Sorry- resending another one hopefully without the garbage.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,

THE FOLLOWING IS WHY WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO CALL, ETC----JUST BECAUSE
THESE WORDS ARE IN THE SENATE BILL WHICH PASSED THE SENATE, DOES NOT
MEAN THE HOUSE WILL PASS IT, AND THAT IT WILL SURVIVE A HOUSE VOTE, THE
COMMITTEE, ETC.  IT'S NOT READY TO GO TO CLINTON YET!!!!

(FROM:  http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:s.1650:)

Charlotte
------------------------------------
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION AND
RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 2000

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND
STROKE

 Appropriations, 1999
                          $899,119,000
 Budget estimate, 2000
                           920,970,000
 Committee recommendation
                         1,019,271,000


The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,019,271,000 for the
National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke [NINDS]. This is $98,301,000 more than the budget
request and $120,152,000 more than
the fiscal year 1999 appropriation. The comparable amounts for the
budget estimate include funds to be
transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.

Mission- The NINDS conducts and supports a broad range of research and
research training on the normal
function of the brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerves, and on
neurological and neuromuscular disorders.
Neurological research includes epidemiology studies to identify risk
factors for disease; laboratory studies to
examine the structure and function of nerve cells; and brain imaging
studies to understand how the brain is
affected by disease and how it operates to carry out tasks such as
learning and memory. New approaches for the
diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of brain disorders are evaluated in
studies with patients and those at risk for
brain disorders.

The Committee was encouraged by testimony from the NINDS Director
indicating that opportunities abound
for progress against neurodegeneration, with Parkinson's disease leading
the way. This progress is driven by new
scientific understanding about the specific neuron populations affected
by disease, by knowledge of the brain
circuits and drug targets involved, and by technological breakthroughs
including deep brain stimulation and stem
cell biology. It is now evident that nerve cells degenerate. The
Committee commends the Institute for its efforts,
notably the establishment of additional Morris K. Udall Centers of
Excellence. Capitalizing on these
opportunities and resources will require a coordinated effort on the
part of all NIH components concerned with
Parkinson's disease as well as other agencies and private groups whose
support has been so important to progress
thus far. The Committee encourages NINDS to establish mechanisms such as
a Neurodegenerative Disease
Program Office to spearhead a public/private partnership to conquer
neurodegenerative disease, and would
appreciate a report on the status of these efforts prior to the fiscal
year 2001 hearings.

Neurodegenerative diseases- The Committee was pleased to see that the
Institute has identified neurodegeneration
as a target for emphasis in its strategic planning process.
Neurodegenerative diseases exact a terrible toll across
the lifespan and have been largely resistant to treatment. Fortunately,
new understanding of the
neurodegenerative process and promising new technologies, including
genetic approaches, long-term brain
stimulation, and innovative cellular implant strategies, offer hope to
patients and their families. The Committee
encourages NINDS to continue its efforts to study neurodegeneration
across the life span from birth to old age.
The Committee also continues to support research investigating the role
of neurotransmitters in
neurodegenerative disorders.

Dystonia- The Committee has been pleased with the extramural research
initiatives that NINDS has conducted in
dystonia-specific research and the increased funding it has allocated to
dystonia research in the past several years.
The Committee continues to encourage NINDS to work with the dystonia
community, particularly in the study
of the DYT1 gene for early on set dystonia. The Committee is pleased
that NINDS will be supporting an
epidemiological study on dystonia, and also encourages NINDS to explore
the opportunities for increased
professional and public awareness.

Intramural research- The Institute has made significant strides in its
intramural program, including the recruitment
of several outstanding scientists. The Committee understands that the
NINDS, in collaboration with NIMH and
other neuroscience institutes, is working toward the development of an
integrated neuroscience program that
will promote collaboration across organizational lines.

