 |
 |
There have been several questions regarding the status of the Udall Bill now that Congress is on the verge of adjournment. First let me say that if I have learned one thing during my Parkinson's advocacy, it is that in Washington D.C. nothing is ever simple or straight forward. There are two types of legislation: authorization and appropriation. Authorization says its OK to spend the money, appropriations actually provides the money. The Udall Bill (HR 1462 & S 684)and the NIH Revitalization Bill (S 1897)to which the Udall Bill was subsequently amended are both authorization bills. The NIH Revitalization Bill was officially passed unanimously by both Kassebaum's Labor and Humans Services Committee and by the full Senate (the latter last Thursday). It did not pass on the House side. In fact it was never acted upon by the two committees which had jurisdiction: the Commerce Committee (Bliley) and its subcommittee on Health and the Environment (Bilirakis). It is my understanding that Congressmen Upton, one of our champions in the House, was finally able to get both Bliley and Bilirakis to consider bringing the NIH Revitalization Bill to the House floor but that effort was killed by the right to life champion Christopher Smith of New Jersey. Let me go back a little and say that passage in the Senate was only because of a compromise with the right to life proponents in the Senate. That compromise was that the bill would only be for one year instead of three thus allowing an opportunity to debate the contentious issues, such as fetal tissue research, next year. That compromise was good enough for strong pro life Senators such as Dan Coats and Rick Santourm. It was not good enough for the zealot Smith. Even had this bill passed, it was an authorization Bill and provided no money. The reason it was/is important is the appropriations committees require authorization legislation before they will appropriate money. WHAT DID WE ACCOMPLISH? We accomplished a great deal. Virtually none of the "experts" gave us the proverbial snowballs chance in Hell of getting anything passed by anyone let alone the entire Senate of the United States. We now have credibility to begin again next year. We clearly have the attention of NIH and have already received several million dollars more in research for Parkinson's. We have truly assembled the beginning of an impressive network of which the advocates on this list are principal players. We now have the most widely recognized person in the world, Muhammed Ali, promoting our cause. (Look what name recognition did for AIDS.) We've accomplished a great deal in a short amount of time. Am I pleased with our accomplishment? Extremely. Am I satisfied with our accomplishment? No. Someone once suggested that my pace in a local Parkinson's endeavor was too fast. My response was I have Parkinson's. The clock is ticking. I'll be back when the next Congress comes back. I hope all of you who have done so much to support the efforts of those of us who are able to travel to Washington will also be back. My goal is to have someone in every legislative district on the net so that we can communicate quickly and effectively. Towards that end I would ask all of you that have been active to send me who your Congressmen is. That goes for those of you who have been lurking and feel a little guilty about not having helped. Guilt is a powerful motivator. Come on board. We need your help. Will we prevail? There is no doubt in my mind that we will. Now that those who doubted can see what a relatively small group with dedication and persistent can accomplish in Congress, we should have momentum on our side. I also believe that Congress now feels they must do something for the Parkinson's community. What about the human fetal tissue issue? First Parkinson's research has no connection with the decision to have an abortion. We must convince those right to life legislator, who will listen to reason, of this. We should pledge to strengthen the legislative barrier that enforces that disconnect. We must convince those who will listen that this is not an abortion issue. Having done that we will have stripped the zealots of their support. Secondly, I believe as do most researchers, that there are more promising technology than human fetal tissue transplants. Finally, will increased funding result in a cure? Of that I am even more convinced than I am that we will secure increased research funding. While in Washington last week I heard a distinguished panel of doctors speak of the many promising areas in Parkinson's research. Several thought the three to five years time frame was possible for a cure or new effective treatment. I spoke with the Dr. Tom Chase, Chief of the Experimental Therapeutic Branch of NINDS at NIH. He stated his opinion that there was no other area of medical research where money could be better spent than Parkinson's. THE CURE IS CLOSE is the cornerstone of our funding argument. I've rambled quite a bit (DragonDictate helps). Take heart in what we've accomplished: a majority of cosponsors in both houses of Congress, passage in the United States Senate, the full attention of NIH and maybe most importantly, convincing those within our own ranks that we could accomplish our goal. Let me finish with two quotes. One of the earliest quotes I remember was John Paul Jones "I have not yet begun to fight" and one that is particularly appropriate for a community with so many disabilities "You can make a difference. Together we can make a big difference".