[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 25 (Thursday, February 11, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H623-H624]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                FEDERAL FUNDING FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. NETHERCUTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the issue of 
federal funding for biomedical research. Over the past four years, this 
Congress has led the effort to double the budget for biomedical 
research at the National Institutes of Health and other federal 
agencies which do scientific research to help cure diseases.
  This effort has already begun to show results in areas such as 
Parkinson's disease, cancer, Alzheimer's's disease, and many others. It 
is a worthwhile undertaking for our federal tax dollars.
  Now, while the President wants to take credit for this research 
effort, unfortunately his budget would severely impede the progress we 
have made and would jeopardize future advances.
  The NIH budget has begun to grow exponentially, because it is the 
right thing to do for people who are sick with chronic diseases. For 
the next fiscal year, however, the President has requested an increase 
of $320 million, or 2.1 percent, for the National Institutes of Health.
  Now, by comparison, last year this Congress increased NIH by $1.99 
billion, or 15 percent, and that is still inadequate funding when you 
look at all of the opportunities for research grants that come before 
the NIH and those which are able to be accepted. There just is not 
enough money to do all of the good research that needs to be done.
  The President was recently reported to have remarked to a member of 
the other body, a Democrat, the President said, ``Don't worry about our 
budget. The Republicans will increase NIH funding.'' Well, certainly we 
will. So much for honesty in the President's budget.
  A 2.1 percent growth rate is two-tenths of a percentage point less 
than the projected rate of inflation. That is a growth rate less than 
inflation, which is in the President's budget, for attempting to cure 
our Nation's diseases and improve the lives of millions of Americans 
who suffer from disease.
  What the President does under this budget game is put in a low number 
for NIH and put a high number for other spending, new federal spending 
programs that he puts in to satisfy special interests, and then 
criticizes those of us who say ``no'' to such excess spending, for 
budget-busting spending, and then politically the President seems to 
want to take credit. In reality, the President's budget says to people 
who

[[Page H624]]

seek a cure for cancer, I do not care about you.

                              {time}  1545

  For the 16 million diabetics in this country, he says, ``I do not 
care about you.'' For those with Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, 
Alzheimer's, lots of other diseases, he says, ``Sorry, I do not care 
about you.''
  We can be sure that if this budget were proposed by the majority 
Congress, the administration would call it a cut in funding, and 
probably the media would say the same thing, that we do not care about 
the lives of people who are sick.
  Well, in fact, we do. Both Democrats and Republicans in this Congress 
care deeply for NIH funding and deeply for those who are sick with 
chronic, debilitating diseases which affect all of us as Americans, 
regardless of our races or religions or genders. It is a fact of life 
that the government can help do something about.
  So I think there should be outrage today over the President's budget 
game for biomedical research. Both Democrats and Republicans should 
rise up and say no. And I urge my colleagues to call on the President, 
Mr. Speaker, on this game he is playing with biomedical research, and 
anyone who cares about curing chronic disease in this country should do 
the same.

                          ____________________