Search This Blog

Showing posts with label BIG PHARMA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BIG PHARMA. Show all posts

Thursday, February 3, 2022

We all deserve healthcare

 


Katie Porter for Congress


The number one priority of our healthcare system should be serving patients.

Right now, the millions of Americans who don’t have health insurance, are under-insured, or are struggling to afford their family’s health coverage or prescriptions can tell you it sure doesn’t work that way.

Since first running for Congress, Katie’s been advocating for Medicare for All. Without meaningful changes to our healthcare system, we won’t see the patient outcomes we should: healthier, happier Americans who don’t fear they’re an accident or diagnosis away from bankruptcy.

As a consumer protection attorney, Katie has seen firsthand how Big Pharma and Big Insurance companies continue to prioritize profits over people. The unfortunate reality is that a decade after passing the Affordable Care Act, millions of Americans remain uninsured.

No matter their salary, age, or where they live: Every American should have access to healthcare.

—Team Katie Porter


Congresswoman Katie Porter is fighting for affordable child care, lower cost prescription drugs, climate action, and a strong, stable, globally competitive economy that works for everyone. She’s standing up to corporate special interests and doesn’t take any money from corporate PACs or lobbyists, so we rely on grassroots supporters like you pitching in when they can. Make a contribution today.







 

Paid for by Katie Porter for Congress

 Our campaign is powered by grassroots supporters chipping in to emails just like this one. 

To contribute via check, please address to: Katie Porter for Congress, PO Box 5176, Irvine, CA 92616

 





Tuesday, February 1, 2022

What 450+ prescriptions have in common

 

Katie Porter for Congress


It may be a new year, but Big Pharma is still up to the same antics: raising prices on Americans.

Since January 1st, the prices of over 450 prescription drugs have already been raised—some by as much as 9%.

The high cost of prescription drugs hurts all of us. As a taxpayer, your tax dollars are spent covering what Big Pharma charges Medicare for these prescriptions. Katie’s been advocating that we fix this by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices—which would save taxpayers billions. She’s also introduced legislation to stop Big Pharma from price gouging patients.

Still, Big Pharma continues to spend millions on lobbying, hoping they can drown out the voices of families across the country. Katie’s proud to be one of just a few members of Congress who doesn’t take a dime of their money.

That means Katie’s fight against Big Pharma is fully funded by people like you chipping in what you can. Consider supporting her campaign so she can continue to hold Big Pharma accountable and work to lower prices.


Congresswoman Katie Porter is fighting for affordable child care, lower cost prescription drugs, climate action, and a strong, stable, globally competitive economy that works for everyone. She’s standing up to corporate special interests and doesn’t take any money from corporate PACs or lobbyists, so we rely on grassroots supporters like you pitching in when they can. Make a contribution today.


—Team KP






 

Paid for by Katie Porter for Congress

 Our campaign is powered by grassroots supporters chipping in to emails just like this one.

To contribute via check, please address to: Katie Porter for Congress, PO Box 5176, Irvine, CA 92616

 




Tuesday, January 25, 2022

CC Newsletter 25 Jan - How the US and NATO Could Settle Dispute Over Ukraine Without War

 


Dear Friend,

This has been a totally unnecessary crisis, fueled in large measure by U.S. insistence on maintaining NATO’s “open door” policy, when the reality is that there is no way that France or Germany will agree to Ukraine becoming a NATO member state. Resolution of the crisis could be hastened were Biden or Blinken to state the obvious: “We understand there are deep insecurities on all sides. Given that our allies are in no hurry to welcome Ukraine into NATO, we propose a moratorium on new NATO memberships. Beyond that, we look forward to a range of constructive negotiations to establish an enduring Eurasian security framework for the 21st century.”

If you think the contents of this newsletter are critical for the dignified living and survival of humanity and other species on earth, please forward it to your friends and spread the word. It's time for humanity to come together as one family! You can subscribe to our newsletter here
http://www.countercurrents.org/news-letter/.

