[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 687-689]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  SENATE RESOLUTION 253--TO EXPRESS THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE 
   FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH SHOULD BE INCREASED BY 
                   $2,700,000,000 IN FISCAL YEAR 2001

  Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Mack, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. 
Frist, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Sarbanes, Ms. Collins, Mr. DeWine, Mr. 
Hutchinson, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Cochran, and Mr. Santorum) submitted the 
following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
Appropriations:

                              S. Res. 253

       Whereas past investments in biomedical research have 
     resulted in better health, an improved quality of life for 
     all Americans and a reduction in national health care 
     expenditures;
       Whereas the Nation's commitment to biomedical research has 
     expanded the base of scientific knowledge about health and 
     disease and revolutionized the practice of medicine;
       Whereas the Federal Government represents the single 
     largest contribution to biomedical research conducted in the 
     United States;
       Whereas biomedical research continues to play a vital role 
     in the growth of this Nation's biotechnology, medical device, 
     and pharmaceutical industries;
       Whereas the origin of many of the new drugs and medical 
     devices currently in use is based in biomedical research 
     supported by the National Institutes of Health;
       Whereas women have traditionally been under represented in 
     medical research protocols, yet are severely affected by 
     diseases including breast cancer, which will kill over 43,300 
     women this year, ovarian cancer which will claim another 
     14,500 lives; and osteoporosis and cardiovascular disorders;
       Whereas research sponsored by the National Institutes of 
     Health is responsible for the identification of genetic 
     mutations relating to nearly 100 diseases, including 
     Alzheimer's disease, cystic fibrosis, Huntington's disease, 
     osteoporosis, many forms of cancer, and immune deficiency 
     disorders;
       Whereas many Americans still face serious and life-
     threatening health problems, both acute and chronic;
       Whereas neurodegenerative diseases of the elderly, such as 
     Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease threaten to destroy the 
     lives of millions of Americans, overwhelm the Nation's health 
     care system, and bankrupt the Medicare and Medicaid programs;
       Whereas 2.7 million Americans are currently infected with 
     the hepatitis C virus, an insidious liver condition that can 
     lead to inflammation, cirrhosis, and cancer as well as liver 
     failure;
       Whereas 297,000 Americans are now suffering from AIDS and 
     hundreds of thousands more with HIV infection;
       Whereas cancer remains a comprehensive threat to any tissue 
     or organ of the body at any age, and remains a top cause of 
     morbidity and mortality;
       Whereas the extent of psychiatric and neurological diseases 
     poses considerable challenges in understanding the workings 
     of the brain and nervous system;
       Whereas recent advances in the treatment of HIV illustrate 
     the promise research holds for even more effective, 
     accessible, and affordable treatments for persons with HIV;
       Whereas infants and children are the hope of our future, 
     yet they continue to be the most vulnerable and underserved 
     members of our society;
       Whereas approximately one out of every six American men 
     will develop prostate cancer and over 40,000 men will die 
     from prostate cancer each year;
       Whereas diabetes, both insulin and non-insulin forms, 
     afflict 16 million Americans and places them at risk for 
     acute and chronic complications, including blindness, kidney 
     failure, atherosclerosis and nerve degeneration;
       Whereas the emerging understanding of the principles of 
     biomimetrics have been applied to the development of hard 
     tissue such as bone and teeth as well as soft tissue, and 
     this field of study holds great promise for the design of new 
     classes of biomaterials, pharmaceuticals, diagnostic and 
     analytical reagents;
       Whereas research sponsored by the National Institute of 
     Health will map and sequence the entire human genome by 2003, 
     leading to a new era of molecular medicine that will provide 
     unprecedented opportunities for the prevention, diagnoses, 
     treatment, and cure of diseases that currently plague 
     society;
       Whereas the fundamental way science is conducted is 
     changing at a revolutionary pace, demanding a far greater 
     investment in emerging new technologies, research training 
     programs, and in developing new skills among scientific 
     investigators; and
       Whereas most Americans show overwhelming support for an 
     increased Federal investment in biomedical research: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This resolution may be cited as the ``Biomedical 
     Revitalization Resolution of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE SENATE.

       It is the sense of the Senate that funding for the National 
     Institutes of Health should be increased by $2,700,000,000 in 
     fiscal year 2001 and that the budget resolution appropriately 
     reflect sufficient funds to achieve this objective.

