ANSWER Activity Report for Program Year 2003-2004

The ANSWER strategy for program year 2003-2004 focused primarily on extending the group's range of Republican congressional contacts in both the House and Senate in order to secure more Republican sponsors for the legislation that would establish a national center for social work research. Other goals included 1) keeping the various educator groups (BPD, NADD, GADE, and SSWR) involved and informed about ANSWER activities , ; 2) making the ANSWER Web site more informative

and easier to use for all the constituencies, ; 3) and trying to clarify identifying all of the options for where a social work research center might be housed within the federal establishment ; and 4) supporting the N ational Institutes of Health (N IH ) in its efforts to continue its research studies which involve social work .

As the report reflects, there was a great deal of activity in all these major areas but with mixed results. The accompanying pages provide many specifics about the main activities that reflect a focused and concentrated effort on promoting the National C enter for Social Work Research Act (S 73/HR 844) .

Keeping Everyone Informed

It is very important that all of the member organizations, as well as individual social workers, be invested in the work that the ANSWER Coalition is doing. T he c oalition meeting s held in September 2003 and March 2004, both in Washington, DC, are one way that the c oalition steering committee members are kept abreast of what individual organizations have been doing related to ANSWER 's agenda. It is also an opportunity for steering committee members to visit their U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives in their Washington offices. Social workers are also kept informed through presentations conducted at various professional organization meetings. For example, an ANSWER representative spoke at the NADD, GADE, and BPD conferences this past year. (For a complete list of these meetings and presentations please refer to the end of this document.)

The ANSWER website is another useful tool for disbursing information and increasing interest in the c oalition's activities. Over the past year, NASW staff has worked to make the site more accessible and eas ier to navigate. The website is located at http://www.naswdc.org/advocacy/answer/default.asp It can also be found by going to the NASW website www.socialworkers.org The site includes information about the coalition, legislative updates and action alerts, and a large amount of information about how individual social workers and social work students can get involved in the efforts to promote social work research.

Federal Legislation

When the ANSWER steering committee members met in March 2004, a discussion ensued about ANSWER's legislative priorities. The discussion focused on the fact that securing legislation to establish a social work research center has been the primary, and almost exclusive, focus of ANSWER for the past several years. While this legislation is relevant to all social workers due to its focus on research, there are several other issues that the individual member organizations would also like to put energy towards . These issues i nclude federal student loan forgiveness for social work students and the child welfare - training program. The participants agreed to confer with their constituent groups about the potential for expanding the coalition's focus to these other topics in addition to research. If the members decide to do this, the coming program year (2004-05) would be used to assist with th e transitional process.

Due to the make-up of the U.S. Congress, it is important for bills to have bipartisan support. Therefore, the Coalition has worked hard this year to increase contacts with members of both the Republican and Democratic parties. These contacts were made through lobby days, attendance at congressional fundraisers, and party donor council meetings. The fundraisers and donor council meetings were attended by NASW 's government relations staff since the political contributions were made by NASW's political action committee. A large number of contacts with congressional Republicans in both houses occurred. Some Republican contacts were stimulated through ANSWER lobby days and others stemmed from the many congressional fundraisers and party donor councils meetings NASW government relations' staff attend that are funded by the NASW's political action committee. The Republican congressional contacts focus ed was on members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pension (HELP) and Finance Committees in the Senate and the Ways & Means and the Energy and Commerce Committees in the House.

The Coalition has been successful during the past year in obtaining bipartisan support for both the Senate and House versions of the National Center for Social Work Research Act. The Senate bill (S.73) currently has one Republican and two Democratic cosponsors. The situation in the House is a bit different because two different versions of the bill have been introduced. The first version (H.R. 844), which places the research center within the National Institutes of Health (NIH), had 43 total cosponsors (both Republicans and Democrats). I n the s pring of 2004, Rep. Rodriguez, the lead sponsor in the House, decided to reintroduce the bill with language that placed the research center in the Department of Health and Human Services, instead of a specific agency within the Department. T he final placement of the center would then be left to the Secretary of HHS' discretion. This change was made in response to the concern of some members of congress that there might be places other than NIH , such as the Centers for Disease Control, that would also be a good option for housing the research center. ANSWER representatives have been in contact with staff from both the NIH and the CDC about the potential for each of them to house the center. There has been some interest expressed by both parties, however, Congress has the actual authority to decide who will make th e final decision.

