Well put. Art.... Very well put.
Barb Mallut
[log in to unmask]
----------
From: Parkinson's Information Exchange on behalf of Arthur Hirsch
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 1998 10:42 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list PARKINSN
Subject: Micromanagement and economics
Ken Aidekman signs his e-mail, "Fund the Research. Find the Cure."
Ken, I couldn't be more in agreement with you. But we need something in
our arsenal that will make a better case against those who say that
Congress should not be micromanaging the N.I.H. budget.
There seem to be three forces to control here: Science, politics, and
economics.
1. The scientists say that they know how best to spend the money that they
are allotted because they know science better, and Director Varmus has been
praised by many regarding his control over the achievements of N.I.H. Your
recent posts, Ken, might indicate that different people might judge his
accomplishments differently in regards to their scientific value. That is
to be expected, and whether or not Varmus and his staff have done well is a
matter that could be debated.
But just as the scientists say that they know science better, are they also
able to claim that they know politics and economics better too?
In a similar vein, the military spends lots of money and various of its
programs are under scrutiny by the Congress. Whether the military or the
Congress is the better judge of how to spend the money, it is the Congress
that is ultimately responsible for the expense. Hence Congress sets goals
for the military, appropriates money for military programs, and monitors
the progress toward the goals. Even if Congress knows less about war and
defense than those in the military establishment, it is the responsibility
of Congress to create the goals and control the money.
When we talk about earmarking funds for use by the N.I.H., we are not
talking necessarily about micromanaging the projects; we are talking about
setting goals, appropriating money, and monitoring progress. This is the
responsibility of Congress. Were Congress not to set up guidelines as to
how the money should be spent, they would be abdicating their
responsibility.
Telling the N.I.H. that they should be spending about a hundred million
dollars on Parkinson's is not micromanaging. Telling the N.I.H. exactly
what and whose projects to spend it on is: I would agree that Congress
should not get into such small detail.
2. The politicians generally work on the squeaky wheel principal, tending
to put public funds where the public demand is highest. Our appeal to the
politicians has been to try to drive home the point that those afflicted
with Parkinson's, their families, and their friends make up a substantial
portion of their electorate. Therefore the monies that we have requested
should be appropriated and spent. Others have made the same case for other
diseases. We have done well in this area by getting the Udall Bill passed.
But this is not enough.
3. It is the ecomonics where we have our strongest case. According to Dr.
Lieberman's testimony, the expenditure of $100 million per year for three
years will most likely result in a continued payout for the U.S. government
of $10,000 million per year in perpetuity. No - it will be more than that,
for as the population ages, the savings will increase.
Even if the assumptions be wrong, suppose it will take 5 years at $100
million and pay out only $5,000 million per year: you are not going to find
many better investments. Where is the money coming from? Does it much
matter for a payoff this great?
I can't forget the suffering and say that it's not an issue. The
scientific and political sides are important. But the economics alone are
compelling for a responsible Congress to act upon. And the sooner it gets
done, the sooner it pays off. Won't that be nice for our government - and
for us too?
Art
____________________________________________________________________
Arthur Hirsch {} [log in to unmask] {} Lewisville, TX {} 972-434-2377
____________________________________________________________________
Always Remember This: Happiness Is Right, So Choose Happiness
____________________________________________________________________
