Sorry- resending another one hopefully without the garbage. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Hi all, THE FOLLOWING IS WHY WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO CALL, ETC----JUST BECAUSE THESE WORDS ARE IN THE SENATE BILL WHICH PASSED THE SENATE, DOES NOT MEAN THE HOUSE WILL PASS IT, AND THAT IT WILL SURVIVE A HOUSE VOTE, THE COMMITTEE, ETC. IT'S NOT READY TO GO TO CLINTON YET!!!! (FROM: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:s.1650:) Charlotte ------------------------------------ DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 2000 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE Appropriations, 1999 $899,119,000 Budget estimate, 2000 920,970,000 Committee recommendation 1,019,271,000 The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,019,271,000 for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [NINDS]. This is $98,301,000 more than the budget request and $120,152,000 more than the fiscal year 1999 appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS Research. Mission- The NINDS conducts and supports a broad range of research and research training on the normal function of the brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerves, and on neurological and neuromuscular disorders. Neurological research includes epidemiology studies to identify risk factors for disease; laboratory studies to examine the structure and function of nerve cells; and brain imaging studies to understand how the brain is affected by disease and how it operates to carry out tasks such as learning and memory. New approaches for the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of brain disorders are evaluated in studies with patients and those at risk for brain disorders. The Committee was encouraged by testimony from the NINDS Director indicating that opportunities abound for progress against neurodegeneration, with Parkinson's disease leading the way. This progress is driven by new scientific understanding about the specific neuron populations affected by disease, by knowledge of the brain circuits and drug targets involved, and by technological breakthroughs including deep brain stimulation and stem cell biology. It is now evident that nerve cells degenerate. The Committee commends the Institute for its efforts, notably the establishment of additional Morris K. Udall Centers of Excellence. Capitalizing on these opportunities and resources will require a coordinated effort on the part of all NIH components concerned with Parkinson's disease as well as other agencies and private groups whose support has been so important to progress thus far. The Committee encourages NINDS to establish mechanisms such as a Neurodegenerative Disease Program Office to spearhead a public/private partnership to conquer neurodegenerative disease, and would appreciate a report on the status of these efforts prior to the fiscal year 2001 hearings. Neurodegenerative diseases- The Committee was pleased to see that the Institute has identified neurodegeneration as a target for emphasis in its strategic planning process. Neurodegenerative diseases exact a terrible toll across the lifespan and have been largely resistant to treatment. Fortunately, new understanding of the neurodegenerative process and promising new technologies, including genetic approaches, long-term brain stimulation, and innovative cellular implant strategies, offer hope to patients and their families. The Committee encourages NINDS to continue its efforts to study neurodegeneration across the life span from birth to old age. The Committee also continues to support research investigating the role of neurotransmitters in neurodegenerative disorders. Dystonia- The Committee has been pleased with the extramural research initiatives that NINDS has conducted in dystonia-specific research and the increased funding it has allocated to dystonia research in the past several years. The Committee continues to encourage NINDS to work with the dystonia community, particularly in the study of the DYT1 gene for early on set dystonia. The Committee is pleased that NINDS will be supporting an epidemiological study on dystonia, and also encourages NINDS to explore the opportunities for increased professional and public awareness. Intramural research- The Institute has made significant strides in its intramural program, including the recruitment of several outstanding scientists. The Committee understands that the NINDS, in collaboration with NIMH and other neuroscience institutes, is working toward the development of an integrated neuroscience program that will promote collaboration across organizational lines. Decade of the Brain.--The Committee notes that the Decade of the Brain has been very successful in stimulating the development of new basic information about the brain. The Committee urges the Institute to continue to translate the basic research information to clinical research issues that can influence the prevention, understanding, diagnosis and therapy of neurological disorders. ALS (`Lou Gehrig's Disease')- Amyotropic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive, fatal neurological disease for which no cure exists. The disease strikes all demographic and age groups, and 85 percent of those diagnosed succumb within two to three years. Diagnosis is difficult, and can take years; there is no simple test for the disease. At the same time, over the course of this decade, there have been a number of research breakthroughs: the identification of a defective gene responsible for some cases of ALS and a better understanding of how that defective gene may lead to ALS; FDA approval of the first drug treatment of ALS; and the development of new tools for studying ALS and potential therapies for ALS. Findings with respect to ALS can lead to methods for prevention and treatment of many other