Our purpose in pursuing Senate Republicans was to secure at least one Republican co-sponsor, which occurred when Senator Olympia Snowe signed on to S 73. We worked on a number of other Republican Senators, mainly members of the HELP committee. Many expressed interest but did not want to see another research center located in the National Institutes of Health and wanted the legislation changed prior to becoming formal sponsors. We talked to numerous Democratic Senators about S 73 but did not necessarily seek formal co-sponsorship now because we wanted to bring more Republican Senators on to the bill first.

Another key issue regarding federal legislation and the promotion of social work research is the submission of committee report language. Among other things, committee reports are an opportunity for Congress to make certain requests of federal agencies. The FY0 4 Senate Labor, HHS, and Education Committee Report commended the NIH for drafting a social work research plan and encouraged them to follow-through on it. This year, ANSWER has requested that language be in cluded in the FY05 report that directs the NIH to host a trans-NIH conference that showcases social work research results relevant to health/mental health and the advance ment of social work's research agenda.

One pleasant surprise in the endeavor to have a research center bill passed has been the staff or m embers of congress who have identified various relatives who are professional social workers. They seem to have a strong sense of social work as a profession because of this . It is certainly in social work's interest, and in the professional associations' interest, to have solid relationships on both sides of the Congressional aisle, regardless of how the political winds are blowing.

With House Republican members our goal was to maintain and increase the number of Republican co-sponsors, which has always hovered around a half dozen or so. Securing Democratic house co-sponsors has been easy but paradoxically this causes the bill to look like a Democratic bill and makes potential Republican House co-sponsors reluctant to sign on to the legislation. Democratic co-sponsors have signed on to the House legislation at a ratio of 5-6 Democrats per Republican.

Securing more Republican House sponsors proved difficult . M any House Republicans also objected to placing another research center within the National Institutes of Health.

In the 2 nd Session of the current Congress (March 2004) we were able to have our lead sponsor, Representative Ciro Rodriguez, MSW, (D) (TX-29), introduce a revised version of the House B ill (HR 3877) that located the research center within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Our Senate lead sponsor, Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), did not want to re-introduce S 73. While the new House bill removes a major objection, it has also forced us back into the laborious process of getting original co-sponsors signed back on to the legislation.

The relationship building with Republican M embers of Congress takes time and is labor intensive. Neither the profession nor the professional associations have previously made the financial and human resources investments necessary to make this activity more productive. The relationships are slowly emerging but we need to sustain high levels of investment in this activity over the long haul. One pleasant surprise in this endeavor has been the Republican staff or Members who have identified various relatives who are professional social workers. They seem to have a strong sense of social work as a profession. It is certainly in social work's, and in the professional associations' interest, to have solid relationships on both side of the Congressional aisle, regardless of how the political winds are blowing.

The question of where to lodge a social work research center has been an issue from the proposed legislation's earliest days. The profession's first preference has always been the National Institutes of Health (NIH). For a variety of complicated reasons having to do with congressional perceptions of NIH, its budget, organization, and research agenda, it is unlikely that social workers can secure a center there . Other locations, most notably the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and HHS have also been considered. A meeting was held last October with local CDC staff who forwarded a proposal to host a social work research center there, but there has been no definitive response yet . HHS has always been considered a possible location and Representative Rodriguez placed the center there when he re-wrote the House legislation.

When the ANSWER steering committee met in March 2004, a discussion ensued about ANSWER's legislative priorities. The central point focused on the fact that securing legislation establishing a social work research center has been the primary, and almost exclusive, focus of ANSWER for the past several years. Given the time it takes to develop the bipartisan congressional support necessary to get the center legislation passed and other social work education legislative priorities, such as securing more generous federal student loan forgiveness and maintaining the child welfare-training program, many ANSWER steering committee members felt that a re-ordering of legislative priorities is due. All ANSWER participants agreed to confirm with their constituent groups on the question of different priorities, with the understanding that the coming program year (2004-05) would be used to assist that transitional process.