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this morning President Clinton announced 
the budget for the administration for fiscal year 2001. It has a large 
number of new programs and has a very substantial increase in spending, 
up to $1.835 trillion. In examining the budget as to its applicability 
to the Departments of Labor, Health, Human Services and Education on 
items which I chair, the appropriations subcommittee, I am concerned 
about the number of new programs.
  On Education, there are 19 new programs. In the Department of Labor, 
there are nine new programs. It is a matter of concern when the 
President proposes programs which have mandates directing the local 
school districts as to what they should be doing without giving 
discretion to local school districts as to specific needs which they 
might have which might be in a somewhat different category. For 
example, this year the 19 new programs will increase expenditures by $2 
billion 951 million--almost $3 billion. Let's put it that way, round it 
up a little bit.
  Within these programs, there is a new program for school renovation 
of $1.3 billion. While there may be some merit to that specific kind of 
program, it may well be that the local school district could better use 
that money, depending upon local needs, for matters such as a science 
program, for laboratory equipment, for computers, for teacher training 
depending upon what the needs are in the local school district.
  Last year, we had a considerable amount of controversy on the 
President's program for new teachers, a commendable objective, but it 
may well be that there are many school districts where the needs for 
some alternative programs are more pressing there. So I express a 
concern about the budget with its increased spending up

[[Page 688]]

to $1.835 trillion, and the mandate of a great many new programs which 
have not been authorized by the appropriate authorizing committees in 
the Congress.
  When it comes to the question of paying for these programs, the 
President has proposed raising the caps by some $62 billion, but it is 
highly questionable whether that raise in the caps will accommodate all 
the programs which he has proposed. I think there is agreement between 
the Congress and the administration that Social Security and Medicare 
have to be kept inviolate and that there not be expenditures which 
would threaten Social Security.
  On the face and on the figures, the President's budget does not 
invade Social Security, but there is the lurking possibility that 
Social Security could be invaded with the tremendous number of new 
programs which the President has proposed.
  Last year, when the President came forward with his budget, he had 
proposals for some $18 billion in offsets: Federal tobacco revenues of 
$6 billion, FAA user fees of $1 billion, and so on, down to some $18 
billion, none of which materialized. So when we take a look at the 
President's proposed offsets, we have to take them with more than a 
grain of salt as to whether they ever will materialize.
  The President has proposed this year to have offsets for penalties 
for tobacco companies where they fail to live up to the reduction on 
teenage smoking. The administration's budget will cut youth smoking in 
half by charging the tobacco industry an assessment for every underage 
smoker, with an estimated penalty of $3,000 for each underage smoker. 
It does not pick up until some of the out years.
  This is an illustration of where the President is proposing alleged 
cuts which may well never materialize.
  There is one item where the Clinton administration budget is not 
adequately funded, and that is for the National Institutes of Health. 
In 1997, the sense-of-the-Senate resolution called for a doubling of 
the NIH budget over a 5-year period.
  During the course of the last 3 years, very substantial advances have 
been made on funding for the National Institutes of Health, although we 
are not quite yet on target. That has been a real battle because 
although the Senate passed a sense-of-the-Senate resolution in 1997 
calling for doubling within 5 years, when the issue has come before the 
budget resolution on amendments sponsored by Senator Harkin, who is the 
ranking Democrat, and myself as chairman of the relevant appropriations 
subcommittee, those increases in funding have been rejected. But with a 
sharp pencil and with very substantial help from staff on allocation of 
funding, we have succeeded in increasing the funding for the National 
Institutes of Health by more than $5 billion over the last 3 years.
  Three years ago, the Senate passed an increase of $950 million. It 
was pared down somewhat in conference to $907 million. Two years ago, 
we increased NIH funding by some $2 billion, and last year we increased 
National Institutes of Health funding by $2.3 billion.
  It is true the National Institutes of Health is the crown jewel of 
the Federal Government. In fact, it may be the only jewel of the 
Federal Government. This year, with a long list of cosponsors who are 
being added incrementally each day--and I expect quite a few more by 
the end of the day, and more even before Senator Harkin, the principal 
cosponsor, and I offer this for a budget resolution--we are proposing 
an increase in funding of $2.7 billion, which is the minimal amount 
necessary to keep funding for the National Institutes of Health on a 
track to approximate the goal of doubling NIH funding over the 5-year 
period.
  In addition to Senator Harkin and myself, we have cosponsorship by 
Senator Mack, Senator Mikulski, Senator Frist, Senator Schumer, Senator 
Collins, Senator DeWine, Senator Sarbanes, and Senator Hutchinson. The 
advances which have been made by NIH over the course of the past 
several years have truly been astounding with the projection that 
Parkinson's may be on the verge of being solved within a 5-year period, 
enormous advances on Alzheimer's, enormous advances on a variety of 
cancer problems--breast cancer, prostate cancer, cervical cancer--
enormous advances on heart disease. As a capital investment in the 
health of America, there is no better investment. As a capital 
investment for cutting costs for Medicare and Medicaid, there is no 
better investment.
  Last year, the Clinton administration proposed an increase of some 
$300 million which was far under the mark. That was raised by Congress 
to $2.3 billion and signed into law by the President.
  This year, I think, noting the strong congressional support, the 
administration has proposed an increase of $1 billion in NIH funding, 
but that, too, is short of the mark on meeting the objective of 
doubling NIH funding within a 5-year period.
  I have sought recognition today to submit, with my distinguished 
colleague Senator Harkin, an important resolution calling for increased 
funding for the National Institutes of Health, to keep us on track to 
double NIH funding by 2002. Specifically, the resolution which we are 
offering today calls for the fiscal year 2001 Budget Resolution to 
include an additional $2.7 billion in the health account, to be 
allocated for biomedical research at the National Institutes of Health.
  As chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee for Labor, Health and 
Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, I have said many times 
that the National Institutes of Health is the crown jewel of the 
Federal Government--perhaps the only jewel of the Federal government. 
We all remain enthralled by the advances realized by the National 
Institutes of Health, which has spawned innumerable breakthroughs in 
our knowledge and treatment for diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer's 
disease, Parkinson's disease, severe mental illnesses, diabetes, 
osteoporosis, heart disease, and many others. It is clear that a 
substantial investment in the NIH is crucial to allow the continuation 
of these advances into the next decade.
  On May 21, 1997, the Senate passed a Sense of the Senate resolution 
submitted by our distinguished colleague, Senator Mack, which stated 
that funding for the National Institutes of Health should be doubled 
over five years. Regrettably, even though that resolution was passed by 
an overwhelming vote of 98 to nothing, when the budget resolution was 
considered on the Senate floor, the appropriate health account had a 
reduction of $100 million. That led to the introduction of an amendment 
to the resolution by myself and Senator Harkin. We sought to add in 
$1.1 billion to carry out the expressed sense of the Senate. Our 
amendment, however, was defeated 63-37. We were extremely disappointed 
that while the Senate had expressed its druthers on a resolution, they 
were simply unwilling to put up the actual dollars to accomplish this 
vital goal.
  The following year, during debate on the fiscal year 1999 Budget 
Resolution, Senator Harkin and I again introduced an amendment which 
called for a $2 billion increase for the National Institutes of Health, 
and which provided sufficient resources in the budget to accomplish 
this. While we gained more support on this vote than in the previous 
year, our amendment was again defeated, this time by a vote of 57-41. 
Not to be deterred, Senator Harkin and I again went to work with our 
Subcommittee and we were able, by making economies and establishing 
priorities, to add an additional $2 billion to the NIH account for 
fiscal year 1999, which at the time was the largest increase in 
history.
  Most recently, for fiscal year 2000, Senator Harkin and I again 
introduced an amendment to the Budget Resolution which would have added 
$1.4 billion to the health accounts, over and above the $600 million 
which had already been provided by the Budget Committee. Despite this 
amendment's defeat by a vote of 47-52, we were able to provide, through 
the maximization of our limited resources, a $2.3 billion increase for 
fiscal year 2000--truly an historic accomplishment.
  In 1981, when I was first elected to the Senate, NIH funding was less 
than

