Page 4
The Global AIDS Research and Relief Act (S 1120). Sens. Barbara Boxer and Gordon Smith introduced this bill, an expansion of last year’s effort. It urges that our foreign aid program give HIV/AIDS prevention priority in its health efforts in the Global South, and authorizes increasing appropriations by $600 million in both FY2002 and FY2003. Priority is to be given to sub-Saharan Africa, with special attention to AIDS orphans and mother-to-child transmission.
The International Infectious Diseases Control Act (S 1032). Sen. Bill Frist’s bill focuses upon the global fund. It calls for negotiations to reach agreement on the fund; sets parameters for the fund, including the composition of its board; requires that the fund provide only grants, thus preventing the accumulation of further debt; and advocates support for both prevention and treatment. The bill authorizes $200 million for FY2002 and $500 million for FY2003.
Vaccines for the New Millennium Act (HR 1504). This bill, re-introduced by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, not only seeks to leverage resources for HIV/AIDS vaccine research (among other diseases) by providing tax credits for vaccine makers. It also establishes a Lifesaving Vaccine Purchase Fund to handle purchase and distribution to the Global South.
The Export-Import Bank HIV/AIDS Medicine Access Promotion Act (HR 1690). Rep. Maxine Waters introduced this bill in May. It prohibits the X-M Bank from guaranteeing, insuring or extending credit to any company that has, in a variety of ways, challenged efforts by any nation to secure affordable medicines through compulsory licensing or parallel imports.
Concerns to raise with your Members of Congress:
These bills raise crucial issues far beyond appropriations. One issue to watch very carefully is affordable access to medicines. Several bills speak to the view that health care and AIDS treatment should not be an economic commodity, the preserve of the wealthy, yet US trade policy continues to show greater concern for the protection of intellectual property than for the lives of those suffering with AIDS.
At a minimum, the US should not retaliate against African nations that seek to use legitimate international trade provisions to secure affordable medicines.
We should, further, agree to an international bulk procurement structure obtaining drugs at the world’s best prices, generic or otherwise.
A second concern is the global fund, its nature and the sufficiency of its funding. African nations should not be merely the recipients of whatever Western nations decide they want to do.
The fund needs to honor broad-based participation, to work through culturally-sensitive structures, and to move quickly.
A third and final concern to be noted here is that HIV/AIDS responses are related to other health needs, that heath care infrastructure is related to broader development needs, and that human development is related to thoughtful and substantial commitments to poverty reduction.
In that context, US commitments to support AIDS programs should not be made at the expense of other development assistance and health concerns, but should draw upon “new” resources drawn from our undeniable wealth as a nation.
