Notes From the Hill
The American Society of Hematology ( ASH ) has selected Catherine Zander , PhD , to participate in the new ASH Congressional Fellowship program . The program aims to connect hematologists to the policy-making process and educate congressional members and staff about issues that are important to hematologists and their patients .
As the first ASH Congressional Fellow , Dr . Zander will spend a year in Washington , DC , ( September 2017 to September 2018 ) working in a congressional office to contribute to health-care and hematology policy . In “ Notes From the Hill ,” a new column in ASH Clinical News , Dr . Zander will share her experiences as she works closely with elected officials to ensure hematologists ’ voices are heard in the policy-making process .
In the first edition , Dr . Zander introduces herself and shares her initial experiences as an ASH Congressional Fellow .
UP FRONT
When I walked into the Ford House Office Building on Capitol Hill that first October morning , I wasn ’ t sure what to expect .
I had spent the previous two weeks in an off-site training with my peers : 36 legislative fellows , 242 executive branch fellows , and the single judicial branch and Roger Revelle fellow in global stewardship of this year ’ s AAAS Science and Technology Policy cohort . I learned more about how the U . S . government operates in those two weeks than I had in four years as an undergraduate majoring in political science . I also learned how to be an effective ambassador for science and strategies to relay my knowledge to a larger audience , but I didn ’ t yet know where I would spend my year on the Hill or what that role would entail .
Prior to coming to D . C ., I worked in the lab of X . Long Zheng , MD , PhD , at the University of Alabama at Birmingham , where our research focused on developing novel treatments for thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura ( TTP ). I was interested in a fellowship position that focused on a topic that didn ’ t overlap with the legislative agenda of ASH , with the goal of avoiding any ethically challenging situations .
I was initially unsure what type of office I wanted to join , whether I wanted to be in the House of Representatives or the Senate , or if I wanted to be in a member ’ s office or in a committee . After interviewing with several different offices , I decided to join a committee working with several congressional members instead of a particular congressperson ’ s office , so I could work on policy , rather than the priorities of one member ’ s constituents .
It was impressed upon us in the AAAS training that one year is not enough time to accomplish significant legislative change , so we needed to adjust our expectations . What I wanted was the best possible learning experience . I was fortunate to secure a fellowship placement on the Democratic staff of the Environment Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee , which has jurisdiction over the many health policy issues related to soil , air , noise , and water contamination , as well as emergency environmental response . This means the committee provides oversight to many aspects of the U . S . Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ).
In my first month within the committee , I began reading and writing about the Toxic Substance Control Act and the EPA ’ s plan to evaluate toxic chemicals ( including asbestos and trichloroethylene ). But much of that time was consumed with the agency ’ s response to Hurricanes Harvey , Irma , and Maria . We had several hearings with EPA representatives from Texas , Florida , and Puerto Rico / the Virgin Islands on the preparations for the storm . With the intent of transparent response and government action accountability , witnesses ( including , Catherine Kennedy , RN , from National Nurses United , Julio Rhymer , executive director and chief executive officer of the Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority , and Ramón Luis Nieves , former chairman of the Senate Energy Committee , Senate of Puerto Rico ) and executive branch agency representatives to testify on the human health and environmental impacts of the storms , including the lack of power to medical facilities and potable water in Puerto Rico , the threat to the 50 medical device-manufacturing plants in Puerto Rico , and the fires at the Arkema Inc . chemical plant in Texas , as well as myriad other issues raised by the storms .
In some ways , the expertise and the depth of knowledge of the longterm committee staffers reminds me of working with a principal investigator in a
“ As scientists , we need to be more engaged in defending our work and ensuring the policies of our government are based in evidence and reason .” laboratory , but that ’ s where the similarities to academia end . One recent assignment was to write a preliminary draft of a memo regarding the “ The Mission of the U . S . Environmental Protection Agency ,” which will be EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt ’ s first time testifying on the Hill since his appointment . In academic writing there is time to ruminate on ideas and continuously revise . This is not the case in Washington . Things must be done quickly and timelines are firm ; otherwise , the information simply won ’ t reach the public .
That means getting up to speed quickly on unfamiliar issues to become comfortable enough to write about them . I ’ m adjusting to not having the time to dive in and learn about every aspect of a topic . As a scientist , I want to back up everything I say . For example , when writing about agriculture contamination of drinking water , I wanted to explain exactly what causes methemoglobinemia , and why it effects certain groups and not others , but that wasn ’ t the goal . My mentor ’ s feedback on my first letter was that I included way too much information . We need to broadcast the information and state that the consequences are bad , but not why they ’ re bad .
For many of the issues we deal with on the committee , the science is clear , but every subject today becomes politicized . There is also a great deal of perversion of science , like the appropriation and misuse of the term “ peer review ,” to give climate change – deniers equal voice in the conversation . These problems help clarify why I wanted this fellowship so much : There is no point in doing meaningful research if there is no chance of it being used in important decisions . As scientists , we need to be more engaged in defending our work and ensuring the policies of our government are based in evidence and reason .
Although there is a lot for me to learn , I am remarkably grateful that I get to be part of the committee ’ s work . The work isn ’ t always fun in today ’ s political climate , but it is terribly important . On my way to work in the morning , I walk past the Capitol Building and see tourists taking pictures , and I ’ m reminded of how lucky I am to be here . Similarly , when I ’ m listening to the senior committee staff and congressional members preparing before a hearing , I am reminded what a privilege this remarkable opportunity is . ●
Interested in Becoming the Next ASH Congressional Fellow ?
The deadline to apply for the ASH Congressional Fellowship is January 31 , 2018 . Candidates must be ASH members in good standing to be considered . For more information , visit hematology . org / congressionalfellowship .
26 ASH Clinical News January 2018