In Solidarity

Binu Mathew
Editor
Countercurrents.org


How the US and NATO Could Settle Dispute Over Ukraine Without War
by Joseph Gerson


This has been a totally unnecessary crisis, fueled in large measure by U.S. insistence on maintaining NATO’s “open door” policy, when the reality is that there is no way that France or Germany will agree to Ukraine becoming a NATO member state. Resolution of the crisis could be hastened were Biden or Blinken to state the obvious: “We understand there are deep insecurities on all sides. Given that our allies are in no hurry to welcome Ukraine into NATO, we propose a moratorium on new NATO memberships. Beyond that, we look forward to a range of constructive negotiations to establish an enduring Eurasian security framework for the 21st century.”



Dangerous Heat Across the Globe
by Robert
Hunziker


Too much heat brings unanticipated problems of unexpected scale, putting decades of legacy infrastructure at risk of malfunctioning and/or total collapse. Nobody expected so much trouble to start so soon. Nobody anticipated such massive record-breaking back-to-back heat, north and south, to hit so soon on the heels of only 1.2C above estimated baseline for global warming.



Republic Day, January 26, 1950: An Epic Journey of India’s  greatest generation 
by George Abraham


As India is about to celebrate its 72nd Republic Day with pomp, pride, and parades, it is also time to rethink whether the country is living up to its constitution. India became a constitutional republic on January 26, 1950, replacing the colonial government act of India of 1935. It was a memorable day for all Indians
who transformed their lives from subjects to citizens and from oppression to liberty. Indeed, this changeover has instilled a sense of national pride in the heart of every Indian regardless of where he/she resides.



‘Monika My Darling’  on Republic Day!
by Samuel Dhar


A GoI twitter release has a video of the Navy band playing, (With the ratings dancing to), the old hit movie tune, “Monika My Darling”, at the R-Day rehearsals. OMG!!! Why did I, a Veteran, not die before seeing this horrendous spectacle !!!



Fables And Fantasies
by Hiren Gohain


The efforts of the Hindutva gang to replace Mahatma Gandhi with some ideal figure armed with a sword or a gun heroically overturning British rule is just childish fanatasy and fable.



Communalism has overtaken the Constitution!
by Dr Prem Singh


Most spheres of Indian politics have been tainted by communalism. Looking at the current political scene of the country, it seems that just as there is a consensus on neoliberalism among the political and intellectual elite of India, similarly a consensus has been made on communal politics or political communalism. Political parties, which are called secular, resort to communalism in competition to communal BJP, so it is rightly said that they cannot defeat BJP on the pitch of communalism



Save Lives, Socialize Big Pharma
by Joseph Grosso


Faced with such obvious market failure, the solution presents itself: A nationalized pharmaceutical industry fully under public control. Under such a system, money from profitable drugs could simply be channeled to less profitable things like vaccines, antibiotics, and neglected tropical diseases.



What Solidarity Journalism Reveals to Us
by Anita Varma


Solidarity reporting calls on journalists to push beyond reporting the easy soundbite from an official press release in order to do the work of representing people experiencing injustice.



History: An Ocean without Shores
by Dr Abdul Ahad


Is history an ocean of knowledge without shores? Is it a seamless fusion of interdisciplinary knowledge? How does it reach us and help us develop our perspectives of lived and living lifestyles? Why does it motivate us to integrate for common good?



Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021 – Monetising that which sustains life
by Radha Gopalan


Since monetising the life sustaining systems is the premise on which these
amendments are constructed, it is not surprising that they demonstrate an emphasis on a centralised rather than a federated, decentralised approach in developing plans and strategies for biodiversity conservation and regeneration. With this approach how will the stated objectives of the Act “conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits”  be achieved?



Channi is dishonest and Kejriwal an honest man?
by Dr Prem Singh


On 20 January, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal called Punjab Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi a dishonest man, and emphasized that Channi should not be viewed as a common man. That is, the patent of the common man lies with Kejriwal alone, and in this respect, honesty as well. Kejriwal made this statement in a quick response to the ED’s raid on Channi’s nephew’s house. Since then, a series of
allegations and counter-allegations have been going on between the two leaders, which may continue till the last day of the Punjab Assembly elections



Drug mafia & role of private ports
by Dr Madabhushi Sridhar


The statement of APSEZ(Adani Ports) that it will not deal with the containers from Iran Pakistan, and Afghanistan inadvertently confirms the earlier transactions and raises suspicion that huge quantum of drugs might have gained surreptitious entry into our nation. At first instance Adani Ports said that it has no policing power, later it says that it does not want to deal with containers of these three nations.