Decade of the Brain.--The Committee notes that the Decade of the Brain
has been very successful in stimulating
the development of new basic information about the brain. The Committee
urges the Institute to continue to
translate the basic research information to clinical research issues
that can influence the prevention,
understanding, diagnosis and therapy of neurological disorders.

ALS (`Lou Gehrig's Disease')- Amyotropic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is a
progressive, fatal neurological disease for
which no cure exists. The disease strikes all demographic and age
groups, and 85 percent of those diagnosed
succumb within two to three years. Diagnosis is difficult, and can take
years; there is no simple test for the
disease. At the same time, over the course of this decade, there have
been a number of research breakthroughs:
the identification of a defective gene responsible for some cases of ALS
and a better understanding of how that
defective gene may lead to ALS; FDA approval of the first drug treatment
of ALS; and the development of new
tools for studying ALS and potential therapies for ALS. Findings with
respect to ALS can lead to methods for
prevention and treatment of many other neurodegenerative disorders,
including Parkinson's, Alzheimers's,
Huntington's, and multiple sclerosis. The Committee applauds the
Institute for its emphasis on research into
identification of neurodegeneration. The Committee encourages the
Institute to consider a research planning
workshop which would bring together ALS researchers and experts from
other fields to foster new ideas and
research directions that might lead to rapid advances in the
understanding and treatment of ALS and related
neurodegenerative diseases. The Committee also encourages the Institute
to continue to expand and intensify its
research efforts into ALS.

Parkinson's disease- The Committee is encouraged by continuing
discoveries in the cause, pathophysiology and
treatment of Parkinson's disease, and continues to seek intensified
efforts by NINDS to speed the development
of effective therapies for this devastating disorder. Several recent
findings demonstrate a strong scientific
foundation for a major new initiative in Parkinson's-focused research.
The Committee also recognizes the
benefits of research breakthroughs in this area on other disorders
within the Institute's scope. The Committee
acknowledges the 1997 enactment of the Morris K. Udall Parkinson's
Research Act as a timely recognition of the
scientific potential in this field and a clear statement of intent by
Congress to make Parkinson's research a
priority. The Committee is pleased that the Institute has funded three
of the ten authorized Morris K. Udall
Research Centers, but it is concerned that these initial efforts do not
fully reflect the Act's intent to expand
Parkinson's-focused research. The Committee encourages the Institutes to
provide sufficient funds to increase
such initiatives, in coordination with other relevant Institutes, in
order to carry out the full intent of the Act and
fully fund its authorization for research focused on Parkinson's
disease.

Spinal Cord injury- The Committee is pleased to learn of the exciting
scientific advances being made on several
fronts which hold much promise for progress against the devastating and
lifelong effects of spinal cord injury.
Research to promote regeneration and restore function to the injured
spinal cord is proceeding along two
promising and complementary lines--implantation of cells and
modification of the injury site's environment to
promote functional recovery. A particularly exciting approach involves
the implantation of pluripotent, neural
stem cells--undifferentiated progenitor cells with the potential to
replace damaged components of the central
nervous system. In addition to traditional funding mechanisms, the
Committee understands that this area of
research may benefit from efforts to promote new types of collaborations
and to build on currently funded
projects that could be expanded to include stem cell research. The
Committee urges the NINDS to aggressively
pursue and initiate studies that will hasten progress to restore
function to the injured spinal cord and offer hope
to victims of spinal cord injury and their families. The Committee
requests NINDS to report on its progress in
promoting research on cell replacement in spinal cord injury at its
fiscal year 2001 appropriations hearing.
----------------------------------------------
 [press release]--Tuesday, September 28, 1999
                                                       Press Contacts:
Jen Siciliano (202) 224-0992
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                            Committee Passes Labor, Health &Human
        Services, Education FY00 Appropriations Bill
                                 S. 1650  /  S Rpt. 106-166

BUDGET SUMMARY AND BILL TOTALS - The bill contains a program level of
$91.7 billion, an increase of
$4 billion over the FY’99 program level of $87.7 billion, and a decrease
of $1.4 billion below the President.  In
order to stay within our revised 302(b) budget authority allocation of
$84,018,000,000 and a revised outlay ceiling
of $84,222,000,000, the bill increased advance funding of programs that
are currently forward funded from
$8,527,500,000 to $16,464,700,000.

