Susan Sarandon’s familiar voice reverberates across American living rooms every day, urging us to buy Tylenol. She narrates the painkiller’s television advertisements and thus is in the pay of the parent company Johnson & Johnson. But Sarandon has also spent years using that voice to advocate against corporate lobbying, which is one of Johnson & Johnson’s strengths.
In an interview published just this month, Sarandon reiterated her opposition to lobbying, telling Vulture, “we have to get money out of government.”
Last year, Sarandon praised Sen. Bernie Sanders’ resistance to the influence of lobbyists, specifically calling out the pharmaceutical industry she collects a paycheck from, heralding Sanders as a candidate “free of ties to these terrible companies — Big Pharma, fracking, Monsanto.”
After Sanders dropped out of the race, Sarandon ardently refused to endorse Hillary Clinton, citing the donations her campaign received from “corporations and banks.”
But while Sarandon publicly condemns the influence of super PACs and pharmaceutical corporations, she’s privately benefitted from Johnson & Johnson — the parent company of Tylenol owner McNeil Consumer Healthcare — and a corporation with an active lobbying arm.
In 2016 alone, Johnson & Johnson reported almost six million dollars lobbying the federal government. When it comes to funding candidates, J&J was no slouch, either: the company’s PAC spent more than a million dollars in 2016 as well, donating 56 percent of those contributions to Republicans.
In 2016, J&J ranked 67 of the 3,729 organizations that reported spending money on lobbying, according to Opensecrets.org. From 2015-2016, Johnson & Johnson was the seventh highest spender in lobbying for what Opensecrets classifies as Pharmaceuticals/Health Products.
J&J, through its executives, employees, and PACS, has routinely ranked among the top 15 sources of funds for federal candidates in the pharmaceutical and health products industry.
In 2016, Clinton’s presidential campaign was the top recipient of donations from individuals employed by J&J. Furthermore, Johnson & Johnson’s PAC funded Hillary Clinton’s reelection campaign while she was a sitting Senator and a member of the health committee.
In an email to the Washington Examiner, Johnson & Johnson confirmed Sarandon provides voiceover for Tylenol commercials.
For her part, Sarandon’s deep commitment to progressive activism spans decades, stretching back to her work with the Sandanistas in the early 1980’s to her campaigning with John Edwards in 2004 all the way to her support for the protesters opposing Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in 2011.
Everything about her activist record indicates a sincere commitment to progressive causes, but it makes little sense for an anti-lobbying advocate to do work for a company owned by a corporation that regularly spends millions on pharmaceutical lobbying. By virtue of her work for Tylenol, Sarandon is a beneficiary of the lobbying she decries.
The more Tylenol that Susan Sarandon and McNeil Consumer Healthcare are able to sell, the more money Johnson & Johnson has to spend on lobbying the government to advance its interests.
The cliche of the Hollywood Hypocrite can be overused, but given her relationship with Johnson & Johnson, Sarandon clearly fits the bill.
Emily Jashinsky is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
