AIDS Funding Advocates Want More From Obama

President Barack Obama’s $25 million package to fund AIDS Drug Assistance Programs (ADAP) nationwide was helpful but not enough, say advocates of the program.

In July, the White House announced that it would distribute the funds to states in which waiting lists for HIV and AIDS treatment had developed. That figure fell far short of the $126 million that lawmakers and groups had asked for from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Though the initial investment helped some states stave off immediate crisis - the state of Iowa, for example, used its funds to eliminate its ADAP waiting list entirely - waiting lists in other states have grown since then, and some states, including Iowa, have been forced to cap enrollments. Currently, over 3,200 Americans in nine states are waiting to receive treatment.

“The president deserves credit for [the $25 million package] but it’s not enough,” says Brandon Macsata, CEO of the ADAP Advocacy Association. “The numbers back it up, the waiting lists are growing.”

Created in 1987 and then incorporated by Congress into the Ryan White Care Act three years later, ADAP has provided hundreds of thousands of low-income AIDS-stricken Americans who are ineligible for Medicaid, access to affordable drugs.

During a Democratic fundraiser in Manhattan on Wednesday night, Obama was interrupted during his speech by protestors demanding more AIDS funding. The president responded by saying his administration has increased funding, despite a tightening budget. He then added that if Republicans win back Congress this fall, “I promise you they’ll cut AIDS funding.”

Macsata, however, says that while federal funding of ADAP is technically higher now than it has been in the past, the federal share of the program’s annual budget is dwindling. Non-profit groups like his and the Community Access National Network are contributing far more to ADAP than the government these days. As a result, people are starting to take action.

“The waiting lists are the tip of the iceberg, Macsata told me. “There are hundreds of people who have been dis-enrolled [from ADAP] and are not eligible for the program anymore, and that’s why you see the protests.”

Activists lament the fact that Congress has yet to come up with the leftover $101 million that has been requested, particularly at a time when spending $1 billion causes few in Washington to bat an eye. Democrats have proposed emergency legislation, but have been unable to muster support due to concerns that their bill isn’t paid for, and a GOP-led effort in the Senate has stalled.

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), co-sponsor of a bill that would direct unobligated Recovery Act funds towards ADAP, says the White House has turned a blind eye to what it considers a relatively minor issue. The administration, says Burr, is so preoccupied with large-scale healthcare reform “that they’re willing to let some go without the products they need.”

Burr told me that he will attempt to bring his bill to the floor one more time before the Senate adjourns, but doubts whether Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will allow it to proceed.

GOP: Let the Patients Choose their Health Care Plan

By Courtney Ann Jackson-Talk Radio News Service

More Americans should have the opportunity for affordable health care and the choice of doctors according to GOP Leaders from the House and Senate who introduced new legislation Wednesday. The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009 would allow for universal health care managed outside of government entities.

U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) said, “We propose to equalize the taxed treatment of health care, giving every American regardless of employment status the ability to purchase health insurance. And if you like what you’ve got, you can keep it.”

Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) was present at the press conference to show his support of the legislation and explained that the legislation lets “the patient makes the decision, not Washington D.C.”

The Patients’ Choice Act as laid out in a summary statement released at the press conference, would transform health care by: preventing disease and promoting healthier lifestyles, creating affordable and accessible health insurance options, and equalizing the tax treatment of health care.

The proposed plan will “empower the American people” to have access to their own doctor and their own health care coverage, according to U.S. Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA).

Senator Richard Burr also explained they are hopeful that the Act will “push Congress to enact a more sensible health care reform bill this year.”

The GOP leaders said the American’s need a health care system centered on their individual needs and that is what the Patients’ Choice Act of 2009 could do.

If There's No Pork, Where's The Beef?

Coffee Brown, MD, University of New Mexico, Talk Radio News


A typical flu season kill 37,000 Americans. The swine flu, officially known as "2009 H1N1", may be responsible for up to 160 deaths in Mexico and one infant death in the U.S.

Of those who have contracted the disease outside of Mexico, the illness has been relatively mild. So, what's the big deal?

"This is a whole new kind of flu," said Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Flu viruses mutate slightly every year, but not like this, Fauci said. Genes from four separate viruses - avian, human, and two kinds of swine flus, have combined into this strain.

Our vaccines and immune systems have "never seen anything like it," Fauci said. That's what makes it potentially more dangerous. While this means that we have little or no natural immunity, it does not necessarily mean that this flu must be any more infectious or virulent than the average flu.

So, why is it called "swine flu"? Actually, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) really wishes we wouldn't call it that, as it's hurting the pork industry. Fauci agrees, "The name that is now being used is 'the 2009 H1N1 flu.'"

Despite Egypt's decision to eliminate all swine from the country, people can still eat pork without contracting the swine flu. The American Heart Association may advise moderation, but this flu is entirely unrelated to pigs. Still, the pork industry and health officials are going to have to come up with a catchier name than "2009 H1N1 flu" if they want us to stop calling it "swine flu."

