 |
 |
Hi Jim, Firstly, thank you so very much for championing the cause of PD funding towards a cure. I know that you, Joan, and many others have worked tirelessly, which is quite a trick with the burden of PD. I am grateful. Your point is well taken. I said in a recent message on 20/20: "I'm very glad the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, if not Spector personally, had his "feet held to the fire,"... In other words, "not Spector personally" because he has been somewhat of an ally, and an attack on him may be risky and result in unwanted repercussions in exposing the unfair funding process. I agree, first things first: get the funding, then reform the process. But then again, maybe a decision was made that this is it guys, and we are not satisfied without those dollars spelled out in the bill. Because, it was so easy for him to say at the hearing that Joan was right, the rescue is in the hands of Congress, and there is no reason why every grant couldn't be approved-- then when he's under fire on TV, he says it's in the hands of the NIH. I guess folks may feel they have good reason to not trust the directives to the NIH that are in the Senate bill to get that funding focused on PD. while, so many other more trendy, politically-correct diseases seem to have managed it time and time again. The disparities really are outrageous, and the time to fight is before it's a done deal. Still, I have been struggling with it: On the one hand, it is rather bad timing to make Sen. Spector look foolish or worse on 20/20. We do, after all, need him to fight the good fight with the House and the committee. On the other hand, one has to hold their toes to the fire BEFORE the vote, and not whine after an unacceptable bill passes once again. Still, he didn't have to be broadsided and humiliated the way he was. If Ted Koppel instead of Stossel had conducted that interview, I feel it would have been tough, but more responsible. Incidentally, I was shocked at how poorly Spector handled the situation. Was he really taken by surprise? What do you think? Thank you again, Charlotte Mancuso > What is our goal? To increase Parkinson's research spending and cure > Parkinson's or is it to correct our system of funding research and > embarrass Sen. Specter. Mine is and will be the former. I and many others > have spent considerable time and effort hoping to have Sen. Specter champion > our cause. I believe that Sen. Specter is now a champion of NIH funding and > of Parkinson's disease research funding. > > I suggest that instead of using are limited time and energy trying to fix > the system whereby research funding is prioritized we write and thank Sen. > Specter for his support and continued support. We've spent years working > within the current system and I think we are beginning to see increase > dollars going to Parkinson's disease research. I plan to spend my energies > working with researchers to identify the best researchers and research that > these hard-won dollars can be spent on as Joan Samuelson identifed at the > hearing. > > What thrilled me about the hearing, wasn't the testimony of Michael J. Fox, > Dr. Langston, Joan Samuelson or even Jim Cordy. It was Dr. Fischbach in his > official capacity stating that he feels the cure is within our grasp, that > there are 11 Parkinson's centers approved, that there will be 200 new people > working on Parkinson's disease research next year. And maybe even more > importantly, that Sen. Specter, chairman of the powerful appropriations > subcommittee was nodding his head in agreement and supporting/championing > increased Parkinson's disease research. > > It matters not to me if Sen. Specter is a Republican or Democrat, liberal or > conservative, smiles at pretty women, has hearing because Michael J. Fox > testifies. What matters to me is that Sen. Specter supports Parkinson's > research. The last thing I want to see happen is Sen. Specter associate > being embarrassed on 20/20 with Parkinson's disease funding. > > I suggest all those who responded to requests to call Sen. Specter's office, > take time to write and thank him for his continued support. I'm tired of > battling the system, of pounding the halls of Congress seeking their > support. Let someone else fix the system, after we cure Parkinson's. My > worst fear is that Parkinson's research get stuck with some massive > revamping of federal bureaucracy.