In 2015, Hillary Clinton described pharmaceutical and health insurance companies as enemies. However, this has not stopped her from accepting millions of dollars in donations from both industries. Since the year 2000, Mrs. Clinton has accepted nearly $1 million from the drug and health industries, and over $2.7 million from the insurance industry. It would seem Mrs. Clinton is comfortable taking money from anyone with large pockets.
Contributions include donations connected to Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Donations from insurance companies include Aetna, MetLife, and Centene Corporation. Centene Corporation was one of Mrs. Clinton’s largest donors in 2015. Mrs. Clinton has received more campaign donations from drug companies than any other candidate in either party, all the while declaring the industry is one of her biggest enemies. Does this make any sense, unless she is telling them one thing, and us something else?
In her 2008 presidential run, Mrs. Clinton took $738,359 in donations from the drug and health industries. They also contributed $86,875 for her 2000 Senate run, and then spent $157,015 for her re-election in 2006. The insurance industry, including car, life and property insurance, donated $1,260,400 to her 2008 campaign.
The Clinton Foundation has also profited from donations. Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of North Carolina, and Humana have donated between $1 million and $5 million. These donations are a guarantee Medicare will not be able to negotiate lower drug costs, a measure heavily opposed by the pharmaceutical industry. At best, a “token” negotiation will take place to create the illusion people are being treated fairly.
When Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, she supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which includes provisions that strengthen patent protections for drugmakers. During her presidential campaign, however, she now says she opposes the deal. Having accepted these donations, is it realistic to believe she will weaken patent protections? No!! Just the opposite.
Mrs. Clinton has a long and strong history of taking money from so-called enemies, and then changing her position, and changing it again. Her word is flexible, and cannot be taken seriously. Mrs. Hillary Clinton uses the philosophy of her husband, when he said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Yeah, right! And Hillary Clinton doesn’t provide special treatment to people making large donations to her Foundations and campaigns.