FULL COMMITTEE ACTION
Bill reported and manager's package agreed to by a vote of 26-0, with
two members abstaining.
Stem Cell Research language was defeated by a vote of 16-12.
Feinstein hold harmless amendment failed by a vote of 21-7.

BILL HIGHLIGHTS

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES - The bill contains a program
level of $37.5 billion
for the Department of HHS, an increase of $1.1 billion over the FY’99
appropriation and  a decrease of $1.6
billion below the budget request.
National Institutes of Health[NIH] — $17.6 billion, an increase of $2
billion over the FY’99 appropriation, and $1.7
billion over the budget request.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

                To:  [log in to unmask]
               Subject:  POL: Washington Fax
        .        > Senate L/HHS funding bill still surviving in floor
debate
                        >
              > House version may be a casualty of internal GOP politics

                        >
                        > Though it's taking longer than expected,
Senate Republicans are confident
                        > they can complete work later this week on
legislation that would provide a
                        > $2 billion boost to the National Institutes of
Health (NIH). Getting the
                        > bill through the Senate has gained added
significance of late, since the
                        > House version of the measure--which has a
$1.35 billion increase for
                        > NIH--is in deep trouble. [this is good]
                        >
                        > House Republican leaders reportedly are
determined to take the FY 2000
                        > Labor, Health and Human Services, Education,
and Related Agencies (L/HHS)
                        > spending bill to the House floor for a vote.
But their effort to shift more
                        > money to the legislation--and thus give it a
chance of passing--blew up
                        > Thursday when GOP presidential candidate
George W. Bush accused them of
                        > trying to "balance their budget on the backs
of the poor" with a plan to
                        > delay government payouts to recipients of the
Earned Income Tax Credit
                        > (EITC). (see Washington Fax 10/1/99)
                        >
                        > The EITC provision, approved Thursday by the
House Appropriations
                        > Committee, would bring $8.7 billion to the
bill. More importantly, it is
                        > the linchpin in the House GOP strategy to
produce L/HHS legislation that
                        > has enough funds to assure passage on the
House floor but does not eat into
                        > Social Security revenues. However, Bush's
comments quickly transformed the
                        > EITC offset from merely controversial to a
political poison pill.
                        >
                        > A Republican staffer predicted that the EITC
language could end up being
                        > the "family planning amendment of FY 2000," a
reference to divisive
                        > language that stymied work on the FY 1999
bill. But as of Monday, sources
                        > said, Republican leaders had not come up with
a way to plug the $8.7
                        > billion hole that would be created should the
EITC provision be stripped.
                        >
                        > Given the size of the federal budget surplus,
FY 2000 money woes are
                        > really, in fact, political problems.
Republicans have insisted on staying
                        > within the spending limits established in the
1997 budget deal while also
                        > staking their political fortunes on a pledge
not to dip into the Social
                        > Security portion of the surplus. As a result,
they have engaged in a
                        > variety of accounting maneuvers in an effort
to claim they're sticking with
                        > their program.
                        >
                        > The Senate has more flexibility in such a
game, and that's why most
                        > observers believe its version of the L/HHS
bill is likely to win approval
                        > on the Senate floor later this week.[It did]
For example, Senate Appropriations
                        > Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-AK, simply
acted unilaterally last week
                        > to shift several billion dollars to the L/HHS
bill from the Defense
                        > appropriations bill, with the proviso that the
money would be replaced by
                        > declaring a portion of Defense spending an
"emergency."
                        >
                        > (Emergency money is not included in the tally
that determines whether
                        > budget limits have been breached and thus has
become a popular device for
                        > GOP appropriators.)
                        >
                        > But affecting a similar reallocation in the
House would require the
                        > approval of the full House Appropriations
Committee, something that aides
                        > say would be difficult or impossible to
accomplish.
