Has anyone asked Mr Kirk about the lobbying of Holland & Knight? According to Open Secrets, that’s the lobbying firm that Hartford Insurance hired. As a well compensated member of the Hartford Board, Kirk should be able to explain what Holland & Knight is lobbying for. Are they, and Hartford Insurance pushing for a strong public option?
Maybe the answer will be reassuring. But the list of Holland & Knight’s other clients is anything but reassuring.
(My apologies for posting this as a comment where it didn’t quite fit–as other commenters pointed out, I’m new here).
Here’s a link to Mother Jones and it’s not reassuring. Too bad nobody got a chance to ask him about this before he was picked.
Please share widely!
The Hartford is primarily an auto and life insurer. They are unlikely to be a major player in the health reform debate.
<
p>What exactly does the client list of Holland and Knight have to do with this? They are a big national law firm that has a lobbying office in Washington. They are likely to represent lots of big companies. That’s what they do. They lobby for the positions that their clients what them to lobby for. What does that have to do with Mr. Kirk?
<
p>
That’s what I’d like to know. I wish someone had the opportunity to ask him. Check the link to Mother Jones again. Kirk lobbied for “FDA reform” in 1999, most likely to speed up the process of drug approval. Streamlined drug approval, I wonder how that worked out.
is in health insurance deal space. Hartford Group is very diverse and one does have to wonder if Senator Kirk is going to have a conflict.
<
p>http://groupbenefits.thehartfo…
Way, way more tainted than Blagojevich’s appointment of Burris, who Harry Reid and others threatened to refuse to seat.
the legislature voted to give the Governor the authority to appoint an interim Senator (by law) and the authority to do it immediately (by law) rather than after 90 days.
<
p>in Blago’s case it was alleged that he tried to sell the seat for personal gain. we don’t have all the evidence as the case has not gone to trial. The Illinois legislature however, impeached Blago and removed him from office. The standard by which he was removed from office was a political judgment, having to do with fitness for office, and not by presentation of evidence of criminal behavior never mind the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. I think Blago deserved to be impeached based on suitable for office and I hope he;s found guilty or else the ILL legislator deprived the voters of their elected leader.
<
p>Kirk’s appointment in interim, and was authorized by law voted by legislature. Was it politics? Absolutely and Republicans would have done exactly the same.
As much as I think this is a bad appointment and a worse process, I don’t think this is a tainted appointment. I think it was perfectly legal.
<
p>And I couldn’t agree more that the Republicans would have done exactly the same. I can very easily imagine them installing some rich white guy who was a lobbyist for a big pharmaceutical company and who sits on the board of an insurance company. I can see them putting in someone who once advocated putting a means test on Social Security, and whose main qualification is that he knows the right people. Yup, that’s exactly how I would expect Republicans to behave.
When he balked at appointing Obama’s aide Valerie Jarrett to be a rubber stamp for Obama, Emmanuel ruined him. Emmanuel’s involvement will come out during the trial. All there is against Blago is that taped phone conversation, where he is complaining about Obama not even offering any sort of quid pro quo (as most certainly was given to Patrick, even if it is still a quid to be named later), and saying “for nothing? fuck him!” Of course there was supposed to be a quid pro quo of some sort, and I can see Obama and Emmanuel just deciding to ruin him instead, to show their power to others.
<
p>At any rate, Burris wasn’t to blame, and wasn’t tainted. Kirk is a PhRMA tool, and for all we know might have gone against Kennedy’s wishes to get himself appointed by colluding with the rest of the staff to write the letter and get himself appointed.
that Kennedy even knew about the letter? Any videos of him making the case for it? Then “for all we know” Kirk might have had his big PhRMA staff write it himself. Seems very likely to me, given what we know about big pharma and Kirk’s deep connections to it.
<
p>And cowtow might be the wrong spelling, but it is certainly what Blagojevich didn’t do, and why his head rolled.
that’s because you give credence to whatever idea enters your brain even without one scintilla of actual evidence