neurodegenerative disorders, including Parkinson's, Alzheimers's, Huntington's, and multiple sclerosis. The Committee applauds the Institute for its emphasis on research into identification of neurodegeneration. The Committee encourages the Institute to consider a research planning workshop which would bring together ALS researchers and experts from other fields to foster new ideas and research directions that might lead to rapid advances in the understanding and treatment of ALS and related neurodegenerative diseases. The Committee also encourages the Institute to continue to expand and intensify its research efforts into ALS. Parkinson's disease- The Committee is encouraged by continuing discoveries in the cause, pathophysiology and treatment of Parkinson's disease, and continues to seek intensified efforts by NINDS to speed the development of effective therapies for this devastating disorder. Several recent findings demonstrate a strong scientific foundation for a major new initiative in Parkinson's-focused research. The Committee also recognizes the benefits of research breakthroughs in this area on other disorders within the Institute's scope. The Committee acknowledges the 1997 enactment of the Morris K. Udall Parkinson's Research Act as a timely recognition of the scientific potential in this field and a clear statement of intent by Congress to make Parkinson's research a priority. The Committee is pleased that the Institute has funded three of the ten authorized Morris K. Udall Research Centers, but it is concerned that these initial efforts do not fully reflect the Act's intent to expand Parkinson's-focused research. The Committee encourages the Institutes to provide sufficient funds to increase such initiatives, in coordination with other relevant Institutes, in order to carry out the full intent of the Act and fully fund its authorization for research focused on Parkinson's disease. Spinal Cord injury- The Committee is pleased to learn of the exciting scientific advances being made on several fronts which hold much promise for progress against the devastating and lifelong effects of spinal cord injury. Research to promote regeneration and restore function to the injured spinal cord is proceeding along two promising and complementary lines--implantation of cells and modification of the injury site's environment to promote functional recovery. A particularly exciting approach involves the implantation of pluripotent, neural stem cells--undifferentiated progenitor cells with the potential to replace damaged components of the central nervous system. In addition to traditional funding mechanisms, the Committee understands that this area of research may benefit from efforts to promote new types of collaborations and to build on currently funded projects that could be expanded to include stem cell research. The Committee urges the NINDS to aggressively pursue and initiate studies that will hasten progress to restore function to the injured spinal cord and offer hope to victims of spinal cord injury and their families. The Committee requests NINDS to report on its progress in promoting research on cell replacement in spinal cord injury at its fiscal year 2001 appropriations hearing. ---------------------------------------------- [press release]--Tuesday, September 28, 1999 Press Contacts: Jen Siciliano (202) 224-0992 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Committee Passes Labor, Health &Human Services, Education FY00 Appropriations Bill S. 1650 / S Rpt. 106-166 BUDGET SUMMARY AND BILL TOTALS - The bill contains a program level of $91.7 billion, an increase of $4 billion over the FY’99 program level of $87.7 billion, and a decrease of $1.4 billion below the President. In order to stay within our revised 302(b) budget authority allocation of $84,018,000,000 and a revised outlay ceiling of $84,222,000,000, the bill increased advance funding of programs that are currently forward funded from $8,527,500,000 to $16,464,700,000. FULL COMMITTEE ACTION Bill reported and manager's package agreed to by a vote of 26-0, with two members abstaining. Stem Cell Research language was defeated by a vote of 16-12. Feinstein hold harmless amendment failed by a vote of 21-7. BILL HIGHLIGHTS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES - The bill contains a program level of $37.5 billion for the Department of HHS, an increase of $1.1 billion over the FY’99 appropriation and a decrease of $1.6 billion below the budget request. National Institutes of Health[NIH] — $17.6 billion, an increase of $2 billion over the FY’99 appropriation, and $1.7 billion over the budget request. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: [log in to unmask] Subject: POL: Washington Fax . > Senate L/HHS funding bill still surviving in floor debate > > House version may be a casualty of internal GOP politics > > Though it's taking longer than expected, Senate Republicans are confident > they can complete work later this week on legislation that would provide a > $2 billion boost to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Getting the > bill through the Senate has gained added significance of late, since the > House version of the measure--which has a $1.35 billion increase for > NIH--is in deep trouble. [this is good] > > House Republican leaders reportedly are determined to take the FY 2000 > Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (L/HHS) > spending bill to the House floor for a vote. But their effort to shift more > money to the legislation--and thus give it a chance of passing--blew up > Thursday when GOP presidential candidate George W. Bush accused them of > trying to "balance their budget on the backs of the poor" with a plan to > delay government payouts to recipients of the Earned Income Tax Credit > (EITC). (see Washington Fax 10/1/99) > > The EITC provision, approved Thursday by