My extern-mate Anita has dutifully attended the blog until now and I am eternally grateful. Thank you, Anita! Rather than revisit material already covered, I thought it would be more meaningful to share some recurring themes that I’ve identified during our adventures in the nation’s capitol.
- It’s really difficult to exact change in Washington. Many people want to laud this reality as testament to our elaborate system of checks and balances, but I would argue that when Congress grinds to a screeching halt (or worse, when both parties begin to subvert each other), our government ceases to satisfy its core function. Congressional efficiency historically ebbs and flows, but we are at an all-time low: the 113th Congress was the least productive in recent history, passing a mere 3% of proposed legislation (a far cry from the 6-7% average over the last 65 years). Although the concept of bipartisanship appears universally accepted, concrete examples of “reaching across the aisle” seem few and far between. Consider the House Republican’s letter to Iranian ayatollahs or President Obama’s executive order regarding amnesty – these are not actions indicative of a government that hopes to work together to exact meaningful change. How did we get here? Surely that topic is hotly debated, but I think it boils down to a period of economic recession and an inflammatory, omnipresent media. In this kind of environment, even a Republican like Mitch McConnell (R-TN), who has dutifully towed the party line for over 30 years, can be condemned by Tea Partyists for “waffling” under pressure from the President, the economy, and the entire American public during the economic shutdown last year.
- While the Dow Jones Industrial Average climbs toward historic highs and Janet Yellen is training Congress to prepare for rate hikes, the average American still feels like we are in an economic recession. Financial resources are limited and the government continues to argue over the best way to allocate diminishing funds. When resources are scarce, strategic and targeted spending becomes even more important. Unfortunately, the opposite is true in the current political landscape. Rather than anticipate problems and safeguard against them, the legislation that passes is “often reactionary and over-reaching” (in the words of Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI). At the Blue Ribbon Study Panel on Biodefense, Dr. Julie Gerberding (former director of the CDC, now with Merck) echoed these sentiments. She emphasized the need to invest in preventive programs aimed at curtailing major threats to our national security, rather than simply react when an affront occurs. Dr. Gerberding described the U.S. government’s collective, strong and unified response to the Ebola outbreak as an example of when all parties worked together harmoniously, but argued that the outbreak itself may have been avoided with better disease monitoring programs. (Notably, Dr. Gerberding also highlighted agroterrorism as a threat to national security that warrants as much attention as biomedical warfare aimed at human populations.)
- As an Economics major at the University of Virginia, I remember studying John Williamson’s “Washington Consensus,” a set of ten, neatly devised economic policies that could resolve insolvency and economic upheaval in developing countries. Long story short, these “one-size-fits-all” policies did not work as expected and their efficacy is still hotly contested today. That lesson seems to have hit home with the policymakers we’ve met these past weeks. At the Farm Foundation Forum, Stephan Polasky (Professor of Ecological and Environmental Economics, Univ. of Minnesota) and Jerry Flint (VP, Dupont Pioneer) underscored the importance of constructing relief programs that incorporate the unique sociocultural customs of each targeted demographic. In particular, Flint emphasized the importance of articulating the benefits of GMOs to societies that are reticent to accept them (likely due to the varied and widespread misconceptions that surround the acronym). Suffice to say, a panacea does not exist and there is no “quick fix” to universally address the issues facing our society or those of our world neighbors. Rather, in an atmosphere where each dollar of discretionary spending is meaningful, outlays should be tailored and incorporate the specific needs of those they are intended to benefit.
- It’s really difficult to exact change in Washington. (Have I said that already?). Acknowledging that our profession consists predominantly of Type A personalities, I find myself asking a lot of veterinarians around the Hill: “how do you reconcile your inherent drive for progress with the barriers you face every day?” The response from people like Gina Luke (Associate Director, AVMA-GRD), Gerald Rushin (Veterinary Medical Officer, USDA-APHIS Animal Care), Michelle Colby (Agriculture Defense Branch Chief, DHS) and others is that when you genuinely believe in the positive change for which you are campaigning, fatigue is not a factor. In fact, said Kevin Cain at the AAVMC: when the bill you’ve poured your heart and soul into finally passes, it makes the victory that much sweeter.
Acknowledging what I’ve written above, I often find myself thinking ‘I probably don’t want your job, but I sure am happy there’s someone like you here doing it.’ No truer words have been written. If nothing else, this experience has taught me that there is a legion of capable, dedicated, and altruistic people undertaking very challenging and sometimes thankless work on behalf of our profession. Regardless of where a veterinarian lies along the political spectrum, we should all be thankful for the sacrifices these advocates make for the betterment of our profession every day.
On 17 March, key members of the United States Animal Health Association (USAHA) joined AVMA-GRD leadership to discuss issues and priorities pertinent to appropriations season in Washington, D.C.
