DeLauro Opening Statement at Ebola Appropriations Hearing

WASHINGTON, DC— Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), senior Democrat on the Labor-Health and Human Services-Education Appropriations Subcommittee, made the following opening statement at that subcommittee’s hearing today on the government’s ability to respond to the Ebola outbreak. The following remarks are as prepared for delivery:

“Let me start by thanking our witnesses, both for being here this morning and for their efforts to combat Ebola. At a time when ill-informed pundits and policymakers were calling for quarantines and travel bans, your agencies provided expert advice and helped to craft a measured, science-based response that is proving effective and saving lives. I particularly want to recognize the staff who have deployed to West Africa. They responded to this human tragedy by going directly to its source. As Dr. Frieden has noted, some travelled by jeep, by canoe, or even on foot, to reach the remotest regions of West Africa. These brave individuals put themselves in harm’s way to keep us safe, and they deserve our deepest gratitude.

“Domestically, however, our response has not been perfect – as two of the nurses who treated the first Ebola patient became infected with the disease. Fortunately, they received world-class treatment and are healthy today. Our public health leaders deserve credit for learning from early mistakes and moving quickly to strengthen infection control protocols across the country.

“At the same time, as I’ve said on many occasions, there is no doubt that ongoing budget cuts in recent years have damaged our ability to respond to public health threats. As our witnesses can attest, NIH, CDC, and ASPR have all suffered substantial real-terms cuts over the last five years. When members of this Committee visited the National Institutes of Health in January, we met Dr. Nancy Sullivan, who leads a team that has been working on vaccines for Ebola and similar viruses. Dr. Sullivan first published her promising work in 2000. And yet, it took a decade-and-a-half – and the worst Ebola outbreak in history – to move forward with a clinical trial.

“Why did it take so long? One reason is that over the past five years, Congress has underfunded NIAID’s budget for biodefense and emerging infectious diseases by more than a quarter-billion dollars, in comparison to NIAID’s budget requests in those years. Nobody knows how a clinical trial will turn out. If we did, we would not need it. But there is a reasonable chance that if Congress had fully funded NIH over the past five years, we could have had a vaccine in time to respond to this Ebola outbreak.

“So yes, it is true that Congress eventually provided $5.4 billion in emergency funding to respond to the Ebola outbreak. But simply responding to crises after they arise is not good enough – we must do all we can to prevent outbreaks and other public health emergencies from happening in the first place. And that requires consistent annual funding to support scientific research, as well as prevention, detection, and emergency response programs. These are core government functions. When we cut funding for these activities, we jeopardize our nation’s security no less than when we cut funding for the military.

“That is why I support the President’s proposal to eliminate the harmful policy of sequestration and boost investment in these critical areas. The President’s budget requests additional funds for NIH, CDC, ASPR, and BARDA. It includes investment in research to develop a universal flu vaccine and to combat antibiotic resistant superbugs. It boosts funding to purchase medical countermeasures for the Strategic National Stockpile, as well as to expand the Global Health Security Initiative. The President’s budget also proposes $110 million for a new Public Health Emergency Response Initiative to give HHS the flexibility to respond quickly to a public health crisis – either domestically or internationally. I strongly support that idea. Other components of the federal government have flexible funds available to fight threats such as forest fires and hurricanes. We should do the same for public health emergencies.

“But $110 million is not nearly enough. For comparison, the emergency funding we provided for Ebola in the 2015 omnibus is nearly fifty times that amount. I introduced a bill in the last Congress to provide HHS with a similar flexible fund worth $5 billion. That is the order of magnitude we should be considering.

“In the meantime, it is important for Members of this subcommittee to understand how HHS is using its emergency funds. Congress provided those funds for two reasons: first, to respond immediately to the Ebola crisis; and second, to better fortify the country against future threats.
I expect our witnesses to report on the progress that has been made to eliminate Ebola at its source in West Africa, and to discuss the initial results of our investments in vaccines and therapeutics to prevent and treat this horrific disease.

“I also expect today’s witnesses to outline our progress in equipping the nation’s hospitals and public health professionals with the tools to prevent, detect, and respond to a future outbreak.
That includes the establishment of treatment sites across the country with the capacity to handle the world’s most deadly infectious diseases. The next public health emergency will probably not be another Ebola outbreak. It could be another naturally-occurring pathogen, like Middle East Respiratory Syndrome or pandemic flu. Or – God forbid – it could be a deliberate attack. Either way, if any lasting good is to come from the Ebola outbreak, we must be sure we are learning lessons that will help us deal with future threats before they become crises.

“Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all our witnesses. I look forward to the discussion.”


###