Urgent Need to Raise Budget Allocations for Health Sector
by Bharat Dogra


Even in Pandemic Times, Health Allocations Have Been Far Short of Real Needs



Tuesday, January 4, 2022

RSN: FOCUS: Andrew Perez | The Biden Consultants Working to Sink His Agenda

 


 

Reader Supported News
04 January 22

Live on the homepage now!
Reader Supported News

 

Joe Biden. (photo: Martin Schoeller/GQ)
FOCUS: Andrew Perez | The Biden Consultants Working to Sink His Agenda
Andrew Perez, Jacobin
Perez writes: "The pharmaceutical industry wants Americans to continue paying far more for medicines than people in any other country, to protect their tremendous profits. And one of Joe Biden's top campaign consulting firms is helping them."

The pharmaceutical industry wants Americans to continue paying far more for medicines than people in any other country, to protect their tremendous profits. And one of Joe Biden’s top campaign consulting firms is helping them.


President Joe Biden’s top media buying firm is helping Big Pharma’s efforts to kill his party’s watered-down drug pricing legislation and targeting Senate Democrats up for reelection this year. It’s the latest reminder that for the Beltway consultant class, money is far more important than ideology.

While Big Pharma’s allies in Congress have already succeeded in scaling back the Democrats’ drug pricing plan, the provision in Biden’s Build Back Better legislation still represents the party’s most sincere effort to fulfill its longtime promise to allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices. The idea of allowing the government to negotiate drug prices — like most other high-income countries do — is one of the most popular items in the Biden social agenda bill.

Yet, a top Democratic Party media buying firm, Canal Partners Media, is placing ads for drug industry front groups that want to block Democrats from lowering drug prices as promised in the Biden reconciliation bill. One group argues that Democrats are putting rare disease patients at risk, and is targeting several incumbent Democratic senators by name. The other says Democrats are harming drug companies’ ability to respond to pandemics like COVID-19.

These fearmongering ad campaigns conveniently ignore the fact that the federal government regularly subsidizes drug companies’ research and development costs and has spent tens of billions of dollars to fund COVID vaccines and treatments.

While one of the group’s ads says they aren’t worried about corporate profits, that is exactly what these campaigns are about. The pharmaceutical industry wants to ensure that Americans continue to pay far more for medicines than people in any other country, in order to protect companies’ tremendous profits. And Democratic campaign consultants are helping them.

Canal Partners Media did not respond to the Daily Poster’s request for comment.

“Politicians Need a Win”

The Canal Partners Media website touts its work as Biden’s “lead buying agency” and its “experience championing progressive causes.”

Media Buying & Analytics, a company affiliated with Canal Partners Media, handled almost $450 million worth of ad buys for Biden’s 2020 campaign, according to OpenSecrets. Another apparent affiliate bought ads for Bernie Sanders’s 2016 presidential bid.

The firm has made media buys for official party committees, including the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. They have also worked with party-aligned super PACs and progressive groups like MoveOn.

In recent months, Canal Partners Media has been buying ads for a new client: the Rare Access Action Project (RAAP), a drug industry front group that received $260,000 from the powerful drug lobby Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) in 2019.

The RAAP website says its partners include the Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a drug industry lobbying group, and more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies, including Alexion, Regeneron, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB. These companies could all potentially see some of their drug prices negotiated under the terms of Democrats’ scaled-back drug pricing plan.

RAAP’s leadership team includes several corporate consultants from Acuity Strategic Partners, as well as former Republican representative Matt Salmon, who is running for governor in Arizona.

The ad campaign from RAAP has been targeting several Democratic senators who are up for reelection in 2022: Michael Bennet of Colorado, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, and Patty Murray of Washington. They’ve also targeted Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, who is up in 2024.

