Last week Sen. Marco Rubio warned it’s “important to be qualified, but if this election is a resume competition, then Hillary Clinton's gonna be the next president” because of her long history in office and in federal government.
For his sake, he’d better hope the GOP primary doesn’t turn into a disqualifying truancy competition, too.
A study by The Tampa Bay Times found that of the four Republican senators running for the White House, Rubio has missed the most Senate votes.
In June alone, Rubio missed 67 percent of the Senate votes, and he wasn’t there for more than half of them in July, according to The Times.
In all, the first-term lawmaker missed 29 percent of Senate votes, or 76 of 262 recorded, in the first six months of 2015. Over 50 of those came after his April 13 campaign announcement.
The numbers show how much time Rubio has had to spend off Capitol Hill and on the campaign trail as he looks to break out of a crowded GOP field that includes his friend and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.
By contrast, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has missed 54 votes since declaring his candidacy in March, while Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was truant for 35 votes since he launched his presidential bid on June 1.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has skipped only three votes throughout 2015 and only one since declaring for president.
On the Democratic side, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has missed four votes since hitting the campaign trail.
Rubio has missed nearly 11 percent of votes since he joined the Senate in January 2011, The Times analysis shows, well above the median 1.6 percent rate for the lifetimes of current senators.
A Rubio spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Top Reads from The Fiscal Times:
- Trump’s Debate Performance Should Kill His Candidacy … but Won’t
- Battle Lines Form in the Fight Over Social Security Payment Reductions
- Robert Gates Says U.S. Got ‘Out-Negotiated’ on Iran Deal, Backs It Anyway
There were 18 million military veterans in the United States in 2018, according to the Census Bureau. That figure includes 485,000 World War II vets, 1.3 million who served in the Korean War, 6.4 million from the Vietnam War era, 3.8 million from the first Gulf War and another 3.8 million since 9/11. We join with the rest of the country today in thanking them for their service.
Democratic presidential candidates are proposing a variety of new taxes to pay for their preferred social programs. Bloomberg’s Laura Davison and Misyrlena Egkolfopoulou took a look at how the top four candidates would fare under their own tax proposals.
“The fact is very little medical care is shoppable. We become good shoppers when we are repeat shoppers. If you buy a new car every three years, you can become an informed shopper. There is no way to become an informed shopper for your appendix. You only get your appendix out once.”
— David Newman, former director of the Health Care Cost Institute, quoted in an article Thursday by Noam Levey of the Los Angeles Times. Levey says the “consumer revolution” in health care – in which patients shop around for the best prices, forcing doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical firms to compete with lower prices – hasn’t materialized, but the higher deductibles that were part of the effort are very much in effect. “High-deductible health insurance was supposed to make American patients into smart shoppers,” Levey writes. “Instead, they got stuck with medical bills they can't afford.”
The House Ways and Means Committee released a new analysis of drug prices in the U.S. compared to 11 other developed nations, and the results, though predictable, aren’t pretty. Here are the key findings from the report:
- The U.S. pays the most for drugs, though prices varied widely.
- U.S. drug prices were nearly four times higher than average prices compared to similar countries.
- U.S. consumers pay significantly more for drugs than other countries, even when accounting for rebates.
- The U.S. could save $49 billion annually on Medicare Part D alone by using average drug prices for comparator countries.