Fred Thompson Wanted to Cut Funding for AIDS Research
Posted by Michael Link on May 8, 2007 at 02:58 PM
Fred Thompson, in a Project Vote Smart survey he filled out in 1994 that has recently come to light, stated that he favored decreasing funding for AIDS research (via NY Sun).
I couldn't believe it until I checked it out for myself; he actually said he wanted to cut funding. This, by the way, was right around the time that the US death rate (per 100,000 population) was near its peak. Yet somehow that didn't cause him to change his mind.
He can't claim that it was a different time. The nation already understood the seriousness of the issue and the great harm it had already caused so many families. President Clinton had already taken steps to make federal funding of research a priority, as an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education back in 1994 pointed out:
A sharp increase in support for AIDS research for fiscal year 1994. After remaining on a plateau for the last three years of the Bush Administration, federal support for AIDS research in the Public Health Service went up by about 18 per cent, to $1.5-billion for 1994. The NIH will receive about $1.3-billion of that total.
A strengthening of the NIH Office of AIDS Research. This reform, which was part of Congress's reauthorization of the NIH in 1993, aimed to coordinate AIDS research more effectively. It gave the AIDS office a full-time director and instructed that person to lead an effort to develop a strategic plan for the government's spending priorities in AIDS research. The director will also distribute AIDS-research funds to the NIH's 17 institutes.
The appointment of a White House "AIDS czar," Kristine Gebbie, whose job is to coordinate federal AIDS programs.
The recent creation of a National Task Force on AIDS Drug Development, which is charged with finding ways to expedite the search for new therapies against HIV and AIDS. The panel will be made up of scientists, doctors, activists, and members of the pharmaceutical industry.
Fred Thompson would have reacted to this national tragedy with budget cuts. Remember that when he starts talking about the safety of the American people.
But that's not all.
In the survey, he also stated that when it came to raising the minimum wage, he was "undecided." At the time, the federal minimum wage was $4.25/hour.
Comments - 4 »
Comments - 4 «
Our President Clinton is doing a wonderful job on Aids in the World.
I hope everyone will see what a good job the Clintons would do the second time around. Both have their heart in the Government in every Department and they have learned so much about what the people want.
Posted by freeforall on May 8, 2007 at 04:07 PM
I don't think that Fred Thompson will be the Republican Presidential candidate, although I am sure that a lot of Republicans wish that he was electable. But, they are in touch with reality and know that if they don't nominate someone who is at least a little bit moderate such as Guiliani, McCain or Romney, then they will stand no chance of winning in '08. It will be hard for them to win even with Guiliani, McCain or Romney. Personally, I don't think that even Guiliani, McCain or Romney will be able to beat us. We have some good candidates on our side (Obama, Edwards, Clinton). And, Al Gore and/or Wesley Clark may decide to join the race later. That would give us 5 good candidates from which to choose. But, the Republicans are struggling to come up with a combination that they will like in their candidate (someone who is at least somewhat conservative, not tied to Bush and this Administration, has gravitas, is likable, and is electable).
Posted by LavoniaW on May 8, 2007 at 04:09 PM
Fred Thompson is a GOP loser. He thinks he is one of those tough guys he plays on cheesy TV shows. Fred Thompson is a GOP loser ... I say let him run, he'll get whipped.
Posted by rjsnj on May 9, 2007 at 07:20 AM
"freeforall" & "rjsnj":
First "freeforall", Clinton pails in comparison to what the Bush Administration has done for AIDS. Like him or not, under Bush, this country has spent "far more than any other country has spent fighting AIDS outside its borders and far more than any previous administration spent."(NY Times 3-31-07 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/31/washington/31aids.html?ex=1179115200&en=eca1a9275a90c057&ei=5070
Despite the Helmsian mentality of not giving in to providing clean needles for drug addicts (a major cause of the spread of AIDS in some parts of the world), the moralistic spending towards chastity and fidelity, and the legal primacy of the FDA over the WHO when it comes to approving drugs, the program is doing a great deal to fight AIDS that has never been done before. Congress (DEMOCRATIC NOW!!) needs to get involved on PEPFAR (The Bush Program for those that don't have a clue!)to push it to a new level!
"Congress requires that 55 percent of the budget be spent on treatment, 15 percent on care for the dying and 10 percent on children and orphans. Of the 20 percent left for prevention, a third must be spent on promoting abstinence until marriage. The law against using taxpayer dollars for needle swaps predates PEPFAR."
(NY Times "Bush’s Global AIDS Effort Limited by Restrictions" [Click on link above]}
So folks, contact your Democratic Congressperson and stop wasting your time pointing at someone (your not going to vote for anyway) for changing his mind or ask him what he believes today and what decision he would make today!
Thompson has been a GOP winner with a 2 to 1 margin when he has run, be careful what you say. He is not just an actor. He is a worthy opponent and not to be look at lightly. Look into his political and legal history back to the Watergate hearings. If you let yourself go delusional, as some Democrats have done and it is not even 2008 yet, the Democrats are going to lose more than just the Presidency.
These rhetorical finger-pointing "flip flopper tactics", like the article on this web site over Thompson and the clever little gizmo on the page before that, have lost all value with the American people. The "Right" did it to the point of ad nauseum with the Democrats...no we have to endure it some more from the Democratic Party? Too bad...
If you want to win, do not try to say how different you are from the rest of the field, distance yourself from the rest of the field! Become the leader! Don't just say you can lead! Be a leader! Forget about what was decided or not decided and by whom, yesterday; make a stand on what you will decide today, tomorrow, and for the future of our country as if your life depended on it! That's the distinction we should be making, not whether or not someone changed their mind on an issue, which everyone of the candidates on both sides has done in their political career! Stop trying to be oh, so clever! Cut the crap!
Posted by Demopublican on May 12, 2007 at 08:43 AM
« Hide Comments
Comments are now closed for this entry.