“Right now, politicians need a win, and rare disease patients are going to lose,” says the group’s Colorado ad. “In Congress’ rush to spend trillions, they’re putting huge cost increases on the development of treatments for rare diseases — killing research, stopping breakthroughs, and stealing hope from 25 million Americans with rare diseases. So before we let Congress score a win, think of what millions stand to lose. Tell Michael Bennet to protect rare disease patients.”

The argument that lower drug prices would significantly hinder research and development is false: A Congressional Budget Office study last year found that even if profits on top drugs decreased by 15 to 25 percent, it would only result in “a 0.5 percent average annual reduction in the number of new drugs entering the market in the first decade.” That’s because the federal government already heavily subsidizes research on virtually every drug that gets approved for sale in the United States.

There is also a lucrative incentive program under the Orphan Drug Act for companies developing drugs to treat rare diseases. An investigative report last month from House Democrats found that pharmaceutical companies have abused this program, which was meant to encourage companies to develop medicines with a limited commercial market. The report found companies are using orphan drug designations to protect and extend monopolies on “widely used and commercially successful drugs” and to “justify charging high prices.”

As for Democrats’ drug pricing provision in the Build Back Better bill, pharma-aligned Democrats have already significantly pared back the measure, saving the industry potentially as much as $450 billion over a decade. While the compromise version would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices for the first time, it would affect far fewer drugs than what Democrats originally proposed.

The government would only be permitted to negotiate prices on a handful of the costliest drugs to Medicare each year, and only on drugs that are past their exclusivity period and have no competition. The legislation would also impose inflation caps to prevent companies from increasing drug prices far beyond what they’re charging now. That may sound promising, but prescription costs in the United States are already way too high. The measure would also not allow the government to negotiate launch prices for new drugs, so companies would likely raise those.

Of course, some drugmakers would still see their drug prices negotiated under Democrats’ limited proposal — and a number of those companies are listed as partners on RAAP’s website. According to Bloomberg Government, some of the drugs that could end up on the government’s negotiation list are sold by Alexion, Regeneron, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB — which are all RAAP partners — as well as AstraZeneca, which owns Alexion.

“What’s at Stake Isn’t Corporate Profits”

Canal Partners Media also started buying ads late last month for the Coalition to Protect Access (CPA), another apparent pharma front group.

Business incorporation records from Washington, DC show that CPA is being led by executives from Purple Strategies, a corporate communications firm that worked with BP after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill as well as Purdue Pharma, the notorious OxyContin manufacturer widely accused of helping fuel the opioid crisis.

Purple Strategies wrote in a 2019 press release that the firm has been a “longtime partner” to PhRMA, a lobbying powerhouse for drugmakers that generated a staggering $573 million in revenue in 2020.

“Today, vaccines and antivirals are helping fight the pandemic, because scientists and researchers in America’s biopharmaceutical industry acted fast, after investing billions over years to achieve breakthroughs,” says the new ad from CPA. “But now, Congress is threatening legislation that will devastate private industry’s ability to fund treatments just like these. What’s at stake isn’t corporate profits — it’s public preparedness. Tell Congress to oppose legislation that would harm our ability to fight pandemics.”

PhRMA CEO Stephen Ubl made the same argument in November, claiming that Democrats’ drug pricing measure would “upend the same innovative ecosystem that brought us lifesaving vaccines and therapies to combat COVID-19.”

This is totally false: the federal government invests billions each year to subsidize pharmaceutical companies’ research and development costs, and the government has poured tens of billions of dollars into efforts to develop COVID vaccines and treatments.

Indeed, a team of government scientists helped develop Moderna’s mRNA-based COVID vaccine — a fact the company fittingly decided to leave out of the patent application for its vaccine technology.

Then there’s the newly approved COVID antiviral treatment from Merck, which “was made possible by government-funded innovation,” according to Stat News. That didn’t stop the company from charging the US government $712 per course of the treatment, or forty times the $17.74 that it costs to produce.

CPA and Purple Strategies did not respond to requests for comment.

While the public is served up TV ads warning about threats to drugmakers’ innovation, the reality of the situation is that the US government funds pharmaceutical companies’ research and development, and the industry rewards that investment by charging Americans the highest prices for medicines in the world.

