low-cost prescription drugs, and high-quality, dependable coverage. As one of the most independent-minded members of Congress, she’s committed to working with anyone – regardless of party – to get it done.”In a 2019 Senate hearing on prescription drug prices, Sinema noted, “The issue I hear about most back home is the cost of health care.” She went on to cite several stories from Arizonans who contacted her office about their sky-high drug costs:
      There’s a gentleman in Mesa, Arizona, who is lucky enough to be insured. But he has seen the price of his medication, to treat a serious lung condition, increase nearly five times in just one year … He’s looked, but there are no generics available that could offer him any financial relief. A woman from Glendale, Arizona, worries about her husband who has a serious heart condition. But his medication costs more than $500 out-of-pocket for a three-month supply. So he refuses to fill his prescription, because he’s worried about how it would impact their family financially. Another Arizona woman struggles to afford her specialty cancer medication. Even though her medication is a generic, she still has to pay thousands of dollars out-of-pocket. And often spends hours on the phone just to understand the unexpected cost increases, and to research payment assistance options. And this, of course, is unacceptable.
      In February last year, Sinema published an op-ed declaring: “Congress must address the cost of prescription drugs. Today, even Arizonans who have insurance sometimes struggle to afford the medicine they need. That’s why I’m pursuing policies to ensure life-saving drugs like EpiPens and insulin are affordable and available to Arizonans, especially our senior citizens.”But by then, drug industry cash was already starting to flood into Sinema’s campaign account.In May 2020, Kaiser Health News wrote that Sinema had recently “emerged as a pharma favorite in Congress”, based on the fact that she had become “a leading recipient of pharma campaign cash even though she’s not up for re-election until 2024 and lacks major committee or subcommittee leadership posts”.According to Kaiser’s pharma contribution tracker, Sinema received $121,000 worth of campaign donations from pharmaceutical company Pacs in 2019 and 2020.For some context, that’s double the amount of drug company Pac money she received during the 2018 election cycle, when she was on the ballot running for Senate. It’s more cash than she had raised from pharmaceutical company Pacs during her entire congressional career to that point.Over the course of her career, Sinema has accepted more than $500,000 from executives and Pacs in the pharmaceutical and health products industries, according to data from OpenSecrets.By March 2021, Big Pharma wasn’t just quietly funneling money to Sinema; the industry was publicly signaling that the senator could be its lead blocker in the fight to prevent the government from negotiating drug prices.“Drug lobbyists see a potential ally in Democratic Sen Kyrsten Sinema, the Arizona moderate who has shown a willingness to break with her party,” Politico reported at the time.Then, early last month, a corporate front group called Center Forward bought $600,000 worth of television and radio ads promoting Sinema in Arizona. The ads touted her “independence”, and characterized her as “a bipartisan leader” in the mold of the late Senator John McCain.As The Daily Poster reported, Center Forward has been heavily bankrolled by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the powerful Washington drug lobby. Two Center Forward board members lobby for PhRMA, as well as drugmakers Amgen, Bayer, Gilead Sciences, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis and Sanofi.A few days after the ad campaign started, Sinema informed the White House that she opposed the party’s drug pricing plan.Now, senators are talking behind the scenes about ways they can water down the legislation to appease the drug industry, and a second Democratic holdout – Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, a longtime top recipient of drug industry cash – has emerged to help Sinema and Big Pharma block the way.For his part, Khanna said he has tried to reach out to Sinema. But though she was eagerly making herself available to her business donors opposing the reconciliation bill, she wasn’t interested in talking to the progressive congressman, even though he was one of the lead authors of the Medicare drug pricing bill.“I’ve never met with her,” he said. ‘I’ve offered. She didn’t want to.”
      David Sirota is a Guardian US columnist and an award-winning investigative journalist. He is an editor-at-large at Jacobin, and the founder of the Daily Poster. He served as Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign speechwriter
      Andrew Perez is a senior editor at the Daily Poster and a cofounder of the Democratic Policy Center
      This article was originally published in the Daily Poster, a grassroots-funded investigative news outlet
      TopicsPharmaceuticals industryOpinionUS CongressUS SenateDemocratsUS politicscommentReuse this content More