Important note: Information in this article was accurate in 2006. The state of the art may have changed since the publication date.
San Francisco Chronicle - April 26, 2006
The CARE act is overdue for renewal. Its level of general funding hasn't changed in a decade, and the Senate and the House are debating how to slice an ever-shrinking pie.
Activists, including the Southern AIDS coalition, cite the results of a report performed by the Government Accountability Office last year to make the case that AIDS patients in Southern, rural areas are underfunded. The nonpartisan investigators found that states with "eligible metropolitan areas" with high concentrations of AIDS patients can essentially double-count patients -- once for the metropolitan area and once for the statewide total of patients. Because the CARE act gives money to 51 areas -- including the San Francisco region -- as well as states, in theory states with greater population density receive more funding.
Opponents of the current funding system would like to diminish the importance of eligible metropolitan areas before renewing the CARE act. The amendment would cost California at least $20 million in funding.
Californians can't allow this to happen. First, there's no evidence that we're actually getting more funding for our AIDS patients -- the national nonprofit organization Communities Advocating Emergency AIDS Relief performed a new analysis of the CARE act this month, and when they looked at all funding factors (the government investigators only looked at two) they saw that California is actually underfunded when compared to the national average. Second, California still ranks third in the nation in its number of AIDS patients. The need here has not declined.
Here's the solution: The White House has authorized an additional $70 million in CARE money for AIDS drugs, and the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors has a proposal to direct that money into states without eligible metropolitan areas. This would allow rural states to better serve far-flung patients without jeopardizing care in California, and it's the only amendment that's fair to all.
060426
SC060410
Copyright © 2006 - San Francisco Chronicle Press. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission. Reproduction of this article (other than one copy for personal reference) must be cleared through the San Francisco Chronicle, Permissions Desk, 901 Mission Street, San Franciso, CA 94103. You may also send a fax to (415) 495-3843, or an email message to chronperm@sfgate.com. http://www.sfgate.com.
AEGiS is a 501(c)3, not-for-profit, tax-exempt, educational corporation. AEGiS is made possible through unrestricted funding from Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, Elton John AIDS Foundation, the National Library of Medicine, Pacific Life Foundation and donations from users like you.
Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 2006. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.
AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.
Copyright ©1980, 2006. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .