| Washington Watch | Issues Update | Vital Signs | Health & Safety |
|
Rose Gonzalez is an associate director in the ANA’s Department of Governmental Affairs. Connie Helmlinger is periodicals manager at the ANA.
As discussions on the fiscal year (FY) 2000 budget begin, the ANA and the Tri-Council for Nursing (a coalition comprising the ANA, the American Association of Colleges of Nursing, the American Organization of Nurse Executives, and the National League for Nursing) will advocate for a 10% increase for the Nurse Education Act (NEA), as well as an increase of $20.9 million for the National Institute of Nursing Research.
Released on February 1, 1999, the president’s FY 2000 budget recommended maintaining funding for the NEA programs at the FY 1999 level of $67 million, and increasing funding for the National Institutes of Health—which houses the National Institute of Nursing Research—by 2% over FY 1999.
“Level funding for the Nurse Education Act is a positive step toward quality,” said ANA President Beverly L. Malone, PhD, RN, FAAN, noting that the president has proposed cuts to the NEA in the past. In addition to level funding for the NEA, the administration proposed increases in funding for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
The president’s proposal also directs the budget surplus to shore up two major entitlement programs. It recommends that 62% of the projected budget surpluses over the next 15 years—$2.8 trillion—be transferred to the Social Security system, and that 15% be reserved in order to ensure the Medicare Trust Fund’s solvency for 20 years.
The budget surplus, which is expected to reach $111 billion for FY 1999, is a key complication this year. Both the House and Senate budget resolutions are expected to call for an FY 2000 tax cut costing about $15 billion, which could use some of the predicted surplus. However, the Clinton administration and congressional Democrats are already objecting to dedicating future budget surpluses to broad tax cuts without congressional agreement on a plan that sustains both the Social Security and Medicare programs on a long-term basis.
Other budgetary concerns involve the tight budget “caps” or funding restrictions put into place with the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. The budget caps initially provided a short-term boost in spending but mandated reductions in the final two years of the plan, postponing the most difficult spending cuts until after the 1998 congressional elections. According to the Senate Budget Committee, the White House and Congress will have to reduce existing programs by about $28 billion (5%) to maintain spending within the caps.
The ANA joined with other health care organizations to send a letter urging members of the House and Senate Budget Committees to raise the budget caps in order to protect funding for a number of health, education, and labor programs. But given the reluctance on Capitol Hill to do this, grassroots lobbying by the nation’s nurses will be crucial.
To reach your senator or representative, call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. For more information, contact Rose Gonzalez at (202) 651-7098.
Concerned that business interests were granted a higher priority than the health of nurses, the ANA recently submitted testimony to a House of Representatives subcommittee, calling for immediate implementation of a latex allergy bulletin by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
“We have seen a dramatic increase in reports of RNs being affected, and sometimes permanently disabled, by latex allergy,” testified ANA Occupational Health and Safety Specialist Susan Wilburn, MPH, RN, before the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, of the Education and Workforce Committee, on March 25. The ANA, along with OSHA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was called to testify on the long-awaited “Technical Information Bulletin: Potential for Allergy to Natural Rubber Latex Gloves and Other Latex Products,” despite the belief by advocates that the bulletin’s release was a foregone conclusion.
Wilburn went on to explain that over the past five years latex allergy has reached epidemic proportions among health care workers, noting that almost 200,000 U.S. registered nurses are allergic to latex.
“By exclusively using powder-free, low-protein, or nonlatex gloves, we can save lives and prevent health care workers and patients from developing latex allergy. The ANA and other organizations have been urging medical facilities to take these simple steps to protect health care workers and others,” Wilburn said. She added that several leading institutions—including Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and Emory University Hospital in Atlanta—have switched to powder-free gloves. Wilburn disputed the latex-glove industry’s attempts to cast doubts on the authenticity of studies proving latex’s dangers.
“If this bulletin is prevented from immediately going forward, essential and life-saving information will be denied to health care facilities and health care workers across the country,” she stated.
To read the ANA’s full testimony, go online to <http://www.nursingworld.org/gova/federal/legis/testimon/>.