                        >
                        > One possible outcome reportedly under
discussion among House and Senate
                        > staff would be to skip the House floor
altogether and work out a compromise
                        > between the bill expected to be produced by
the Senate and the L/HHS
                        > measure approved by the House Appropriations
Committee. Such a
                        > "conferenced" bill could then be attached to
another appropriations measure
                        > and voted on by both bodies.
                        >
                        > The problem with that tactic, say those close
to the discussions, is
                        > Republicans are worried about any move that
would lessen their influence in
                        > the process. They are determined to send
President Clinton individual
                        > appropriations measures and then negotiate on
a bill-by-bill,
                        > issue-by-issue basis. Many Republicans view
last year's budget
                        > negotiations, in which most spending was
rolled into a massive, omnibus
                        > bill as a process that cedes most power to the
president.
                        >
                        > The good news for science programs is despite
the problems besetting the
                        > L/HHS spending bill, no one is suggesting NIH
will end up with anything
                        > short of a substantial increase. Also, the
L/HHS dilemma has prompted
                        > Republicans to try to keep their headaches to
a minimum by speeding up work
                        > on other appropriations bills.
                        >
                        > That desire for action resulted in more money
being added last week to
                        > legislation that funds the National Science
Foundation (NSF). The extra
                        > cash makes it more likely the House, which
produced a bill that cut NSF by
                        > $34 million, would agree to the Senate mark
for the agency, which provides
                        > a $250 million increase--the equivalent of
what President Clinton requested
                        > in February. The architects of the House
legislation have said they want to
                        > give more money to NSF and would do so if
extra funds were added to the
                        > bill.
                        >
                        > As it now stands, for NIH the only potentially
negative effect of the FY
                        > 2000 accounting gymnastics is the Senate L/HHS
bill would hold back $3
                        > billion in NIH funds until the end of the
fiscal year. Section 215 of the
                        > Senate legislation stipulates that $3 billion
in NIH appropriations "shall
                        > not be available for obligation until
September 29, 2000." The House
                        > measure contains no such language.
                        >
                        > If the Senate provision is retained in
whatever L/HHS funding legislation
                        > is finally enacted, it could mean grant awards
normally doled out
                        > throughout the last quarter of the fiscal year
would not be paid until the
                        > last day of the fourth quarter. It is not yet
clear what the consequences
                        > would be for NIH-funded investigators, beyond
posing administrative
                        > difficulties.
                        >
                        > On the positive side for NIH, the Senate bill
employs an accounting
                        > technique known as "forward funding" to double
the amount available for
                        > extramural construction, from $30 million to
$60 million. The only catch is
                        > half of that money would not be available
until October 1, 2000, the
                        > beginning of the 2001 fiscal year. However,
advocates for increased
                        > facilities funding say it still should be
counted as a victory for FY 2000
                        > because research institutions would be able to
apply for the money and NIH
                        > could review applications in FY 2000, even
though they would technically
                        > not be able to send out any cash until October
1.
                        >
                        > The House bill contains $30 million for
extramural facilities construction,
                        > none of it forward funded.
                        >
                        > --Matthew Davis
                        >
                        > A summary of the Senate L/HHS bill with links
to bill and report language
                        > is available through the Senate Web site at [
                        >
http://www.senate.gov/~appropriations/hhsfull.htm].
                        >
                        >
                        > (C) 1998 WASHINGTON FAX, an established news
and information service
                        > specializing in science policy
[http://www.washingtonfax.com]. Apply for a
                        > free trial subscription at
[http://www.washingtonfax.com/auto-trial.htm],
                        > or e-mail [[log in to unmask]].