[[Page 689]]

$3.6 billion; for fiscal year 2000, it is $17.9 billion, a 95% 
inflation-adjusted increase. Through several years and several 
Subcommittee Chairs--Senator Weicker, Senator Chiles, Senator Harkin, 
and myself--the budgets were always tight and frequently faced 
Administration-proposed cuts. Still, we managed to increase NIH funding 
tremendously. This resolution seeks to reiterate the intent of the 
Senate to double our investment in the National Institutes of Health: 
we must provide $2.7 billion to stay on track to reach that goal. I 
believe that this goal can be achieved if we make the proper allocation 
of our resources.
  Our investment has resulted in tremendous advances in medical 
research. A new generation of AIDS drugs are reducing the presence of 
the AIDS virus in HIV infected persons to nearly undetectable levels. 
Death rates from cancer have begun a steady decline. The human genome 
is on track to be 90 percent mapped by this spring, and fully sequenced 
by 2003. We are seeing the advent of a relatively new field of 
pharmacogenomics, which seeks to solve whether there is something about 
an individual's genetic instructions which prevent them from 
metabolizing a particular drug as intended. In essence, drugs may soon 
be designed to fit the patient's genetic makeup. I anxiously await the 
results of all of these avenues of remarkable research.
  I, like millions of Americans, have benefitted tremendously from the 
investment we have made in the National Institutes of Health. But to 
continue that commitment takes actual dollars, not just the discussion 
of dollars. That is why we offer this resolution today--to call upon 
the Budget Committee to add $2.7 billion to the health accounts so we 
can carry forward the important work of the National Institutes of 
Health.

                          ____________________