Epidemic or Pandemic? An epidemic means that more cases are occurring than predicted. With seasonal flu, epidemiologists have so much experience that they can usually predict the number of cases fairly accurately. The number they are seeing right now wouldn't even be noticeable in the middle of flu season, but this one was winding down for the year. Since this is really a new type of flu, the CDC don't yet have the experience to predict a "normal" season or number of cases.

A pandemic occurs when a disease covers a large geographic area, such as a continent, or multiple continents, as this one has. The common cold is a type of pandemic, though we usually don't bother to call it that. Neither word actually refers to the severity of the disease, the likelihood that a sufferer will end up in the hospital or even die.

So what about the rising number of cases? If that makes you nervous, stop watching them, because the numbers will rise steeply with every re-count for the foreseeable future, whether this is a killer flu or of ordinary severity.

On April 29, 2009, the WHO raised the level of alert to "phase 5. "What does that mean? Phase 4 meant human to human transmission, phase 5 means the same thing, but in more than one country, phase 6 will mean clusters of cases, outbreaks, in more than one country. Phases 7 and 8 describe the trailing off of the disease.

So, is it going to get worse, or go away? It may do either. The behavior of flus is variable, and epidemiologists don't have enough information yet to predict this one's course. Almost any scenario imaginable could occur.

At a Senate hearing Wednesday, convened on short notice in response to this flu, John McCain (R-Ariz) asked, "Should we close the borders?"

"No," Richard E Besser, MD, Acting Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS,responded. That was tried during the SARS outbreak, and it appears to have been unsuccessful. Simulations suggest that closing the borders would have little, if any, effect on limiting spread, and it would tie up massive resources that could be put to much better use elsewhere. If we had been one of the later countries to be hit, we might have tried closing the borders to buy a few more weeks to get ready, but even then the gain would be slight, Besser said. The World Health Organization concurs.

That led Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) to ask about resources. Besser told him that stockpiles of antivirals , masks, and respirators are sufficient, because they had been bought when funding was better. Recent cutbacks have cost public health thousands of jobs, lost or threatened, and have made it harder for states to exercise their pandemic control plans.

The Office of the Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority , which prepares contingency plans and caches supplies, has never had its own funding, but has receives sporadic money from NIH, according to Fauci.

In his 100 day address last night, President Obama re-iterated many of these points, saying "We are continuing to closely monitor the emergency ... (This is) obviously a very serious situation," adding that schools with confirmed or suspected cases should close temporarily.

Obama is requesting $1.5 billion for the further stockpiling of medicines and equipment, and for logistical support. He echoed the CDC and WHO by reminding people, "I've asked every American to take the same steps you would take to prevent any other flu: Keep your hands washed; cover your mouth when you cough; stay home from work if you're sick; and keep your children home from school if they're sick."

Readers: Please send questions, tell us what you need to know.

Obama's "eyes and ears closed"

In a press conference this afternoon Republican Senators and Congressmen launched an attack against Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) by launching a new seven minute video titled "The Obama Iraq Documentary: Whatever the Politics Demand." The video asks the question: Where does Barack Obama stand on Iraq? In the video, Obama's own words are used against him to paint the senator as a politically expedient politician who will say and do anything to get elected.

"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there [Iraq]. In fact, I think it will do the reverse," Obama is shown saying in a video clip. The next slide shows in big bold words the phrase "said he always said the surge will make things better."

Republican Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) who was joined by Senators John Thune (R-N.D.), Richard Burr (R-Va.) and Representatives Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) as they launched their attack on Obama. Kyl said "Barack Obama announced a plan for Iraq before even going there. He believes Iraq is a political issue. "This is political expediency in how he views the war," said Kyl. Thune added on Obama by saying "one thing that has been clear it's you can guarantee he will take the position that will satisfy the far left of his party."

Blackburn of Tennessee concluded the press conference when she chided Obama for voting to "de-fund the troops." Blackburn added, "he's already made up his mind on Iraq before even going there with his eyes and ears closed." Blackburn concluded that she hopes that because Obama isn't going to Iraq for a fact finding mission and will not meet with any foreign leaders that he should spare the troops "the phot-op."

More secure with McCain

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Doug Holtz-Eakin from Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) campaign team held a conference call to rebuttal some issues brought up in Sen. Barrack Obama’s (D-Ill.) campaign speech on economic policy held in Raleigh, North Carolina. Burr began by saying that if the American people focus on the campaign rhetoric they will find big differences between what candidates propose and what they have done.

Burr said that about fifty percent of Obama’s speech focused on discrediting McCain rather than on Obama’s actual policy and proposals. While Obama said he wanted to lower tax rates for lower and middle class Americans, in the past he has voted 94 times to raise taxes. Burr explained that McCain has “been bold” in his pledge to keep taxes low and wants to give middle class Americans a tax break.

Burr also said that when looking at all the proposals and histories of both presidential candidates, there is more security with McCain. McCain has the better track record when it comes to committing to his promises. Burr went as far as to say that the speech Obama gave today is one that the American people are “sick and tired of.”

Holtz-Eakin explained that McCain actually voted against the 2005 Energy Policy Act while Obama favored it. This shows that McCain does not support a tax cut for Exxon, one of many false claims made by Obama. McCain does in fact believe that keeping taxes low is important for families, for the economy, and for corporations across America.