When meeting with the Animal Agriculture Coalition, hot topics included the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Enhancement Act (VMLRPEA), support for the National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN), and the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS).
VMLRPEA would remove the steep 39% withholding tax associated with the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program, an initiative that places highly qualified veterinarians in rural communities to provide much needed veterinary care to underserved areas. Since 2003, this program has placed over 280 veterinarians in areas that would otherwise go without veterinary services; had the 39% tax not been withheld, an additional 100 veterinarians (and communities) would have been benefited from the program.
NAHLN is part of a nationwide effort to track and address animal disease outbreaks. The NAHLN brings together numerous organizations and laboratories strategically located throughout the United States to more efficiently and expediently respond to disease threats. Unfortunately, the President’s budget did not provide any funding for this strategic initiative.
What the President did prioritize was a massive $1+ billion budget across government agencies to address the breadth and impact of antibiotic resistance. While members of today’s meetings were supportive of efforts to combat and prevent antibiotic resistance, there was concern that the magnitude of this outlay necessarily diminished funding for other important projects (such as the NAHLN).
We had a very full day Thursday. We started out by attending the first panel of the Blue Ribbon Study Panel on Biodefense: Surveillance and Detection. The study panel included members such as Tom Ridge, Kenneth Wanstein, Jim Greenwood, Donna Shalala, and Joseph Lieberman. Their objective was to gather information from qualified members of the intellectual community to put together some long- and short-term recommendations for Congress regarding biosecurity. The event started with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) addressing the panel on his perspective. He stated that he thought the risk bioterrorism poses is a greater threat than even cyberterrorism because of the immediate and severe consequences as a result of each and every attack. He proposes that we increase our sense of urgency because of the increased ease of access to materials and methods to build bioweapons. He also encouraged them to ask Congress not only to prepare themselves for the possibility of physical damage an attack could result in, but also the psychological damage. He talked in length about the challenges of addressing biosecurity as a topic, including the fact that the issue is touched on by so many different committees in Congress that one, single unanimous decision or plan will be challenging to form.
Next, we heard from the panel on The Biosurveillance and Detection Landscape. The panel including Dr. Julie Gerberding (Executive Vice President for Strategic Communications, Global Public Policy and Population Health, Merck; former Director of CDC), Dr. Julie Fischer (Associate Research Professor, Department of Health Policy, George Washington University), and Dr. Norm Kahn (Consultant, Counter-BIO LCC; former Director, Intelligence Community Counter-Biological Weapons Program). They talked about the need to put into place a plan that included funding to national laboratories responsible for surveillance and preventative research consistently, and not just ramping them up when there is an outbreak or crisis. The surveillance would need to not only need to be consistent but also in context with the surrounding animal, social, and cultural environment.
An interesting discussion that arouse was that of the ‘lone wolf,’ an individual who initiates an attack without support from a group. The main concept was the degree in which intent of action and ability meet to create the greatest threat. Dr. Kahn spoke about the need to create a culture of moral obligation in students and researchers in the field of biology to encourage the ‘bystander’ to be more willing to alert authority to a threat created by one single individual.
The part of the discussion that piqued my interest the most as a future member of the research community was the panel encouraging the increase in funding to ‘high risk’ research and not just ‘sure result’ research. While there will be many failures along the way, this is one of the only ways to make significant progress and major discoveries.
At the very end of the discussion they noted that biosurveillance needs to account for the agricultural industry as well as for human pathogens because an attack/outbreak in either crops or animal agriculture would be devastating to the industry and ultimately the national economy. The lunch keynote speaker was going to further elaborate on the human-animal interface, however due to our very full schedule we were not able to attend. I am hopeful however that they will not disregard issues such as high pathogenic avian influenza, just because it is not infectious to humans.
This morning we walked over to the National Press building for a Farm Foundation Forum on Nexus of Technology, Agricultural Productivity, and the Environment. We had the pleasure to hear from a panel of speakers that included Derek Byerlee (an economist and independent agriculture researcher), Dr. Jerry Flint (Vice President, Industry Affairs and Regulatory at DuPont Pioneer) , and Stephan Polasky (Regents Professor and the Felser-Lampert Professor of Ecological and Environmental Economics at the University of Minnesota). While all three members had slightly different interest and jobs, there were a few key things that resonated among all of them. They all spoke on the issue of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in agriculture and the importance of them in today’s world and the future. While GMOs have been bashed in the media for being ‘unhealthy’ or ‘unnatural’, these three distinguished researchers were indicating that the advancements of biotechnology (GMOs) has lead to yield intensification, meaning each acre of land and drop of water produce more crops, ultimately being one of the biggest advancements in environmental conservation in agriculture. They all agreed that there is absolute need to increase product yield to meet the increasing needs of the steeply growing world population. To do so without any use of biotechnology would be unsustainable, even if we used every bit of arable land, essentially destroying the biodiversity and environment. One of the audience members asked if it is so clear that the use of biotechnology is so key to making crops more efficient, decreasing pesticide use, preserving natural land, and feeding the growing population why are consumers in the US so against them? It seems as a society we should try to promote agriculture and research that helps advance environmental conservation, decreases pesticide use, increase small farmer productivity and sustainability, and meet the increasing food demand. Instead of intentionally eating items labeled ‘organic’ or ‘natural’, maybe we should be selecting our food from farmers that use biotechnology for better land management, decreased carbon output, and increase water quality.
