The Journal Sentinel and Mark Green Part 4

While Mark Green might vote like a shill for the pharmaceutical companies, he gets stiffed by them come contribution time. So actually his votes reflect high-mindedness. And those meanies at the Greater Wisconsin Committee ought to leave him alone!

Seriously is there any other way to read this Aug. 2 post by Steve Schultze on the JSOnline's PoliticsWatch? (Yes, the Brawler is late like Spice to this, but he's been busy):

The campaign of Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle is criticizing Republican governor candidate Mark Green for his acceptance of $39,500 in donations from large drug companies, which echoes a theme currently playing in a television ad sponsored by the Greater Wisconsin Committee, an independent group. Doyle's former campaign manager, Bill Christofferson, has created the committee's ads.

Figures compiled by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics show that Green's totals for much of the period lagged behind average drug company-related donations to either Republican or Democratic members of Congress. Average donations from drug companies or their employes to Republican House members during roughly the same period were nearly $90,000 and to Democrats about half that sum, according to the center.

Green's donations from drug manufacturers rose after he shifted his views on the issue, Doyle campaign spokesman Anson Kaye said. Green has voted in favor of measures that protect the large pharmaceutical firms, Kaye said.

For example, Green changed his view to oppose re-importation of Canadian prescription drugs after 2001, Kaye said. Green campaign officials have said Green does not oppose reimportation, but opposed some measures because they didn't include sufficient consumer safeguards.

Not only did he get less than half that the average Republican received -- the average Democrat got more! What a loser!

But...but...Two words jumped out at the Brawler in Schultze's piece. The first was "average." The second was "much" as in "much of the period."

Let's take average. A guy making $100 K is walking down the street and bumps into a guy making $20 k a year. Between them, they take home an average of $60 K. But that doesn't really tell you much does it? An average tells you even less in congressional fundraising because the grand poobahs and those who serve on influential committees will get crazy dollars while the distinguished members below them fight for scraps. If the Brawler knows this, I think it's safe to assume Schultze knows this.

And any time -- any time -- a reporter says X happened during "much of the period" it means in part of the period X did not happen.

Wondering what period that might be, the Brawler spelunked into the CRP figures (Achtung, JS: providing your readers with raw data -- or links to raw data --  is pretty easy on the web. Open source, baby! All the kids are doing it!)

The Brawler started at 2004. In that year, Green received $15,000 from pharmaceutical/health products PACs and individuals (this does not include all pharma giving but is a strong proxy). The average for Democrats that year was $12,708. Which, last time the Brawler checked, was less than $15,000.

The average contribution for Republicans was $24,502. Nearly $10 k more than poor misunderstood Mark! But if you bump out the 8 demigods at the top who raked in $99,949 or more. (Richard Burr brought in $299,184. Mike Ferguson brought in $266,810. Hastert brought in $159,000.) the picture changes. Backing out those solons reduces the overall "average" to $18,654.99.  So Mark Green still made less than the "average" Republican. But the gap has narrowed for the man from Green Bay distinguished by his sycophancy toward George Bush and Tom Delay.

But doing deeper analysis, the Brawler decided to actually count where Green ranked. And he came in 134 among the 375 Dems and Repubs who got dough from pharma. So he got more dough than 241 other representatives. Doing further research, the Brawler actually counted down to the median to see what that person got. And lo and behold Civil Rights hero John Lewis received $9,000. Mark Green received nearly 70% more than that.

Then the Brawler, tirelessly, clicked back to see what Green brought in during 2002. He saw and was stunned: $5,500!

What could have happened between 2002 and 2004 that pharma would have nearly tripled its contribution -- jacked it up by nearly 300% -- to Green? (Pharma spending overall increased about 60%) I dunno....maybe the godawful Medicare prescription drug bill that passed the house BY ONE VOTE on 6/27/03? Or Green opposing the reimportation of drugs from Canada on 7/25/03?

Let's see, here's a narrative: In the 2004  election cycle, Mark Green received $15,000 from pharmaceutical interests -- an amount nearly 300% more than what he received in 2002 and placed him in roughly the top third of Congressional recipients -- after supporting two bills that benefited the big drug companies.

Fair? Maybe not. Green had plenty of reason to vote against those bills besides the prospect of receiving cash. Ideology? Sucking up to Bush? Sucking up to DeLay? A heady mix of all four? Who knows?

The Brawler isn't saying Green voted for the green. But he is saying that the way Schultze describes Green's relationship with pharma, certainly in the case of PAC giving,  is less than illuminating (Is it any surprise that Green would lag the average in the period since he was elected given the "average" includes powerful politicians who were around decades before Green showed up?)

The Brawler's not saying Schultze rewrote a Mark Green press release.  The Brawler's just suggesting a Mark Green press release would not look too different from what Schultze wrote. And the Brawler would even speculate if Mark Green's name were Jim Doyle the story might have been written a bit differently.

The Brawler would also say Schultze should be ashamed of regurgitating that "consumer safeguards" line. What, was Green afraid drugs might be reimported from Quebec with directions only in French? Seriously. Schultzey: Just cause a flack says something doesn't mean you can't laugh in his face!

Comments

[Xoff]

Another look after the most recent reports raised the number to $56,500 Green got from pharma-related donors. I shared that with Schultze, but he hasn't seen fit to post it.