I am writing to address my concerns about recent attacks on a man I know better than anyone, my husband Kirk Adams. Let me tell you who he really is. He is a loving husband, committed father, and a man of integrity.
He is also a gifted public servant who is willing to make tough but necessary decisions. I watched as he helped lead our state through difficult times. I remember the long hours, the stress, and the eventual triumph of success as our state finally reached a balanced budget. He is a hard and quiet worker who never quits. He is motivated by a love of country, our freedoms, and a passion to preserve them for future generations.
I urge you to get to know him too. He will patiently answer all your questions, always respectful, and always factual.
Some of you may have received an email recently attacking my husband. These attacks on his character are wrong and are an attempt to obscure the facts.
Here are the facts:
1. Matt Salmon lobbied for Obamacare.
2. Publicly available disclosure documents prove this fact.
3. The Salmon campaign has not disputed the veracity of these documents. Instead, they’ve chosen to personally attack my husband.
So what? Why does it matter that Matt lobbied for Obamacare? Wasn’t he just doing his job?
Obamacare is the worst bill in maybe a hundred years. It is certainly the worst in my lifetime. It does real damage to our Constitution, to our small businesses, and will make our healthcare worse. The only position to have on Obamacare was to oppose it from the very beginning, like Kirk and the Arizona Legislature did. But Matt lobbied for it and profited off of it. That’s not the kind of leadership we all seek to represent us in Washington.
How do we know he lobbied for Obamacare?
1) Matt’s name is listed on seven different lobbying disclosure documents. He lobbied for two pharmaceutical interests, companies that sought benefits and financial advantages from Obamacare.
2) Lobbyists are required by federal law to be listed on the quarterly disclosure forms of companies that employ them. It says only to list those that actually did lobby. Matt’s name is listed as a lobbyist on the forms that his own company filed. His company is called Policy Impact Communications, a small, seven person firm of which Matt was a partner.
Is it true that Matt’s name was on the form, but only because thats what lobbying firms do, they list everyone in the firm, even if they did not lobby?
1) No. If this were true then you would expect to see Matt’s name on EVERY disclosure form for every client of his firm. In fact, this is not the case as Matt’s firm listed eight different combinations of employees on disclosure forms over their 20 federal lobbying clients during that period of time. Matt Salmon’s name is not listed on every disclosure form for their other federal clients.
2) Federal law does not provide for including names on the disclosure form when those names did not actually lobby. That would defeat the purpose of the law passed in 1996 and supported by Matt Salmon. Congress intended to bring transparency to lobbying, so we could see who was lobbying and for whom. Including everyone in the firm defeats the purpose of disclosure.
How do you know these two pharmaceutical companies supported Obamacare?
1) These two companies, Millenium-Takeda and Lundbeck, manufacture “specialty” drugs. Both companies are ranked in the top fifty largest drug companies in the world. Millenium-Takeda is a $24 Billion dollar company. Matt and his firm lobbied to ensure that Obamacare would include money for the very drugs that these companies manufacture. His own press release dated 7/16/2012 states they lobbied to get drugs covered under Obamacare for these companies.
2) Matt’s own disclosure form also states that he lobbied for “removal of patient lifetime caps.” All pharma companies wanted lifetime caps removed to ensure they could receive a lifetime of payments for the drugs that they manufacture. This is one reason why the pharmaceutical industry made a deal with President Obama on Obamacare, spending over $150 million to ensure Obamacare’s passage. Matt Salmon and his firm were paid by a pharmaceutical company to lobby members of congress to eliminate caps through government subsidy or mandate. How is this type of activity “against” Obamacare? It clearly expands Obamacare and passes the bill onto the American taxpayer.
3) Both companies are dues paying members of PhRMA, the political arm of the big drug companies. PhRMA and their member companies spent millions to pass Obamacare because it benefited their industry. Matt and his firm were paid almost $200,000 by these two large drug companies so that their drugs could be covered with no lifetime caps, thereby securing millions of dollars in revenue for them.
Are the sources being used against Kirk credible?
Gilbert Watch is a blog that promotes one writer’s individual opinions. The tone and tenor of that website would make many blush if they read some of its mean spirited claims. The site also claims Skymall Founder Bob Worsley is owned by the left, that former LDS leader Jerry Lewis is a liberal, and that Jeff Flake is a fake conservative. It is not a news site and it does not claim to be fair and balanced. This is someone’s personal site used to promote their ideas and opinions. Gilbert Watch is similar to the blogs listed below that do not support Matt Salmon or his lobbying activities, none of which are objective, but all could be called “researched.”
The ABC 15 news story that was quoted stated that Matt Salmon profited from Obamacare. How do you profit from Obamacare without lobbying “for or against” it as Matt claimed? The ABC 15 story did not discredit the documents at all, neither did the story support the Salmon campaign claims. Here’s what they said, “Profited from, yes. Lobbied for inconclusive.” To say something is inconclusive is to suspend judgment. Since the story was put together quickly and within the first few hours, ABC15 did not have all of the information available that you do.
John Adams once said that, “facts are stubborn things.” I would also add that sometimes facts can make us feel uncomfortable. Attacking my husband’s character for laying out the facts, as uncomfortable as they may be, is just plain wrong and needs to stop.
Thank you for your careful consideration of the facts. An informed electorate on issues we all value most is our goal. As always, Kirk welcomes the opportunity to talk to you personally. His cell phone is 480 570 8873.