 |
 |
The following statements were made in the Senate during consideration of the conference report accompanying the omnibus spending bill HIR 4328, and are recorded in the Congressional Record issue of October 21, 1998 (Senate), pp. S12771-2. Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, one year ago this body adopted, by a vote of 95 to 3, legislation increasing our nation's commitment to finding the cause and cure for a long overlooked, but truly devastating disorder: Parkinson's disease. I was proud to cosponsor and vote for the Morris K. Udall Parkinson's Disease Research Act, signed into law as part of the Fiscal 1998 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The Udall Act authorized $100 million in research focused on Parkinson's disease to be funded through the National Institutes of Health in fiscal year 1998, 1999 and beyond. The passage of the Udall Act was a great accomplishment, particularly for the hundreds and thousands of victims, and their families and friends, who worked so diligently to bring this issue to the Congress and make us aware of the need for additional Parkinson's research funding. I would also like to commend the Senior Senator from Pennsylvania, one of the true champions of medical research, for his strong support of the Udall Act and Parkinson's research. Mr. SPECTER. I appreciate the remarks of my friend from Mississippi. He is correct that Parkinson's disease is a very serious disability, but one for which medical science does hold great promise. In addition, I too would like to commend the efforts of the Parkinson's community who have worked tirelessly to achieve passage of the Udall Act and increase funding for Parkinson's research. Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am concerned that the National Institutes of Health has implemented neither the letter nor the spirit of the Udall Act, and that funding for Parkinson's-focused research has not increased in a fashion consistent with Congressional intent. An independent analysis, conducted by Parkinson's researchers at institutions all around the country, of the grants NIH defined as its Parkinson's research portfolio for fiscal year 1997 indicates that a majority of the grants are in fact not focused on Parkinson's disease. Only 34 percent of the funding NIH claims is Parkinson's research is actually Parkinson's-focused research, as required by the Udall Act. As troubling as that is, the study also found that 38 percent of the funding has no relation whatsoever to finding a cause or cure for this terrible affliction. It is my understanding from published NIH budgetary documents that $106 million is expected to be allocated to Parkinson's research in fiscal year 1999. My concern is that without more direction from Congress, the NIH will undermine the intent of the Udall Act by continuing to classify, as part of its Parkinson's portfolio, research that is not focused on Parkinson's disease and, in doing so, will allow meritorious and much-needed Parkinson's research projects to go unfunded. I propose that a hearing be held early in 1999 to address and clarify these matters. Mr. SPECTER. The gentleman has brought up important issues, which warrant further discussion. Mr. CRAIG. As a sponsor of the Udall Act and supporter of Parkinson's research funding, I appreciate the Chairman's interest in these matters. The NIH claimed to spend more than $89 million on Parkinson's research in 1997. The Congress set a baseline authorization of $100 million for Parkinson's research in the fiscal year 1998 bill making NIH appropriations and clearly stated in report language that Congressional intent was to increase the commitment of NIH resources to Parkinson's. Close review of NIH's Parkinson's funding practices indicates that most of the research funding they define as Parkinson's is, in fact, not focused on Parkinson's at all. The NIH claimed to spend more than $89 million on Parkinson's research, in FY 1997. In reality, we later discovered that less than $31 million--just more than one third--of that research was truly focused on Parkinson's. Obviously there seems to be some disconnect here. Congress needs to be as clear as possible when communicating our intent to NIH, and diligent when overseeing their funding practices with regard to Parkinson's. I agree with Senator Cochran that hearings should be held early next year to address these issues, and I look forward to working with him, the Chairman, and others to see this resolved. [continued on part 2 of 3]