If there is one thing we can be sure of when it comes to a government bureaucracy falling flat on its face at a moment of crisis it should have been prepared for is how quickly said bureaucrat in charge deflects blame with the go to phrase: “if we’d have only had more money”.
On September 30 the first case of Ebola diagnosed within the borders of the United States is announced by government officials and on October 8th, the patient, Thomas Eric Duncan dies.
Two days later the head of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins, tells Huffington Post’s Sam Stein: “NIH has been working on Ebola vaccines since 2001. It’s not like we suddenly woke up and thought, ‘Oh my gosh, we should have something ready here,'”…..”Frankly, if we had not gone through our 10-year slide in research support, we probably would have had a vaccine in time for this that would’ve gone through clinical trials and would have been ready.” Collins went on to claim that Ebola therapeutics also “were on a slower track than would’ve been ideal, or that would have happened if we had been on a stable research support trajectory.”
Those words may ring true in the halls that Collins roams throughout his days, but when it comes to factual truth, they were more than just slightly off the mark.
Needless to say, they worked their way into newscasts and headlines faster than Al Gore can shout “climate change” at the latest low pressure trough.
And less than 24 hours after Stein’s post, reports surfaced of a new ad by liberal PAC Agenda Project Action Fund titled “Republican Cuts Kill”. It was brilliantly edited with hazmat suits, body bags, and Republicans calling for spending cuts.
And it was also blatantly false.
Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler researched the accusations and concluded that based upon the actual facts, such claims were “absurd” and deserved a “Four Pinocchio’s” (Whopper) rating.
What you won’t hear from Collins and crew is of the significant funding increases the NIH received during the early 2000’s under President Bush, or how in 2013 and 2014 it was Congress that increased the CDC’s budget by tens of millions of dollars overruling Obama White House proposed budget cuts, and you certainly won’t hear of the millions upon millions upon millions of dollars awarded in grants so far away from these agencies core mission that you need the Hubble telescope to find them.
Elizabeth Harrington of the FreeBeacon.com compiled a partial list of NIH spending that tallied over $39 million in NIH “studies” ranging from “why lesbians are obese…encouraging old people to join choirs…why gay men get syphilis in Peru…developing origami condoms” and numerous Facebook and Twitter campaigns for varying issues and maladies. Over $50 grand was given away to study, of all things, sighs.
Investor’s Business Daily notes that the CDC spent over $100 million on a new visitor center, $10 million for furniture at its swanky new headquarters and somehow thought that dropping almost $2 million to advise Hollywood on medical plots was a good use of taxpayer funds.
The left so desperately claims that in order to have better lives we must have better government and that the only way to have better government is bigger government.
Yet the NIH/CDC spending absurdities expose once again the fallacy of such claims.
Bigger government isn’t better government; it’s just more wasteful, more confiscatory government.
If the CDC really wanted to help, it would give itself a grant and study the detrimental health effects of a morbidly obese government gorging itself on its citizenry. Just sayin.
Publisher’s Note: An edited version of this column first appeared in the October 22nd print edition of the Joplin Globe.