 |
 |
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Jim Cordy" <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: Udall, does anyone know? Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 05:43:18 -0400 There was no meeting but there was a hearing. I will share with you what I know. First let me thank everyone who called and wrote Senator Frist to encourage his subcommittee to include in the hearing Thursday a section devoted to the Udall Bill. It's my understanding that our efforts were quite effective (i.e. Frist's office got a lot of calls and letters). We just have to keep letting them know we're out here and that we are not going away. Now to the hearing. Bill Turenne wrote the following synopsis: Senate Labor & Human Resources Committee: Public Health & Safety Subcommittee Hearing 2:00 p.m. Thursday, July 24th, 1997 SD-430 Title: Coordination of NIH Research Efforts; 3 Case Studies Senators in Attendance: Bill Frist (R-TN), Subcommittee Chairman James Jeffords (R-VT), Committee Chairman Senator Dan Coats (R-IN) Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) Senator Chris Dodd (D-CN) Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) The hearing began at 2:00p.m. with a brief opening statement by Chairman Frist. He indicated that this was the second of three scheduled hearings of the subcommittee on the subject of NIH revitalization. The first hearing was in May and the third would be held in early September. Following the third and final hearing, the intent was to draft a new NIH Revitalization Bill that would be reported out of the Committee. It is Sen. Frist's desire to have such a bill voted on in the Senate this year There were three panels of witnesses testifying on how to better coordinate NIH's inter-institute efforts, priorities and funding procedures. The first panel was on the subject of Bioengineering. Parkinson's Disease was the subject of the second panel and the third was pediatric research coordination. In between the first and second panels Sense. McCain and Wellstone gave brief testimony in support of the Udall Bill and the importance of its passage this Session of Congress. Following their remarks, each sub-committee member present gave a brief statement of either support for the bill (if they were cosponsors; i.e.: Reed, Dodd) or their reasons for not supporting it. Senator Frist was non-committal. Chairman Jeffords and Senator Coats objected to earmarking disease-specific legislation. Senator Coats spoke for about 10 minutes about his deep commitment to PD but that he didn't want to take money away from other diseases. The Parkinson's disease panel consisted of Dr. Zach Hall, soon to be retiring director of NINDS, and Dr. Warren Olanow, Chairman, Dept. of Neurology, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine in New York City. Dr. Hall testified that the recent gene discovery was yet another example of how the current system of dispersing funds was working. He took issue with the # of PWPs there are in the country, claiming 500-750K maximum, and produced #s that said that PD has received the largest % increase in funding of all major diseases funded by NINDS at 45%. His next chart showed that actual direct and indirect funding of PD research throughout all of NIH for FY 1996 was 77 million and estimated at 82 million for FY '97 (leaving only an $18m difference between where they say they are and where we want to be). Dr. Olanow was extremely articulate in trying to take issue with some of Hall's claims without being confrontational. He also presented an idea of how to better the NIH's responsiveness to breakthroughs and opportunities such as the gene discovery. His suggestion was that there be a separate "pool of money" that would be available, at the Director's discretion, to better capture the promise and momentum of these new breakthroughs soon after they happen without having to take away from other disease funding. Most of the senators seemed interested in this idea (especially DeWine and Coats). ---------- > From: LIST Helen K. Mason <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Udall, does anyone know? > Date: Saturday, July 26, 1997 6:27 PM > > I understand that there was a meeting (testimony?) with Sen. McCain & > Wellstone and Joan Samuelson on Thursday afternoon with Sen. Frist. Does > anyone know about the outcome? If I am wrong I would like to know that too. > Thank you, > [log in to unmask] (Helen Mason)