Newt lobbies for Big Pharma - wants Medical Marijuana banned
Newt is a Pharmaceutical lobbyist, and was a big pusher of the Medicare Part D entitlement expansion bill.
He had a sudden change of heart in 1991. After introducing a pro-medical-marijuana bill, he sold out and he's been vehemently against it ever since.
Newt is a Pharmaceutical lobbyist, and was a big pusher of the Medicare Part D entitlement expansion bill.
He flat out denies it. Or maybe he doesn't understand what lobbying is.First of all, we know that Gingrich has been paid by drug companies and by the drug lobby, notably during the Medicare drug debate. A former employee of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, (the main industry lobby) told me Gingrich was being paid by someone in the industry at the time. A spokeswoman for Gingrich's health care consulting firm, Center for Health Transformation, told me that drug companies have been CHT clients. PhRMA confirmed in a statement that they had paid Gingrich. Bloomberg News cited sources from leading drug companies Astra-Zeneca and Pfizer saying that those companies had also hired Gingrich.
And not surprisingly, the Pharma lobbyist thinks that non-Pharmaceutical drugs should all be banned. Including a federal ban on medical marijuana.Gingrich stated last week on Fox News, "I do no lobbying of any kind. I never have. A very important point to make. I have never done lobbying of any kind."
He had a sudden change of heart in 1991. After introducing a pro-medical-marijuana bill, he sold out and he's been vehemently against it ever since.
Yes, then-Congressman Gingrich in 1991 introduced pro-medical marijuana legislation, but now he’s thinking of the children, he tells Yahoo! News’ Chris Moody. “What has changed was the number of parents I met with who said they did not want their children to get the signal from the government that it was acceptable behavior,” said Gingrich, before saying that Americans who need medical marijuana will simply have to cope with the inconvenience of debilitating pain and nausea.
“[My supporters] were prepared to say as a matter of value that it was better to send a clear signal on no drug use at the risk of inconveniencing some people, than it was to be compassionate toward a small group at the risk of telling a much larger group that it was okay to use the drug,” Gingrich explained. “Within a year of my original support of that bill I withdrew it.”