Washington Highlights: March 21,
2008
AAMC Comments on NIH Peer Review Proposals
Contents
Prior Issues
 |
Given a tight deadline imposed by the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), the AAMC sent on March 17 what the Association described
as an "initial
response" to the agency's request for public comment on
"The Final Draft of the NIH 2007-2008 Peer Review Self-Study"
[See Washington Highlights,
Feb. 22]. The letter and attachments
convey several general observations of concern and summarizes statements
received from a limited number of AAMC member institutions. The
AAMC emphasizes that the prime focus of the initial peer review
process should remain on the assessment of scientific quality.
The AAMC letter supports the NIH peer review working group's decision
to shift mentoring responsibilities from study sections to the departments
and institutions; conveys the Association's appreciation of the
rationale for establishing a "Not Recommended for Resubmission"
(NRR) category; and strongly urges that criteria for assigning a
NRR designation to an application be clearly and unambiguously defined
for reviewers and applicants alike.
The working group also recommended a 20 percent minimum level of
effort for principal investigators to be eligible for review. Given
the varying structures, organizations and practices among institutions
in defining "total effort", the AAMC letter urges further
exploration to assess the impact of the proposed minimum, perhaps
by piloting with several appropriate award mechanisms.
Furthermore, the letter states the minimum level of effort recommendations
must be clarified with respect to their applicability to multiple
principal investigators, multicenter awards, conference awards,
and institutional training awards. AAMC presumes that the effort
requirement would be applicable only to Research Project Grants
(RPGs), although this is not clear in the NIH document.
The letter also encourages the working group to reconsider AAMC's
prior recommendations for increased use of teleconferencing or other
available technologies to conduct review operations among many parties
and over long distances, and suggests that the NIH review process
should utilize new technologies that would reduce reviewer burden,
the challenge of enlisting sufficient expert reviewers, and, not
least, NIH expense.
Information:
Irena Tartokovsky, MD, Clinical Research Program Manager
AAMC Biomedical and Health Sciences Research
itartakovsky@aamc.org
(202) 862-6134
Stephen Heinig, Lead Science Policy Analyst
AAMC Biomedical Health Sciences Research
sheinig@aamc.org
(202) 828-0488
Chairman Dingell Introduces Medicaid Moratorium
Legislation
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair John Dingell (D-Mich.)
and Health Subcommittee member Tim Murphy (R-Pa.) March 13 introduced
bipartisan legislation, the "Protecting the Medicaid Safety
Net Act of 2008" (H.R.
5613), that would prohibit until April 2009 any CMS actions
related to the Medicaid GME proposed rule, the Medicaid Cost Limit/Unit
of Government ("IGT") final rule, and five other recently
issued Medicaid regulations. Reportedly, Chairman Dingell may mark
up H.R. 5613 shortly after the spring recess, which ends March 28.
In a March 13 news release,
Chairman Dingell states that the seven regulations "will put
the health of millions at risk." According to the release,
the rules "reverse long-standing Medicaid policies" and
"would only lead to higher costs in the future." H.R.
5613 would "give Congress time to better evaluate and assess"
the impact of the regulations. Chairman Dingell and Rep. Murphy
are circulating a March 19 "Dear
Colleague" letter urging cosponsorship of H.R. 5613.
Information:
Christiane Mitchell, Director, Federal Affairs
AAMC Government Relations
cmitchell@aamc.org
(202) 828-0526
House Members Call for NIH Increase
A total of 179 members of the House of Representatives signed a
March 19 letter to the leadership
of the House Appropriations Committee requesting a 6.5 percent increase
in the NIH budget for the coming fiscal year. The letter, which
was sent to Reps. David Obey (D-Wis.) and Jerry Lewis (R-Calif),
the chair and ranking member, respectively of the House Appropriations
Committee, notes the Administration's proposal to fund NIH at the
current level "is deeply troubling given the high rate of biomedical
inflation…. [T]he NIH budget will need to increase by 3.5 percent
simply to maintain its existing purchasing power."
The letter also states, "Unfortunately, we have already seen
the negative impact on biomedical research when the NIH budget fails
to account for increases in inflation. In the short term, this amounts
to a reduced number of NIH-funded grants awarded around the country
each year. More broadly, inadequate funding for biomedical research
delays or ends cutting-edge research, making it more difficult to
retain talented American researchers in the United States. Even
worse, flat funding further impedes our ability to mitigate or delay
the onset of the chronic diseases, which are the greatest contributor
to spiraling health care costs."
Reps. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), David Reichert (R-Wash.), Janice
Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.),
and Chris Smith (R-N.J.) organized the letter.
Information:
Dave Moore, Senior Director
AAMC Government Relations
dbmoore@aamc.org
(202) 828-0525
House Members Urge Title VII Restoration
A total of 131 Representatives signed a March 14 letter
urging appropriators to restore funding for the Title VII health
professions training programs to $300 million, the FY 2005 level.
Organized by Reps. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers
(R-Wash.), the letter warns "at a time of serious health professions
shortages, reducing this resource has already had devastating effects
to the country's neediest communities." Reps. DeGette and McMorris
Rodgers were joined by 21 Republicans and 7 appropriators in signing
the letter. The President's FY 2009 budget request proposes eliminating
all funding for the Title VII programs, which received $194 million
in FY 2008.
Information:
Tannaz Rasouli, Senior Legislative Analyst
AAMC Government Relations
trasouli@aamc.org
(202) 828-0525
FOVA Testifies Before House VA Appropriations
Subcommittee
James K. Brown, M.D., Associate Professor, University of California
San Francisco and Assistant Chief, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine
Section, San Fansisco VA Medical Center, March 13 testified on behalf
of the Friends of VA Medical Care and Health Research (FOVA) coalition
before the House VA Appropriations Subcommittee. In his written
statement, Dr. Brown noted "Funding for VA research must be
steady and sustainable to meet current commitments while allowing
for innovative scientific growth to address critical emerging needs."
For FY 2009, FOVA recommends $555 million for the VA Medical and
Prosthetic Research Program, a $75 million (15.6 percent) increase
over FY 2008. FOVA also recommends an additional $45 million in
the VA minor construction account dedicated for VA research facility
improvement. The President's FY 2009 Budget proposes $442 million
for VA Research, a $38 million (8 percent) cut under the FY 2008
level.
FOVA's recommendations were echoed at the hearing by the American
Lung Association and the American Psychological Association. The
AAMC is a member of the FOVA Executive Committee.
Information:
Matthew Shick, Senior Legislative Analyst
AAMC Government Relations
mshick@aamc.org
(202) 862-6116
On the Hill
Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.) March 20 announced that he will retire
at the end of his term, stating it is time "to take up new
challenges." Rep. Reynolds is serving his fifth term and is
a member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.
| 
