[Fax and Report to Tim Westmoreland from Martin Delaney]

2/5198 05:22:49.

Martin Delaney

Page 6 of 6

S 1 Discussion Points / Analysis / Clarification
A relatively minor second point of disagreement expressed by some parties is the amount and nature
of the "discretionary funds" created for the OAR. As written, the bill says that "up to 25%" of new
money (defined as money appropriated in excess of the "commitment base," the "new and competing
program initiatives," and the cost of inflation), will be placed under the control of the OARD for
discretionary use as defined in the Table 1 on page 2.
For: This gives the OARD the ability to respond to new information, opportunities, and crises, such as the
growth of TB.
Against: Some don't believe the OARD should control what they view as a high percentage of new moneys,
preferring to make it more available for intra and extramural programs. This view, however, fails to take into
account the fact that control of the discretionary funds by no means excludes the intra and extramural
programs, as these will still be the likely sites of any new research.
There is little question that some who both support and oppose S 1 misunderstand the current disagreement, believing instead that Dr. Fauci is attempting to block the strengthening of the OAR, or
trying to make it possible for the OARD to retain both that title and to continue to head an Institute.
This is not correct. There is no debate about those aspects of S1, or about any of the other aspects
concerning plarming, budgeting, roles, responsibilities, or committees, including the primacy of the
OARD's role in creating the budget which goes to the President and the Congress.
1. All agree that a special discretionary fund of some size should be set up and controlled by the
OARD.
2. All agree that funds for intramural and ongoing programs should be paid directly to the
institutes, centers, and divisions;
A. One side (current S 1)argues that the money for this should still be channeled through the
OAR, even though the funds transfer will be essentially automatic and unchallenged.
B. The other side (Fauci et al.) argues that moving the funds through an intermediary, the
OAR, creates bureaucratic waste and adds nothing, since the transfer if automatic and
unchallenged.
3. All agree that the budget for "new programs and initiatives" should be created jointly by the
OARD and the Institutes, with final control in the hands of the OARD.
A. One side (current Si) argues that these funds should then first be placed in the hands of
the OARD, for disbursement to the Institutes. The OARD will be required by law to
distiibute the funds as directed by the budget submitted by the OARD.
B. The other side (Fauci et al.) argues that moving the funds through the intermediary, the
OAR, creates bureaucratic waste and adds nothing, since the transfer according to the
budget is required by law.