Pharmaceutical companies are not losing money on their products in countries that negotiate lower prices. They only charge Americans more because they can — because US politicians barred the government from negotiating prices, while also eliminating the requirement that government-funded drugs be sold at a “reasonable price.” Companies can also game the US patent system to preserve drug monopolies even as generic or biosimilar versions are being offered in other countries.

This is why drugmakers have “targeted the United States for price increases for many years while maintaining or cutting prices in the rest of the world,” according to the recent report by House Democrats.

So far, CPA is running ads in ArizonaWest VirginiaNevada and the DC area. Arizona Democratic senator Kyrsten Sinema already played a key role in watering down the party’s prescription drug measure, while a pharma-funded front group ran ads promoting her at home.

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) has publicly supported the idea of allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, but he has pushed Democrats to stall the broader Build Back Better reconciliation bill, despite having personally negotiated down the scope of the legislation substantially.

READ MORE

 

Contribute to RSN

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation

PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611




Monday, December 27, 2021

RSN: FOCUS: Charlotte Kilpatrick | The Grinches Hoarding Vaccine Patents

 

 

Reader Supported News
26 December 21

We Need a Sustaining-Matching Donation

Right now it’s all small donations. Those work when there are a few larger sustaining donations to match them. It’s the match that’s missing this December.

With respect, who can?

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

 

If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation



 

Reader Supported News
26 December 21

Live on the homepage now!
Reader Supported News

WE SINCERELY APPRECIATE THE INCREDIBLE EFFORT OF OUR DONORS — It’s a real struggle right now to pull in enough funding to meet RSN’s operating costs. It is however very reassuring to see the incredible effort being made by great donors dedicated to keeping this unique news source strong and vital. A lot of people absolutely do “stand up for Reader Supported News.” Please, join them.
Marc Ash • Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

 

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla talks during a press conference with European Commission President after a visit to oversee the production of the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine at the factory of US pharmaceutical company Pfizer, in Puurs, on April 23, 2021. (photo: John Thys/AFP/Getty Images)
FOCUS: Charlotte Kilpatrick | The Grinches Hoarding Vaccine Patents
Charlotte Kilpatrick, Salon
Kilpatrick writes: "Putting technical arguments of who-can-do-what aside, a bigger question is not who should be allowed to produce the vaccine - but who has the moral right to own it in the first place."

Nelson Mandela condemned Big Pharma for patent-protecting HIV drugs. Something similar is happening with COVID-19


In 1998 the South African Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association teamed up with 39 pharmaceutical companies to sue Nelson Mandela's government for suspending international trade agreements that protected the patents to HIV antiretroviral medication.

At the time of the lawsuit, it was estimated that one in nine South Africans had contracted HIV, and the cost of providing the patent-protected medication was largely out of reach to the 4.7 million people in the country who needed it.

Defending his decision to bypass the WTO's agreement protecting intellectual property, Nelson Mandela said in a TV interview: "I think the pharmaceuticals are exploiting the situation that exists in countries like South Africa — in the developing world — because they charge exorbitant prices which are beyond the capacity of the ordinary HIV/AIDS person. That is completely wrong and must be condemned."

"The government is perfectly entitled, in facing that situation, to resort to generic drugs and it is a gross error for the companies, for the pharmaceuticals, to take the government to court," Mandela continued.

In deciding to ignore patent laws, Mandela made a moral decision that saving lives was more important than protecting private property rights. The pharmaceutical companies argued back that if developing countries could effectively steal their medicines, they would have less incentive to research new drugs in the future that could also save millions of lives.

Twenty-three years later, history is repeating itself. In October of 2020, South Africa and India noticed that the overwhelming amount of pre-purchasing agreements for COVID-19 vaccines were being negotiated by rich countries, meaning those countries would get the vaccine first. The two nations went to the World Trade Organization and asked for a temporary suspension on patents for all COVID-related medicines and technologies, so that the developing world could produce vaccines on its own without having to rely on handouts from COVAX or donations from rich countries.

It turns out they were right to worry. According to the New York Times COVID data tracker, 74% of all COVID-19 vaccines have gone to upper and middle income countries, while less than 1% have gone to low-income countries. More booster shots have been administered in rich countries than single shots given in poor ones. All the while, lower-middle income countries have suffered the highest estimated excess death rate from the virus.