ANSWER Activities July 2003-June 2004

Accomplishments—

• Rep. Rodriguez reintroduced the National Center for Social Work Research Act (H.R. 3877) in early 2004 with language that gives the Secretary of HHS final discretion for the location of the research center
• H.R.3877 currently has 29 co-sponsors in addition to Rep. Rodriguez
• Sen. Inouye's National Center for Social Work Research Act (S.73) currently has 2 cosponsors, 1 of whom is a Republican, in addition to Sen. Inouye
• H.R.3877 currently has 29 co-sponsors in addition to Rep. Rodriguez
• Report language regarding social work research was included in the Senate Appropriations Committee Report on the FY04 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill
• Article regarding ANSWER to be included in the SSWR newsletter
• Articles were included in the NASW News about ANSWER and the National Center for Social Work Research Act
• NASW hosted two lobby days for ANSWER
• NASW co-sponsored a reception on Capitol Hill, along with IASWR, to highlight social work research and in honor of IASWR's 10 year anniversary, March 2004

Legislative Action Alerts Sent Out by NASW—

• Reintroduction of the National Center For Social Work Research Act , February
• Support the National Center for Social Work Research Act , August

Legislative Updates Sent Out by NASW—

• Dear Colleague Sent by Representative Rodriguez Regarding Introduction of H.R. 3887 , March
• “ NIH Plan for Social Work Research” Available Online , February

Dear Colleague Letters Drafted by NASW Staff for Congressional Staff—

• February 2004
• August 2003

Conferences and Meetings Attended by NASW Staff Representing ANSWER—

• University of Missouri Government Relations Department, March 2004
• SSWR, January 2004
• CDC Staff Meeting Regarding Research Center , October 2003
• NADD, October 2003
• GADE, October 2003
• BPD, October 2003

ANSWER Web Materials Maintained and Updated by NASW—

• ANSWER website, https://www.socialworkers.org/advocacy/answer/default.asp
• 291 letters and e-mails sent to members of Congress through Congress Web http://www.naswdc.org/advocacy/grassroots/congressweb.asp
• Congress Plus—maintains record of visits, letters, and phone calls to Members of Congress

ANSWER Meetings/Lobby Days Hosted by NASW—

• March 10-11, Washington , DC , 16 Congressional offices visited
• September 22-23, Washington , DC , 8 Congressional offices visited

Capitol Hill Office Visits and Fundraisers Attended by ANSWER Coalition Members and NASW Staff—

Coalition Meetings Attended by NASW Staff Representing ANSWER—

• Monthly meetings of the Coalition for the Advancement of Health Through Behavioral and Social Science Research

Social Work Educators Hosted in Washington by NASW—

• Barbara White, University of Texas —visited offices of Sen. Hutchison, Reps. Lee, Rodriguez, Towns, and Doggett
• Kim-Anne Perkins, University of Maine Presque Isle —visited offices of Sens. Collins and Snowe

Letters Sent to Congress by Educators and ANSWER Coalition Members—

• Bruce Thyer, Florida State University , October 2003—Letters sent to Sen. Nelson (D-FL) and Sen. Graham (D-FL)
• James Adams, on behalf of the Alabama Deans and Directors of Social Work Programs, October 2003—Letters sent to Sen. Shelby (R-AL), Sen. Sessions (R-AL), Rep. Rogers (R-AL), Rep. Everett (R-AL), Rep. Davis (D-AL), Rep. Cramer (D-AL), Rep. Bonner (R-AL), Rep. Bachus (R-AL), Rep. Aderholt (R-AL)
• Sandra Vaughn, on behalf of the Mississippi Social Work Deans and Directors of Social Work Programs, October, 2003—Letter sent to Sen. Lott (R-MS)
• NASW Connecticut Chapter, Aug. 2003—Letters sent to Rep. Johnson (R-CT) and Rep. Shays (R-CT)
• Bonnie Yegidis, University of Georgia , July 2003—Letters sent to Rep. Deal (R-GA) and Rep. Norwood (R-GA)