If you are interested in learning more about the growing population, production yield demands, and environmental impact here are some good resources to check out:
Yesterday, we took the green line out to Riverdale, MD for a full day at the USDA APHIS facility. Dr. Gary Egrie, USDA-APHIS Farm Animal Welfare Coordinator, met with us at the beginning of the day to go over the history, structure of USDA, and purview of the organization. He gave us an overview of his job at the USDA and left us with the take away message that working in D.C. is all about getting along with people and money. He handed us off to Dr. Dean Goeldner who had an intriguing life history of doing many different jobs before working for USDA, including being a former AVMA GRD fellow. Next, we met with Dr. Silvia Kreindel, USDA Senior Staff Veterinarian and Emergency Prevention Service Expert, who gave us insight to her job evaluating foreign countries’ disease status for importable diseases and commodities. She has traveled to many different countries to evaluate their disease status and help determine if trade should be resumed and to what extent. Then we met with Dr. Langston Hull, USDA Staff Veterinary Officer in the National Center for Import and Exports, who told us about the challenges of imports and having to enforce regulations to protect our nation from foreign animal diseases. Next on the list was Dr. Darrel Styles, USDA Sr. Veterinary Officer, who has done lots of research in virology and currently works to organize the development new vaccines. Then we met with Dr. Rory Carolan, Veterinarian of Surveillance Preparedness and Response Service (SPRS), who had a facinating career that included a 20+ year career in equine medicine followed by a career in the Army Veterinary Corps and USDA. The last meeting was with Dr. Gerald Rushin, USDA – APHIS Veterinarian in Animal Care, the devision responsible for oversight of research, zoos, and animal welfare. He previously worked for the AVMA GRD as an Administrative Director and told us about his experience lobbying. The message that was consistent throughout the day was that there were many opportunities for us in the public sector as well as elsewhere, we just needed to keep our eyes open for them in our futures. It was a long day, but well worth it!
Being an extern is not just attending meetings and participating in the political process, it is also about experiencing Washington, D.C. The city is a serious package deal with endless amounts of history, museums, monuments, and restaurants to visit. The National Mall is lined with Smithsonian Institute Museums (free entrance) with the Capitol at one end and the Washington and Lincoln Memorials at the other. It seems like a month would be a long time to be here, but in reality it would take longer than that to even explore all the marvels of just the National Mall. The Smithsonian Institute in comprised of 19 museums, the National Zoo, and nine research facilities spread throughout the capitol. This alone provides endless opportunities for out of the office entertainment.
On Saturday, I met up with my classmate from Purdue, Catie Belding, for an outing on the National Mall. We spent most of our day in the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History seeing giant squids and flashy gems.
I finished off the day meeting up with some of my University of Arizona alumni friends and getting the full Washington, D.C. experience.
Sunday, I adventured out on my own, enjoying the 50 degree weather, to the National Archives. There are no pictures allowed inside to preserve the historic documents it contains, so you will just have to trust me when I tell you the exhibits are fabulously designed. As a special treat there was a new special, limited time exhibit ‘Spirited Republic, alcohol in American History.’ I got an up close look at important documents such as the Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. This is an experience I recommend for anyone visiting Washington, D.C.
After having a day ‘off’ we made the trek back into the office. The 30 minute walk from my temporary home turned into an hour long expedition, since it seems less than half of D.C. residents own a snow shovel and the heavy traffic turned the snow into sheets of ice. As I got closer to Dupont Circle, I noticed that many of the row houses had plaques labeling them as embassies of foreign countries, many proudly flying their flags. Once we made it into the office, we quickly headed out the door to meet with Dr. Andy McCabe, Executive Director of the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC). Over lunch we discussed our future plans, current issues facing the veterinary field, and the role and mission of the AAVMC. In addition, Mike and I received some fabulous advice for our future careers. We headed back to the office where we met with Kevin Cain, AAVMC Director of Government Affairs, and discussed the AAVMC legislative agenda. The following week (week of March 9th) is the Annual AAVMC Conference and Iverson Bell Symposium and the whole office was preparing. On Thursday March 12th, the deans in attendance will be participating in Hill meetings with their respective congressmen. During our meeting we graciously accepted an invitation to the AAVMC President’s Reception the following Friday.
