Democratic Senators opposed to drug reimportation receive 76% more Pharma $$ than those voting Yes

[mcablue]

The award-winning, non-partisan, non-profit Maplight.org, whose mission is to " illuminate the connection between campaign donations and legislative votes," has found that,

the Senate voted against the importation of prescription drugs, 51-48. Offered by Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND) as an amendment to the health care reform bill, the provision would pave the way for market access to cheaper prescription drugs, by relaxing restrictions on imports from Canada and other highly-developed countries. In a bipartisan effort rarely seen in recent votes on health care reform, 30 Democrats sided with 17 Republicans and one Independent to kill the bill.

MAPLight.org found that Senate Democrats who voted to block imports, siding with drug companies, received an average of $73,678 each from drug companies over the past six years—76% more than Democrats who voted in favor of imports.

(...)

All Democrats (and Independents)
Average to Yes votes (allow imports): $41,894
Average to No votes (block imports): $73,678

All Senators
Average to Yes votes (allow imports): $50,767
Average to No votes (block imports): $85,779

[laughingliberal]

1. Huh, who'd a thunk it? nt

[Mass]

2. True, but some people with $0 dollars voted NO, and Lamar , with $140,000 voted NO

(I guess that he became one of your hero by this vote?)

Edited to correct numbers that I had wrong.

[mcablue]

3. Isn't looking at the big picture better than looking at the exceptions?

Why aren't the contributions roughly even on both sides? A coincidence?

The fact that not all of the Senator followed their pockets does not negate what we see in the big picture. Just as you mentioned the exceptions, you could have mentioned the non-exceptions.

You live in a world in which money does not greatly influence Congressional votes. I don't live in that world.