Mo
[This message has been edited by LymeCaucus (edited 27 June 2005).]
[This message has been edited by LymeCaucus (edited 27 June 2005).]
TC warned us before she went off to fight for legislation to beware. TC worked on HR2877.
I'm following the lead of ILADS and they support HR2877.
Janet
I've been up on the reading regarding the two bills, and the various posting on concerns about the bills..
and I've seen no 'attacks' on the legislation or it's supporters, just discussion on which is better for Lyme patients...and some concern for the financial supporters of Senator Kelley.
That matters in politics, so is important to consider.
More important is the text of the two bills, though.
The IOM issue has also been raised...and within the text of the Smith Bill, there is a safeguard regarding the advisory panel and the direction of the research.
It also assures broad scientific research and literature (inclusing ILADS Doc's work) be included, which is a strong plus that is not included in the Kelly Bill.
I would be very concerned to know legislation was passing without assurance of LL involvement. That spells trouble.
The Smith Bill also refers to chronic
Lyme several times in the text, whuch will help negate the problems where denial of chronic Lyme's very existance comes into play.
The CALDA website explains things much better than I can.
I also read that Kelly was planning to co-sponsor the Smith Bill..
I hope, if she does, the Lyme community will also pull together to get this much needed legislation passed.
Many lives are depending on it.
Mo
[This message has been edited by Mo (edited 28 June 2005).]
fixed it. TOOOO many bills..
Check em out for yourselves, Lymos..
I'm sure this is some kind of trick
neuro-psych
testing..
Mo
It only provides for diagnostic test, surveillance and prevention.
The SMITH bill provides for all the above AND gives money for research in the TREATMENT OF CHRONIC Lyme disease.
I don't know about you, but if I am going to work to pass a bill, I would at least like it to be one that benefits me.
Call me selfish.
Ellen
------------------
This is a quote from the article posted recently. This does not mean Kelly is giving up on her bill to support Smith's bill, it means that Representatives often support each other's bills. It sounded like a very nice courtesy to me.
At this point in the scheme of things, it is important to remember that either bill is a very long way from any kind of vote and that many many changes will be made to either one before it reaches voting stage.
Ann - OH
That probably means all of us here.
THe Kelly bill only covers finding a diagnostic test, improving surveillance and prevention.
Kelly has nothing in it on treatment research and nothing on chronic Lyme.
The Smith bill on the other hand is a bill about CHRONIC Lyme disease and funds research for treatment.
Ellen
Mo