In recent years, the Sackler family, owners of Purdue Pharma, has faced intense scrutiny over their role in the opioid epidemic. As it turns out, the Sacklers were not just profiting from the sale of OxyContin and other prescription opioids, they were also using their wealth and influence to shape opioid policy in their favor.
A new report by the watchdog organization American Oversight has revealed that the Sacklers donated more than $1 million to groups and individuals involved in shaping opioid policy, including think tanks, political action committees, and lawmakers. These donations were often made during key moments in the opioid crisis, such as when Purdue Pharma was facing increased scrutiny and lawsuits.
The report highlights specific examples of donations that raise red flags. For instance, the Sacklers donated $125,000 to Senator Thom Tillis’ political action committee, who played a key role in passing legislation that weakened the Drug Enforcement Administration’s ability to crack down on opioid manufacturers. This move by Tillis was heavily criticized at the time, with many arguing that it was a blatant attempt to protect Purdue Pharma and its owners from legal consequences.
This isn’t the first time the Sacklers have faced criticism for their influence on opioid policy. In 2018, a report by the New Yorker revealed that the Sacklers had been lobbying the World Health Organization (WHO) to downplay the risks of opioids and promote their use for pain relief. The WHO eventually released guidelines that were criticized for their leniency towards opioid use, prompting accusations that the Sacklers had influenced the decision-making process.
The Sacklers’ use of donations to shape opioid policy is a clear conflict of interest and undermines efforts to hold Purdue Pharma accountable for its role in the opioid epidemic. The company has faced increasing legal action in recent years, with lawsuits from states, cities, and tribes seeking billions in damages for the harm caused by its products.
The Sacklers themselves have also faced consequences for their actions. In 2020, Purdue Pharma pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges for its role in fueling the epidemic, and the Sacklers agreed to pay $8.3 billion in damages. However, critics argue that this is not enough, and that the Sacklers should face further consequences for their role in the crisis.
The broader issue of money in politics is also at play here. As the American Oversight report notes, these donations highlight the corrupting influence of money in politics and underscore the need for transparency and accountability in the policymaking process.
In order to address the root causes of the opioid epidemic and prevent similar crises from occurring in the future, it is crucial that we hold those responsible accountable and take steps to prevent the undue influence of wealthy donors like the Sacklers on policymaking. The Sacklers’ use of donations to shape opioid policy is just one example of the broader issue of money in politics, and it is up to policymakers and watchdog organizations to ensure that transparency and accountability are maintained in the policymaking process.
