Monday, June 25, 2018

Mail Tribune Addresses Greg Walden's Drug Money

The Mail Tribune faced up to their responsibility--and opportunity.


On Sunday the newspaper addressed an issue in their "Since You Asked" column--does Greg Walden take contributions from manufacturers and marketers of opioids? 

To their credit, the Tribune gave the accurate answer. Yes he does.
$800,000 from Drug Companies

The simple fact is that Greg Walden is a fundraising dynamo, gathering up money from the industries his House committee oversees. Is that OK?  Are we comfortable with that? 

I had written a blog post last week, answering a question posed to me: does Walden get contributions from the opioid drug industry. Click: June 18 post. It was widely read and then circulated on social media. I examined the official contribution reports for Walden's fundraising from the drug industry. I compared the list of contributors with the list of companies that are being sued by states and cities for abusive practices regarding the opioid crisis.  

The Mail Tribune used the same methodology I used, and reported the same result I found: Walden is the number one recipient of money from the drug industry, and this includes the opioid companies identified as defendants in those lawsuits.

The Tribune could easily have continued to stay silent on this. A local newspaper is both a potential civic asset--and a business.
  
Many newspapers have a self image of public service and journalistic integrity. They may want to consider themselves a trustworthy truth-teller, willing to face up to reporting on troubling issues. Walden is popular locally, so it took courage for the Tribune to have spoken up. Many readers might be happier had the Tribune averted its eyes.

Image from my post on the issue of opioids
The issue has been around for years, but it got stirred up again because two weeks ago Greg Walden ran a half page color ad in the Tribune trumpeting his getting an "award" as a health care champion. The "award" was given by drug companies who lobby for keeping drug prices high for American taxpayers and consumers. That fact was not evident from the ad. I gave the ad the close look it needed. Click: June 11 post  

Talk of contributions from the drug industry raises important questions about our Congressman, and apparently "Ann" of Jacksonville asked the Tribune. Does Walden get money from the opioid industry? That leads to the bigger question, what with Walden getting all that money, just whose interests does he now serve?

Greg Walden's contributions create an awkward dilemma for a newspaper, so I commend the Tribune for stepping up to its obligation and opportunity as a public trust. Some newspapers might take the easy route, by treating his contributions as a sign of power and campaign success: look at how much money our very own congressman raises. That kind of coverage imbeds an editorial judgement, that the contributions are benign, that more is better, and that Walden gets $800,000 in contributions from the drug industry because he is a really good legislator, not because he is really cozy with that industry. 

Or just stay silent and let sleeping dogs lie.
Walden ad in the Mail Tribune

Sunday the Mail Tribune stepped up.

It is easy and painless for a citizen blogger to investigate this issue, but the Tribune has something to lose by exposing the uncomfortable truth, that Greg Walden takes boatloads of money from the industries his Committee has responsibility for overseeing, including money from the opioid industry.

On Sunday the Tribune began giving voters the information they need to decide whether Greg Walden is OK, or whether there is something ugly about the fact he is chest deep in the swamp. 




  


8 comments:

Judy Brown said...

Can you post the Mail Tribune Link?

Janis E. Carpenter said...

Bravo, Peter W. Sage, for practicing real journalism in Oregon's 2nd Convressation District. You not only cover political issues in the district but also provide meta-analysis of media coverage of the Congressional race. For a related discussion, see this week's issue of The Economist : “Small-town newspapers: Still kicking” (June 23, 2018, at 27). The Economist cites the work of the Institute for Rural Journalism at the University of Kentucky and the Tow Centre for Digital Journalism, and it quotes publisher Jay Nolan: “We have to have a free and vibrant press in American to be great in America.” Of course we need courageous journalists to sustain a free and vibrant press. Thank you, Peter W. Sage, for your courage and the courage you inspire.

JEC said...

Make that "Congressional" in first line above (to correct typo).

Curt said...

Peter.....you are sick little man obsessed with Walden and Trump. while the real danger to America are the progressives like Schumer, Pelosi, and Maxine Waters. For a guy who advertises that he went to Harvard (did you graduate, and with what degree?), you miss the boat daily.

Almost every politician takes campaign contributions. The Dems do it, and it affects their votes. Why no comment on that?

You would be happy that there were narcotics if you were sick, ill, or in pain. Walden doesn't write the abusive prescriptions, doctors do. Go rail on them. I am aware of local doctors who keep their old patients loaded-up on narcotics as much as a drug addict in the back alley is. They are hooked on opioids because of their doctor. If there's a problem with narcotic abuse, then blame the doctors for being abusive with their prescription pads. Walden doesn't write prescriptions. I'll bet that some of these abusive doctors were your investment clients.

Where does Jamie Skinner get her contributions from? Why don't you dissect them?

In spite of Trump personal issues, he's still a hell of a lot better than Obama, and I would guess that most Americans have more hope for their lives than they did 5 years ago.

If you're concerned about "bought government" from special interests, then start writing about Medford and Jackson County local governments, because both have been bought by the local Chamber of Commerce, who include your friends and former clients. Jessica Gomez received $100K from PACS for a reason.

Up Close: Road to the White House said...

Regarding the Link: I just added it to the post. Thanks for the suggestion. Here is is again: http://mailtribune.com/news/since-you-asked/walden-has-multiple-pharmaceutical-contributors

Regarding Curt Ankerberg's comments: Yeah, I went to Harvard and graduated cum laude (i.e. with Honors) in History, class of 1971. Then I went to graduate school at Yale, Department of History, where I received a M.A. before I left the Ph.D. program. I was too restless and my temperament too undisciplined to be a history professor. I am delighted Ankerberg reads my posts. There are 1,000 to 2,000 every day and I cherish each of them.

Malcolm said...

I won’t call Curt Ankerberg a "sick litt”e man". I’m not sinking to his level. But really, does he expect Peter to muckrake on every democrat in the same article in which he focuses on the corrupt Congressman Walden? He’s writing about Walden, not anybody else, at least in this one exposé.

Besides, it’s pretty weird that Curt thinks it’s just dandy that Walden should sleep with big pharmaceutical, in order to allow big pharmaceutical to exploit individuals in need of medicine.

Big pharmaceutical, obviously, has its place, but I thought our congressmen were supposed to represent the American public. That’s the way things worked when I was younger. Much younger, unfortunat ly.

Anonymous said...

Curt please consider a consultation with a medical health professional.

Janis E. Carpenter said...

Sent to The Economist this week: I appreciate your attention to the survival of rural newspapers (“Small-town newspapers: Still kicking” June 23rd), but the focus on financial stability implicitly diminished another key element in maintaining a vibrant free press: courage. Publishers may find methods to balance their books: opening of commercial-printing ventures, solicitation of donations, raising of subscription prices, hosting of community events, use of sponsored content, and more. Those endeavors may turn red accounts black but they do not necessarily engender the journalistic courage to challenge local leaders and take risky stands on local issues. In his blog, Peter W. Sage provides a cogent example in southern Oregon with his praise of a local newspaper (the Mail Tribute in Medford, Oregon) for stepping up to report on Congressman Greg Walden's ties to the opioid industry even though Walden is a prominent advertiser in that newspaper (peterwsage.blog). That newspaper's stepping-up arose not from a comfortable bank account but in response to Sage's blog, an alert newspaper reader's question, and the newspaper's courage in reporting despite financial discomfort.


JANIS E. CARPENTER
Portland, Oregon