Senator HILL. Thank you. Any questions, Senator Smith? Senator SMITH. No. Senator HILL. General, we certainly want to thank you. Dr. Alexander, it is very fine to have you back with us again this year. Dr. ALEXANDER. Thank you. Senator HILL. Although you are professor emeritus, you look so young we would like to have that secret. You made such a fine witness here for us this morning and such a splendid presentation, which both Senator Smith and I deeply appreiate; and you, too, Dr. Wood, from Johns Hopkins. And Mr. Crockett. All three of you gentlemen were most informative and most helpful and you brought us some very excellent testimony and I want yoù to now we feel most grateful to you. We thank you very, very much. Doctor, how much older is your school than Johns Hopkins? Dr. ALEXANDER. We are much, much younger. Senator HILL. You are one of the older schools. Dr. ALEXANDER. Not the medical school. Senator HILL. Not the medical school? When was your medical School Dr. ALEXANDER. In St. Louis. Senator HILL. I know where it is and all that. It has an outstanding reputation. Dr. ALEXANDER. We have had a medical school only since 1912, I believe. Senator HILL. Just since 1912. The university itself, though, has been there quite a good many years, hasn't it? Dr. ALEXANDER. Yes, 75 years; much longer. The medical school has a good reputation and Dr. Wood was professor of medicine there, which was one reason for it, a few years ago. Senator HILL. As young as your school is, certainly it has a very, very outstanding reputation. Dr. ALEXANDER. Thank you. Senator HILL. And I think I can say the same for Johns Hopkins. It has a very, very outstanding reputation, doesn't it, Senator Smith? Senator SMITH. That is correct. REPUTATION OF MEDICAL SCHOOLS Senator HILL. Both of these schools have very outstanding reputaions. We had Dr. Ravdin yesterday, who comes from the University of Pennsylvania, which, of course, is our oldest medical school. Mr. CROCKETT. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Senator HILL. Senator Smith, coming from Maine, feels what we said about Massachusetts General Hospital should have been on the record. Mr. CROCKETT. You see, the Massachusetts General Hospital was founded when Maine was a part of Massachusetts. Senator HILL. Gentlemen, we are certainly most grateful to you. Mr. CROCKETT. Thank you, sir. 41001-59-85 Senator HILL. We surely appreciate your testimony here this morning. Thank you very, very much. FUNDS FOR MENTALLY RETARDED PERSONS Senator HILL. Senator Robertson has received a letter from Mr. R. F. B. Steele, president of the Petersburg, Va., Savings & American Trust Co. in support of the budget estimate and the House allowance of $1 million for expansion of teaching in education of the mentally retarded. Senator Robertson has requested that Mr. Steele's letter be included in the record. It will appear at this point. (The letter referred to follows:) PETERSBURG SAVINGS & AMERICAN TRUST Co., Hon. A. WILLIS ROBERTSON, DEAR WILLIS: It is my understanding that the House has passed the Labor, Health, Education, and Welfare appropriations bill, and that in this is included a million dollars for the special education for teachers of the mentally retarded. I hope very much that this item will be retained in the Senate version of the bill. There is a great need for such a program, and I know this from personal experience and in working with our State association. It is, therefore, my hope that you will give favorable consideration to this matter when it comes before the Senate. With best wishes, and thank you very much for all that you are doing. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION R. F. B. STEELE. Senator HILL. Mr. Charles Wesley Dunn, of the Food Law Institute, Inc., New York City, had requested to testify on the budget estimate for the Food and Drug Administration but was unable to be here. He has addressed a letter to me on the subject, which will appear at this point in the record. (The letter referred to follows:) THE FOOD LAW INSTITUTE, INC., Re 1960 appropriation for Food and Drug Administration. U.S. Senate, Senate Office Building, DEAR SENATOR HILL: I respectfully ask that this letter be added to the record of the hearings by the Subcommittee on Labor and Public Welfare of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, of which you are chairman; and I will appreciate your reference to it at the executive session of the subcommittee when the question of this FDA appropriation is considered, pursuant to my recent talk with your assistant (Mr. Campbell). I long since requested the privilege of testifying before the subcommittee on this appropriation; but for some accidental reason I was not informed of the time scheduled for such testimony. Hence I now respectfully file the following substitute written statement, in brief: (1) I write this letter as a member of the FDA Citizens Advisory Committee. which submitted its report to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare in June 1955. I also write this letter as president of The Food Law Institute, a public organization to develop a better knowledge and state of this basic publie law; and it is one that has become a national and international leader in the area of such law, working in close association with the FDA. I further write this letter as general counsel for the Grocery Manufacturers of America, Inc., which is the major national association of food manufacturers generally in this country; whose brands are household names. (2) The budget increase in the 1960 FDA appropriation is $825,000, wheress the increase recommended by the FDA Citizens Advisory Committee is approxi mately $2,918,600. I suggested this latter increased amount to the House Committee on Appropriations and it made the increased amount $2 million, whereby the 1960 FDA appropriation by that committee is $13,800,000. Hence it thus went a considerable distance toward meeting the foregoing recommendation by the FDA Citizens Advisory Committee. (3) I now suggest to the Senate Committee on Appropriations that the House $2 million increase in the 1960 FDA appropriation be retained and further increased to the full approximate amount of $2,918,600, recommended by the FDA Citizens Advisory Committee. For the FDA urgently needs this increased appropriation to meet its greatly increased and essential responsibilities in administering the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which is our national pure food and drug law to fundamental importance to public health. The FDA administrative responsibilities have thus increased because of the recent basic food additives amendment to this act, for example, and also for general reasons. They include