To: Health Resources Commission

From: Janice Thompson, Executive Director of the Money in Politics Research Action Project

Re: Conflict of interest discussion

Thanks for the opportunity to provide the following information about campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures by pharmaceutical companies as well as information about connections between drug company allies and that industry. I am often asked if this kind of data proves a direct link between money in politics and policy decisions and I want to be clear that MiPRAP's purpose is to present the data because of the value of disclosure in public policy discussions. To help shed light on ways to use this information MiPRAP provides polling data on the role of money in politics.

A national poll by the Mellman Group done in March of 2000 asked a question about the role of money in federal politics. The sample size was 800 likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.5%.

A national poll of 300 corporate executives was done by The Tarrance Group for the Committee for Economic Development. This survey was done from mid-September to mid-October of 2000 and has a margin of error of + 5.8%. Key findings from this survey include:

• 75% agree that business leaders believe that political contributions give them an advantage in the shaping of legislation
• 73% believe that Corporate America contributes to political campaigns because it wants something in return

Total campaign contributions in Oregon from the pharmaceutical industry during the 2000 election came to $87,000 with $85,075 going to legislative candidates.

The industry spent $411,108 on lobbying during the last legislative session in 1999. This is double the drug industry lobbying expenditures during the 1997 session. It seems likely that 2001 legislative session spending on lobbying will more than double again given the extent of lobbying about H.B. 3300. Also three pharmaceutical companies new to Oregon joined the lobbying ranks during the 2001 session. How much drug companies spent on lobbying during the 2001 session won't be known until early 2002 because these expenditures only have to be reported annually.

In addition to direct campaign and lobbying spending by pharmaceutical companies, many of the national affiliates of drug industry allies against HB 3300 during the 2001 legislative session have received funding from the prescription drug industry. As a nonprofit organization, MiPRAP staff recognizes the need for these organizations to maintain a diversified fundraising base. Revealing these money connections is intended to provide information during public discussion. The following information was obtained by a June search of organizational websites. This self-disclosure is to be commended but it means that other anti-formulary allies may receive drug company support that was not revealed through a website search. Examples include the American Lung Association that receives funding from Merck for its asthma research efforts. Merck both lobbies and makes campaign contributions in Oregon. The National Psoriasis Foundation Corporate members include seven pharmaceutical companies. Two of them, Novartis and Bristol-Myers Squib are active in Oregon politics.

The Arthritis Foundation received contributions of $100,000 or more from 10 pharmaceutical companies. Four of these companies, Schering-Plough, Pharmacia, Merck, and Aventis made 2000 campaign contributions and are lobbying during this legislative session.

The Epilepsy Foundation, an anti-HB 3300 ally, has pharmaceutical company support at each of their levels of corporate partners. Pfizer, which has given campaign contributions and lobbied in Oregon, is at the Epilepsy Foundations' Platinum Level category. Three of the four Gold Level corporate partners are drug companies. Two of these Gold Level partners, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis, gave Oregon campaign contributions during the 2000 election. These companies have lobbied in Oregon for many years. Three of the four Silver Level corporate partners of the Epilepsy Foundation are also pharmaceutical companies. Abbott Laboratories is in this group of partners and has lobbied in Oregon since 1994.

Another opponent of HB 3300 was United Seniors of Oregon. Its legislative director is Jim Davis who ran for the House in district 11. The average legislative contribution from the pharmaceutical industry in 2000 was $1,519 and Mr. Davis received $4,750. Twelve percent of his contributions were from pharmaceutical companies. Mr. Davis was the highest recipient of pharmaceutical industry contributions during the 2000 Oregon house primary. Mr. Davis was the third highest recipient of drug company campaign contributions to all legislative candidates in an analysis of total 2000 contributions for both the primary and the general elections.