Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Bullet dodged? Congress to INCREASE health research funding

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS Discussion' started by Kenny Banya, Sep 12, 2017.

  1. Kenny Banya

    Kenny Banya Senior Member

    Congress Rejects Trump Proposals to Cut Health Research Funds

    Back in March, when President Trump released the first draft of his budget proposal for the coming fiscal year, he asked lawmakers for deep cuts to one of their favorite institutions, the National Institutes of Health — part of a broad reordering of priorities, away from science and social spending, toward defense and border security.

    Six months later, Congress has not only rejected the president’s N.I.H. proposal; lawmakers from both parties have joined forces to increase spending on biomedical research — and have bragged about it.

    The Senate Appropriations Committee approved a bipartisan bill last week providing $36.1 billion for the health institutes in the fiscal year that starts next month. Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri and the chairman of the subcommittee responsible for health spending, said it was the third consecutive year in which he had secured a $2 billion increase for the agency, amounting to an increase of about 20 percent over three years.

    The audience erupted in applause when Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, announced the increase at a hearing of a separate Senate committee.

    Mr. Trump had proposed to cut funds for the health institutes by $7.5 billion, or 22 percent, to $26.6 billion. Congress pushed back hard.

    The president’s proposal “would have crippled American innovation in medical research, delayed new cures and treatments and brought N.I.H. funding to its lowest level since 2002,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat.

    The House Appropriations Committee, though less generous than the Senate, still approved a $1.1 billion increase for the health research agency. Lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol said they expected the final figure to be close to the higher amount in the Senate bill.

    “The spectacular increase provided by the Senate Appropriations Committee is amazing in the current fiscal environment,” said Anthony J. Mazzaschi, a lobbyist at the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. “Neither the Senate nor the House paid much attention to the president’s recommendations.”

    The appropriations committees in both houses rejected Mr. Trump’s proposal to slash payments to universities for overhead — the “indirect costs” of research financed by the health institutes. These include the cost of utilities, internet service, data storage, the construction and upkeep of laboratories and compliance with federal rules protecting human subjects of clinical research.

    In identical language, the House and Senate bills explicitly prohibit the Trump administration from changing the formula used for decades to calculate and pay indirect costs.

    “The administration’s proposal would radically change the nature of the federal government’s relationship with the research community, abandoning the government’s long-established responsibility for underwriting much of the nation’s research infrastructure, and jeopardizing biomedical research nationwide,” the Senate Appropriations Committee said in a report on its bill. The proposed cuts, it said, could not be made “without throwing research programs across the country into disarray.”
    Dolphin, Neunistiva, Barry53 and 10 others like this.
  2. lauluce

    lauluce as long as you manage to stay alive, there's hope

    great news! I wish it turns out as spected.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2017
    Dolphin, Barry53 and belize44 like this.
  3. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    Issues with disability and medical costs and suffering will only be solved by finding real answers. Medical research spending is an investment in the future, and while the USA will benefit first, the world will benefit after that. Its great to see bipartisan support for something so important.
    Sandman00747, Aroa, Barry53 and 5 others like this.
  4. *GG*

    *GG* senior member

    Concord, NH
    I don't know, I don't demand much from people, they can think what they want. The only thing I require is respect for my human dignity and right to think differently :) Not big on insanity, continuing to do things that end the same way :( Lets learn from our past!

    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2017
  5. Sushi

    Sushi Moderation Resource Albuquerque

    A few posts have been removed or edited in this thread to remove political content. Comment on politics, unrelated to health care, is divisive and prohibited by forum rules.
    lauluce likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page