the House Appropriations > Committee, would bring $8.7 billion to the bill. More importantly, it is > the linchpin in the House GOP strategy to produce L/HHS legislation that > has enough funds to assure passage on the House floor but does not eat into > Social Security revenues. However, Bush's comments quickly transformed the > EITC offset from merely controversial to a political poison pill. > > A Republican staffer predicted that the EITC language could end up being > the "family planning amendment of FY 2000," a reference to divisive > language that stymied work on the FY 1999 bill. But as of Monday, sources > said, Republican leaders had not come up with a way to plug the $8.7 > billion hole that would be created should the EITC provision be stripped. > > Given the size of the federal budget surplus, FY 2000 money woes are > really, in fact, political problems. Republicans have insisted on staying > within the spending limits established in the 1997 budget deal while also > staking their political fortunes on a pledge not to dip into the Social > Security portion of the surplus. As a result, they have engaged in a > variety of accounting maneuvers in an effort to claim they're sticking with > their program. > > The Senate has more flexibility in such a game, and that's why most > observers believe its version of the L/HHS bill is likely to win approval > on the Senate floor later this week.[It did] For example, Senate Appropriations > Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-AK, simply acted unilaterally last week > to shift several billion dollars to the L/HHS bill from the Defense > appropriations bill, with the proviso that the money would be replaced by > declaring a portion of Defense spending an "emergency." > > (Emergency money is not included in the tally that determines whether > budget limits have been breached and thus has become a popular device for > GOP appropriators.) > > But affecting a similar reallocation in the House would require the > approval of the full House Appropriations Committee, something that aides > say would be difficult or impossible to accomplish. > > One possible outcome reportedly under discussion among House and Senate > staff would be to skip the House floor altogether and work out a compromise > between the bill expected to be produced by the Senate and the L/HHS > measure approved by the House Appropriations Committee. Such a > "conferenced" bill could then be attached to another appropriations measure > and voted on by both bodies. > > The problem with that tactic, say those close to the discussions, is > Republicans are worried about any move that would lessen their influence in > the process. They are determined to send President Clinton individual > appropriations measures and then negotiate on a bill-by-bill, > issue-by-issue basis. Many Republicans view last year's budget > negotiations, in which most spending was rolled into a massive, omnibus > bill as a process that cedes most power to the president. > > The good news for science programs is despite the problems besetting the > L/HHS spending bill, no one is suggesting NIH will end up with anything > short of a substantial increase. Also, the L/HHS dilemma has prompted > Republicans to try to keep their headaches to a minimum by speeding up work > on other appropriations bills. > > That desire for action resulted in more money being added last week to > legislation that funds the National Science Foundation (NSF). The extra > cash makes it more likely the House, which produced a bill that cut NSF by > $34 million, would agree to the Senate mark for the agency, which provides > a $250 million increase--the equivalent of what President Clinton requested > in February. The architects of the House legislation have said they want to > give more money to NSF and would do so if extra funds were added to the > bill. > > As it now stands, for NIH the only potentially negative effect of the FY > 2000 accounting gymnastics is the Senate L/HHS bill would hold back $3 > billion in NIH funds until the end of the fiscal year. Section 215 of the > Senate legislation stipulates that $3 billion in NIH appropriations "shall > not be available for obligation until September 29, 2000." The House > measure contains no such language. > > If the Senate provision is retained in whatever L/HHS funding legislation > is finally enacted, it could mean grant awards normally doled out > throughout the last quarter of the fiscal year would not be paid until the > last day of the fourth quarter. It is not yet clear what the consequences > would be for NIH-funded investigators, beyond posing administrative > difficulties. > > On the positive side for NIH, the Senate bill employs an accounting > technique known as "forward funding" to double the amount available for > extramural construction, from $30 million to $60 million. The only catch is > half of that money would not be available until October 1, 2000, the > beginning of the 2001 fiscal year. However, advocates for increased > facilities funding say it still should be counted as a victory for FY 2000 > because research institutions would be able to apply for the money and NIH > could review applications in FY 2000, even though they would technically > not be able to send out any cash until October 1. > > The House bill contains $30 million for extramural facilities construction, > none of it forward funded. > > --Matthew Davis > > A summary of the Senate L/HHS bill with links to bill and report language > is available through the Senate Web site at [ > http://www.senate.gov/~appropriations/hhsfull.htm]. > > > (C) 1998 WASHINGTON FAX, an established news and information service > specializing in science policy [http://www.washingtonfax.com]. Apply for a > free trial subscription at [http://www.washingtonfax.com/auto-trial.htm], > or e-mail [[log in to unmask]].