Print

---

Re: earmarking, I believe that Congress did pass a LAW  *authorizing* money
for PD research.....
seems that should carry some weight with the persons who are supposed to
implement the laws.....
I understood that there was ample evidence from reputable researchers that
a push on PD was appropriate and  should be productive..... also that many
other diseases have been and are being earmarked.    There is of course a
chance of inappropriate pressure leading to bad choices, but it seems there
should be a better balance between the mandates of Congress(responding to
their electorate) and the choices of (dare I say the "B" word--bureaucrats)
possibly responding to  special interests as well as to  scientific
realities?
Yes, I know that special interests play an enormous role in legislative
decisions, but in a case like ours we didn't have millions of $$$$$$ to
contribute, only facts and personal stories.....and we won anyway!
That's why it's so frustrating to be brushed aside after so much hard work
by so many.

I do hope that when we see the details there will be a better outlook---got
my fingers crossed, and eyes , too!   :-)


Jeanette wrote:

>Camilla and list family:
>In response to Camilla's remarks(see below my post:)  I really do a slow
>burn when staff or appropriations committee or any official government
>staff person says like the fellow on C-SPAN you mention below that  NIH
>doesn't think the congress should earmark funds for any specific disease.
>
> Why can't our elected officials speak on our behalf, pass laws
>specifically earmarking funds for pd research?  We elect rep/sen to speak
>in our behalf to spend the tax dollars we all contribute.  Certainly $40
>annually per pd diagnosed person in the USA/Canada that has previously been
>spent can be raised as per Udall bill lang.  What are lobbies for if not to
>insure that tax dollars are spent the way taxpayers want?  Most of the
>supporting sen/rep of Udall bill are more informed about
>costs/problems/devistation of pd than the fellow on C-SPAN probably ever
>might be and can speak for the pd community when they say "Keep the $$$ in
>Udall bill committed to pd research."
SNIPPED



>       Camilla Flintermann, CG for Peter, 80/9 <[log in to unmask]>
>
>  http://www.newcountry.nu/pd/members/camilla/one.htm  My Home Page
>
>
>              * *****    *****    *****    *****    *****  *  *****  *****  *
>              *
>*
>              * Knowing when to insist, and when to let be,     *
>              * is,perhaps, a lifetime learning experience        *
>              *                 --Mary McCurry
>*
>              *
>*
>              * *****    *****    *****    *****    *****  *  *****  ***** *
>