We then made our way back to the office for a conference call from Lt. Col. Margery Hanfelt. Lt. Col. Hanfelt told us about her career path which included a transition from rural food animal veterinarian to a career in the military. She had a significant amount of positive advice to offer both Mike, currently a lieutenant in the Veterinary Corps, and me, a future Laboratory Animal Medicine resident. Speaking with Lt. Col. Hanfelt was very inspiring because she was a woman veterinarian in food animal medicine during a time when it was almost solely dominated by men. She discussed challenges she faced, including often being asked when the ‘real’ veterinarian was arriving. Her methods of handling such circumstances were graceful and respectful, leading to a great amount of success in an environment that can be hostile. While the current climate for women in veterinary medicine is nothing compared to what it was then, there are still many times I find myself in similar situations and am very appreciative of advice from a woman with so much experience and success.
After the whirlwind of the AVMA Student Legislative Fly-In, we were able to finally get around to orientation. After a brisk walk to Dupont Circle I arrived at the AVMA GRD building for the first time during my externship. My orientation began with being handed a 25-page document listed almost all the veterinarians in Washington and the surrounding area. While I knew that there were many veterinarians in the federal government and agencies, I had no idea that DVMs here were so numerous. As a future member of the Laboratory Animal Medicine community, I was pleased to find that a large number of them were American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine (ACLAM) Diplomats. We were introduced to the GRD staff and then instructed that the month was ours to make of it what we wanted. Mike and I decided we were most interested in meeting as many veterinarians as possible. We are both interested in educating ourselves about all the facets of veterinary medicine to help educate others as well as explore our future options.
I am quickly finding out that ‘typical’ is not something that is ever used to describe a day in D.C. Orientation was followed by meeting all the AVMA GRD staffs’ pets for their staff and their pets photo shoot. And in the non-typical fashion, the next day was declared a snow day. While I have spent almost 4 years living in Lafayette, IN this was my very first snow day. I took the opportunity to catch up on a little sleep and then started sending out emails to the contacts on the list that was given to me during orientation. In the typical D.C. fashion, I was receiving replies to my emails minutes after sending them, even though it was a snow day and everything in D.C. was ‘closed’. Replies ranged from those of support, encouragement, and excitement to meet with us to ‘away from the office’ messages (the best being ‘I am currently in Sierra Leone as a part of the Ebola DART). Our schedules began filling with meetings and events, including a full day trip to USDA APHIS Monday.
As the first externs of the 114th Congress it was appropriate that we started the externship off with the 2015 AVMA Legislative Student Fly-In. I had the pleasure of attending the 2013 Student Fly-in and it was during that experience that I was first introduced to the idea of being an active participant in the political and decided to apply for the externship. This time when the GRD staff asked who follows AVMA-CAN and advocates for others to write their congressmen, I proudly raised my hand. Two fellow Purdue students from the class of 2017, Kyle Hohu and Clayton Carr, as well as Katrina Van Zant from Ross University School of Veterinary Medicine joined my at the fly-in to lobby on behalf of the state of Indiana. During the first day of the fly-in we were introduced to the AVMA GRD staff, current and past AVMA GRD fellows, and briefed on the legislative topics we would be speaking to our representatives about as well as a tutorial on legislative meetings.
The next day we were escorted via the metro to the states capitol for a full day of lobbying. My Indiana group had a full schedule starting with a staffer meeting at Senator Joe Donnelly’s office, and subsequent visits to Representative Luke Messer, Senator Dan Coats, Representative Todd Rokita, and finishing up with an in person meeting with Representative Todd Young. The agenda including asking the senators to co-sponsor the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program Enhancement Act, educating them on issues that face veterinary students affected by the Higher Education Act Reauthorization, and asking members of the House to join the Veterinary Medicine Caucus. The task of asking for money appropriation during a time of daunting debt and unforgiving budget is not an easy one, however there is nothing more thrilling than getting the attention of a staffer or Congressman who walked in determined to not talk about money. My group of Indiana residents handled this task with much poise and success. We ended our very full day with a delicious celebratory feast at Burger Tap and Shake near Dupont Circle.
The 7th annual AVMA Legislative Fly-In will take place March 1-3, 2015, in Washington, D.C. The workshop is designed to introduce veterinary students to the legislative process and to educate students and members of Congress on public policy issues facing the veterinary profession.
During the two-day meeting this upcoming spring, staff from AVMA’s Governmental Relations Division (GRD) will provide briefings on current issues facing the veterinary medical profession on Capitol Hill. Attendees will also learn about how lobbying works, the role advocates play in the federal government and the important role veterinarians can play in shaping public policy.
The 2014 fly-in brought 100 veterinary students and veterinarians from across the country to the nation’s capital to participate in the event. Read about last year’s fly-in here.
To find out information about the 2015 Fly-in, check out the event information packet or contact your school’s SAVMA Delegates.