After seeing the article in the New York Times this morning about which party is being supported by the healthcare sector, I thought it would be interesting to update a prior post and see how the campaign finances are shaping up between lawyers and doctors. (You can check out your favorite donors, too, at the Chicago Tribune's Campaign Presidential Campaign Contributions site.)
Here's the standings:
Under the occupations of "Attorney" or "Lawyer:"
Attorney - 34,306 contributions totalling $32,392,344.51
Lawyer - 2,682 contributions totalling $2,443,718.47
TOTAL: 36,988 contribution totalling $34,836,062.98
Under the occupations of "Physician" or "Doctor:"
Physician - 6,384 contributions totalling $4,204,323.07
Doctor - 440 contributions totalling 407,580.84
TOTAL: 6824 contributions totalling $4,611,903.91
Physicians are losing at a ratio of 7.5 to 1! Common guys, let's get on it!
-Wes
4 comments:
This is staggering, but I'm not surprised (unfortunately).
What's the ratio of lawyers/physicians that serve in the US Congress? Isn't it 534 to 1? Definitely difficult to change things when the people making the laws are lawyers....
Nice post, and depressing. One problem, I find, is that as a group physician interests are more fragmented than attorney interests. For example, a cardiologist, a urologist, and a radiologist all have different interests. Trial attorneys, a very large group, all have the same goal.
As physicians need to put aside our own provincial self-interests if we want to regain any political clout in both numbers and monies.
Again, nice post.
GREAT JOB
Excellent analysis with just basic math. If only The NYTimes staff could use calculators.
Recall Mario Puzo in "The Godfather:" A lawyer can take more than 12 mob guys with machine guns.
Recall John Edwards' estimated worth: ~$50,000,000.00. Malpractice law can be such a strain .. not.
Recall: ~50% of presidential candidates are lawyers. And 100% are politicians. (Dr. Ron Paul, call your office.)
http://healthcaremoney-newsblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/md-v-jd-1-v-7.html#links
"One problem, I find, is that as a group physician interests are more fragmented than attorney interests. For example, a cardiologist, a urologist, and a radiologist all have different interests. Trial attorneys, a very large group, all have the same goal."
One problem I find is that the above is not accurate. Trial lawyers, ie. those who represent individuals who have been harmed by the negligence of others, are a tiny subset of lawyers overall. You'll find far more lawyers doing insurance defense, and many, many more working in areas such as commercial litigation for large firms with Fortune 500 clients, lobbying for business interests, or simply doing real estate transactions, wills and trusts, etc. Not to mention those who are just involved with criminal law, on both sides. Almost none of those care one bit about issues like tort reform (well, the insurance defense bar and commercial litigation bar does, but not for the plaintiffs) Lawyers are extremely fragmented as a group.
Post a Comment