The pharmaceutical lobby instantly lashed out against South Africa and India's proposal. Among their arguments was that even if they surrendered their patents, there weren't enough manufacturers in the developing world to make the vaccines — and, they argued that even if there were, it would take ages for the technical transfers necessary to get them up and running. That likely isn't true: this week, Doctors Without Borders identified 120 manufacturers in Asia, Africa and Latin America with the technical requirements and quality standards needed to produce mRNA vaccines.

But putting technical arguments of who-can-do-what aside, a bigger question is not who should be allowed to produce the vaccine — but who has the moral right to own it in the first place.

The COVID vaccines used in high-income countries were developed largely — in some cases entirely — with public funding. The AstraZeneca vaccine was invented at the Jenner Institute at Oxford University with 99% of public funding. Moderna received 100% of its funding for the vaccine from Operation Warp Speed, and the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was funded with almost half a billion dollars from the German government. Pharmaceutical companies have also invested huge sums of their own money in vaccine development, without which they would not have been able to bring about the vaccines so quickly.

But let's pretend that the public invested nothing, and it was only a small handful of multinational pharmaceutical companies that took the risk and invested millions of dollars to develop the vaccines. Surely the pharma companies are entitled to a reward for their investment, and the great service they are providing humanity by supplying life-saving medicine.

But how much should that reward be? Is a couple of million enough? How about a few billion? Pfizer has said it will make $33.5 billion in revenue from sales of its vaccine this year. Even after taking out a chunk that pharma companies say will be reinvested for the development of new medicines, Pfizer's shareholders are left with billions to line their Christmas stockings.

Western society has long enshrined the right to private property; as the old saying goes, possession is 9/10ths of the law. The pharmaceutical companies clearly have the right to sell their property – in this case, vaccines – to whomever it wants and at whatever price it sees fit. Yet Western societies are also governed by principles of The Enlightenment, among them a right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." So what happens when these rights abut? Should somebody's right to "life" mean they have a right to take somebody else's private property? Representatives from the pharma lobby would likely say no, while global health advocates would probably say yes.

Because I'm home alone with my eight-year-old daughter and desperately trying to avoid watching the first Harry Potter movie for the hundredth time I decided to divert her attention away from the TV by asking her how she would resolve this moral dilemma. She responded in typical childhood fashion: "The pharma companies are not being very very nice, and if sick people need the vaccine they should go to the police and make the pharma companies give them the vaccine." I suppose that any daughter of a left-leaning journalist is likely to produce the same answer to this ethical quandary, but I'd be very interested to hear how the children of Pfizer's C-Suite would respond.

Children are usually quite good at answering black and white philosophical questions that lack nuance. Voldemort is bad, Harry Potter is good. Killing people is wrong, as is stealing Mommy's white chocolate bar. The public invested billions of dollars. Millions of lives are at stake along with hopes and dreams of getting back to "a normal way of life." If pharma companies are robbed of the rights to their private property for COVID-19 vaccines, who's to say the same won't happen for HIV or diabetes drugs.

Fortunately for policy makers, their jobs are not currently under threat by primary school–aged children. But delegates at the WTO are essentially being asked the same question, only with a lot more nuance that can easily derail the central question of how the global community should organise itself to respond to a public health emergency. It's been well over a year since the WTO council responsible for intellectual property agreements was asked to consider South Africa and India's proposal for an intellectual property waiver. So far nothing tangible has happened. If delegates don't know what to do about the waiver, perhaps they can turn to their children for advice, as their moral compass is apt to be more sound.

Another fun question to ask one's children is how much money the people should give the pharma companies in exchange for taking the vaccine and giving them to poor countries. My daughter said: "Maybe like five or ten euros." To her that is a lot of money.

READ MORE

 

Contribute to RSN

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation

PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611







"Look Me In The Eye" | Lucas Kunce for Missouri

  Help Lucas Kunce defeat Josh Hawley in November: https://LucasKunce.com/chip-in/ Josh Hawley has been a proud leader in the fight to ...