 |
 |
(This is actually Sherri Cave, I am just writing from Nicki's computer) I, too, am looking forward to see what happens when the dust settles--there were a number of other quite positive meetings that didn't make it onto Jim's list. In general, the message we got from supportive LAs was, I will present your points, but we need to hear from constituents. Quick calls are probably the best at this point, especially if it's a non-cosponsoring Senator because someone has probably met with their staff--you don't have to prepare to present all the intricacies ahead of time. You must point out that 1) you are a constituent, the person you talk to should take your name and address so that you can receive a written response. 2) you are specifically requesting that the Senator/Congressperson sign on as a co-sponsor of S.684/H.R. 1462 as soon as possible so that we can get this bill out on the floor I was part of teams that met with both Montana Senators and both had quite supportive and knowledgeable staff members. Both said it was the type of legislation that each would support at the request of constituents. I've asked them to check files to see whose written in the past, but they need to hear from people again. A few letters back in April-June of 1995 are not enough to make this an urgent priority. I think the post cards will also work very well, but don't wait, do both. Call friends and family in states with non-cosponsoring representatives. If your legislator's staff needs more information, get the L.A. for Health's name and ask Michael at PAN to see that someone gets in touch with them--707-544-1994 or 800-850-4726. If the staff member would like to meet with someone to discuss the Udall bill, I'll be back home and available to take on appointments after July 1-- my email is [log in to unmask] and my # is (301) 559-7626 (I won't be home until June 28 though). Someone asked about the Udall bill being attached to the NIH reauthorization act: the answer is "yes" in the Senate now, but we can't rely on that alone since the act itself may not get passed this year. With a majority cosponsorship, Hatfield has said he will ask for a short amount of floor time to quickly bring the bill to a vote. other than getting that majority, our main threat may be an anti-fetal tissue research move. A new point we are making: Parkinson's research is not the only research using fetal tissue research and it is extremely unfair to attach an anti-fetal tissue research ammendment to the Udall bill, thereby singling out Parkinson's. If some legislators wish to bring this issue up again, then it should be attached to the overall NIH bill, not just to Parkinson's disease research. Please make those calls. I must have felt like we'd run out of time already at least once every week in June, and I know I'm not the only one. If we come out with 50% in both houses during the next week or two, we've got a great shot. Yes, it is unfortunate that there are legislators whose entire offices haven't heard of the Udall bill, but what those of us who met with legislators and staffers this week need now is for constituents to make our work worthwhile--it will not be a priority without your calls, in fact, many of those meetings will not even go beyond the legislative assisstant unless you tell them they need to move the Udall bill to the top of the pile. Sherri Cave