the necessary expansion in the FDA administrative organization and costs, the constant rise in our population, and the growing expansion of the regulated industries and trades. The fact is that the FDA has not received adequate annual appropriations in the past; and that the time has come when Congress should correct this serious public health situation, as the FDA Citizens Advisory Committee has responsibly recommended after a full investigation. (4) I also suggest that the Senate Committee on Appropriations take the necessary action to complete the new FDA headquarters building in Washington, which the FDA Citizens Advisory Committee recommended and Congress has already approved in policy. But no action has yet been taken by appropriation or otherwise to finance the construction and equipment of this building, whose initial estimated cost is $23 million or thereabouts. I understand that the architects have developed or will soon develop the plans, designs, and actual costs of this building; and the committee should make the required appropriation accordingly. It is of the highest importance that the FDA thus be provided with the facilities which it also urgently needs. (5) It is my considered opinion, based on a related survey, that the FDA is by far the best national organization in the free world today for the due administration of a national pure food and drug law. And it is clear that Congress should provide it with the appropriations and facilities which it unquestionably needs to effectively meet the increased and essential administrative responsibilities that Congress has placed on it. Respectfully submitted. CHARLES WESLEY DUNN, STATEMENT OF SENATORS HUMPHREY AND MCCARTHY Senator HILL. Senator Humphrey has requested that his statement on behalf of himself and Senator McCarthy in support of an increase in the appropriations for the research programs of the National Institutes of Health be included in the record. The Senator's statement will appear at this point. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF SENATOR HUBERT H. HUMPHREY On Behalf of HIMSELF AND SENATOR EUGENE MCCARTHY IN SUPPORT OF AN INCREASE IN THE APPROPRIATIONS FOR NIH RESEARCH PROGRAMS Mr. Chairman, we can have nothing but praise for the outstanding work conducted by the National Institutes of Health of the U.S. Public Health Service through its research programs throughout the country. This work is part of a continuing all-out war, through research on cancer, mental illness, heart illness, dental disorders, arthritis and metabolic disease, allergy and infectious disease, and neurology and blindness. It is my opinion that the accomplishments which have been made in medical research justifies the continuance of NIH programs at an accelerated pace. This must be done now, without hesitation, if we are to solve the riddles of the various afflictions and diseases which are constantly crippling and snuffing out the lives of thousands of individuals, consequently slashing the wrists of the Nation's productive capacity. The administration is requesting only $294,279,000 for the operation of the eight NIH research programs in fiscal 1960. This is roughly the same financial level on which the programs are operating this fiscal year. This request is sorely lacking in realism when considered in light of the tremendous accomplishments made in the field of medical research. Fundamental research and applied research have resulted in the things which money cannot buy. I am speaking of the reduction in disability, lengthening productive life, good health and happiness, and high morale. This request obviously does not take into account increases in prices and in the national population, and certainly does not consider continued improvements and progress in medical research. This is evident in the fact that the justifications offered in support of the budget recommendations are so futile. The only concrete justification given is that the amount requested-despite the fact that it will not adequately maintain NIH programs would be in tune with the administration's stand on inflation and on balancing the budget. I respectfully submit, Mr. Chairman, that it behooves all of us to constantly bear in mind that the health and welfare of the American people is a primary object of our Government. The Nation itself is only stable and secure to the extent that its citizens are provided for. Despite improvements in cancer control through surgery and radiation, we are still short of that breakthrough that will free mankind from this terrible disease. The death of John Foster Dulles serves to dramatize just how much further there is to go before we can bring this dread scourge of mankind under control. The struggle against disease is not limited by national boundaries and ideologies. Indeed all nations are challenged to mobilize their resources against disease. As you know, during my study tour of Europe last winter with my subcommittee on International Health, I secured agreement from even the Soviet Premier to participate with the United States in a worldwide undertaking to pool medical researcn in the struggle against cancer and other dread diseases. We are going to have such a worldwide onslaught on pain and disease, during the International Health Year-following the passage by Congress of my resolution calling for American leadership to establish such a year. I am saddened by the fact that the administration talks boldly about the need for greater medical research but does nothing about it. It is my understanding that several months ago NIH officials informed the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare that at least $351,279,000 was needed to operate NIH programs in the coming fiscal year. This is $57 million more than what was requested but is by no means adequate. It is my hope that the committee will recommend an appropriation of $478 million for medical research under NIH. This is the amount suggested by 16 of the Nation's leading medical scientists. I submit that this would be a realistic appropriation which could be economically used by NIH in seeking the causes and cures of mankind's dread diseases. I am indeed grateful to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the committee for allowing me this opportunity. (Whereupon, at 12:38 p.m., Thursday, May 28, 1959, the hearing was concluded.) DEPARTMENT OF LABOR LIST OF WITNESSES Ambursen, Frances A. Arnow, Philip... Leopold, Alice K. Lundquist, Clarence T Maas, Melvin J. Manor, Stella P. McCauley, William_ Mitchell, Hon. James P. Norwood, William A., Jr. Nystrom, Harold C. O'Connell, James T. Omohundro, E. L.. Rothman, Stuart Schwartz, Theodore. Shaffer, Willard. Wagenet, R. G... Van Zant, Robert P. |