Diet Plan For A BLOATED Government (Retirement Homes for Chimps)

PortlandPressHerald ^ | Sunday, July 20, 2003 | SCOTT K. FISH

[fight_truth_decay]

My opinion of the current political situation in Washington, D.C.? There are pluses. The war on terrorism is generally going well. The Bush tax cut package. The return of common sense and sound science to environmental issues.

Still, the federal government keeps growing in size and reach. Count me among those who thought, with Republicans controlling both Congress and the White House, the GOP would grab the reins of runaway government growth and spending and yell, "Whoa." Cato Institute's Ed Crane tells Human Events that at this time in President Reagan's first term, "the total increase in government spending was 4 percent total for three years; today, the increase in spending is 30 percent for three years."

Another yardstick: Cost of Government Day is the date of the calendar year when the average American worker has earned enough gross income to pay off his or her share of spending and regulatory burdens imposed by federal, state and local government. This year, that date is July 11th - four and a half days later than last year and 17 days later than in 2000.

The next time someone asks, "Is the GOP Embracing 'Big Government'?" What's my answer? I didn't join the Republican Party to help Americans become less independent and more dependent upon government.

Our nation is at a crossroads. How long can government take more of our earnings before we reach a breaking point? How much will we allow government to micromanage our lives before we say, "Enough!"

I remain optimistic about America's future, and I still have hope that the Republican Party will wake up.

To that end, I offer here two solutions to America's "Crisis of Government Obesity," one short-term and one long-term.

First, I want elected officials to stop their lazy, damaging fallback on tax increases as their answer to every alleged public problem. Especially the trivial and stupid problems. Does the federal government really need to use our money to fund retirement homes for chimpanzees? To back a loan for someone to buy a bed-and-breakfast in Bar Harbor? To pay for a Bangor motel to paint its interior and landscape its exterior?

[fight_truth_decay]

Does the federal government really need to use our money to fund retirement homes for chimpanzees?

In the late 90's, government sponsored scientists were faced with an unwanted "colony" of research animals including approximately 1700 chimpanzees,for example, used in the research on AIDS; but testing disappointed scientists, as AIDS does not seem to take to chimpanzees. In the past, lab animals had been euthanized. In a landmark decision, an NIH study panel ruled out the use of euthanasia, arguing that "the similarity of chimpanzees to humans distinguishes them in substantial ways from other laboratory animals and implies a moral responsibility for long-term care."(Although,NIH endorsed continued biomedical research on the animals.)

Long-term care of the chimps costs the NIH (National Institute of Health) $10 million (early figures) a year. In 1999 a 'volunteer organization' had set up a retirement home, "Chimp Haven", in Georgia offering acres of oak and pine forests and vistas that include ponds, streams and fields of wildflowers.

June 14, 2000 Legislation for S. 2725, the CHIMP bill, was introduced in the Senate by Senators Robert Smith (R-NH) and Richard Durbin (D-IL).

On December 20, 2000 President Clinton signs the CHIMP Act into public law (P.L. 106-551).

January 10, 2002 President Bush signs H.R. 3061 into public law, including $5 million towards the construction of the national sanctuary system.

September 30, 2002 NIH announces the award of a contract to Chimp Haven for the establishment and operation of a chimpanzee sanctuary, as mandated by the CHIMP Act.