Infectious Diseases Society of America opposes House bill seeking to eliminate Prevention and Public Health Fund

A federal fund that helps state and local efforts to detect and respond to disease outbreaks, supports immunization and critical health responses is at risk of legislative elimination, according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA).

The bill that would do so–the CHAMPION Act–is currently under consideration by the U.S. House of Representatives. It would carve out 75 percent of the fund’s budget–or $10.5 billion–and divert those funds to other health sources. It would also lay the groundwork for continued reductions over the next eight years until the project’s complete elimination in 2026.

IDSA President Paul Auwaerter, along with HIV Medical Association (HIVMA) Chair Melanie Thomas, and Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS) President Paul Spearman, banded together this week to denounce the move, writing in no uncertain terms that it would compromise public health and national security alike.

The fund supports more than 12 percent of the annual finances for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“There are many examples of critical activities supported by the Fund,” the doctors wrote in a statement. “Prevention of health care-associated infections, including by antimicrobial-resistant pathogens is a top priority. Access to routinely recommended immunizations that protect Americans from the spread of serious illnesses such as measles, pertussis, and influenza is an important prevention strategy while the ability to achieve mass immunization efforts in response to outbreaks needs to remain a priority for our nation’s safety. In addition, drastically cutting the CDC funding will leave the agency ill-equipped to respond to the opioid epidemic, just recently declared a public health emergency by the President. Dramatic increases in new hepatitis A, hepatitis C, and sexually transmitted diseases would be left without sufficient attention.”

In contrast to this move, the three agencies have asked for funding to all programs in question, rather than draining one to support the others. All the latter does it pit one against the other, they said, and that supports no one.

“Draining the Public Health and Prevention Fund to support these valuable programs, however, is self-defeating and will ultimately cost more than it saves,” they said. “Sustaining a strong public health infrastructure to prevent, to monitor and to respond to disease outbreaks serves to protect the health of Americans.”