HONORARY CHAIRMAN
HONORABLE FLUO i RICHARDSON

CHATRMIAN

MIC HLARL FE OPAAKPY, MED

VICE CEONTRMEDS
THEODORE COOPER, MD
DAMES PHLOEM?

MERSIN MOSER. SEED

bOTRECTOR

 

OR REL eb FICE

BALE LD MELO

 

SPONSORS
RADCH ABE RNATHS

WALOPOAED ALI IPE MANS St
HHCHCOLAS Gy ALE AGEN STE?
sHARLES 1 BERSTAS DDS
PIE NEY BERS ALE

Sis MDT LAME Met LAER Tn

ENTER PRESEOM MEDD SEP EE

 

TERIOR ARENSON

 

BERTRAM OS TVRONN SET?
PADEMAS HE CARY. SED?
FRIOT CORDIAY, M1.
PALL EB CORNELY StL?

MENRRIET POLE NEAN, MED

RARE ENGELMAN, M.D

IONATTEAN EO FIELDENG, M.D. MPH
PRANK A FINNERTY, JR. MD
EMERSON POXOTE

MES A GRANT FORD CH

TOL GLAS FRASER

PE SVARDD D) PREIS SODS

MOOLCIMIOIN CARES.
HON EORATALE TOORIN WO GARDNER
BAS MW GaP ReORD TR MTD
LEONARD EL CH TUENSON

ME Ge ET NSOOHIS Tt

MARTON OS HUE KON MSN
KOREN GON ROLE OIMIAN TR

IOAN HORAN

BAC HIAMEDD ETE REE YS MLD

Mi)

 

HAKOOLIO Ds PISRONTTZ, MD

i SLL TORINSOON

MRS LYNDON BR Tt HENSON
CON b TORDIAS. TR

  
 

SORNIAN KAPLAN SOU!
“MATHAN SOREING MDD

ORAL RRISHAN MEL

De TAKES
VINCENT LEARSON
SORBET P PRY MCT

 

oN fabt

 

SMEAN ME!

MINE CN LA OHILEN, MoL2 0 MER HE
WALPER | MoONERNEY

NUEANDEY FOMALAMEB) D0 d0S

Pt. MARSELALL

MORTON PE MAXWELL. ML}

PAT. MAYER. Pra

HOM ARDY MO MEPZRENBALM, FSC
HORN EL MOWER. WE MAY. DN
LENDS PAL DING, Pui)
HONORABLE PAUL G
ISADORE ROSENEBRLDY
RECELARDO SN Ross. ALL)
HOWARED RUSK. MEL
AR TTHOR NACKTE R. St Ls
WoOMCEATE SMEDH SED
FORE MIAED ST AMEE MOT?
RANK STANTON

Pane DL OSTPUINFERE? M1

ROGERS
Midd

bON | WARSEEAM ADT:

STUD EAML BE WHIETT

KOSEPTE WELBER, MLDY

PEAVARID BENNETT SILLIAMS. SC)
FONARD? WOODCOCK

TANT NG: s. RIGS. Mla

LESTER MY NPOP RALAN

FRNSE DMO NEOR RATED

NEL N YU MD

Ooerabodens Are Tax Dedbenhic

|
|
|

 

CITIZENS FOR PEE TREATMENT OF HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE, INC,
Executive Otfice: HOT seventeenth) street, NAN, Suite 008, Washington, 1G. 20086 (202) 296 4 4S5
Meld Office: [a0 Connecticut ave, NAW Suite G04, Washington, 2.0. 20046 (202) 296 7747

 

July 27, 1983
Mr. Tony Fiskett CA CD
Director of Public Relations Se A,
Merck, Sharp and Dohme ae
West Point, Pennsylvania 19486

Dear Tony:

With reference to our phone conversations last
week, I asked Gerry Wilson to draw up the 12-month pro-
posed operating budget for the National Committee to
Prevent Glaucoma. I did this because he has had ex-
perience in handling the $350,000 yearly budget he has
from Smith Kline and French for the Field Office. I
have gone over the budget very carefully and find that
if anything, it is on the tight side.

Let me
budget. The
On the phone

make a couple of general observations on the
key one involves the Associate Director.

you mentioned a salary of $50,000 for this
person, with Bob Hurt suggesting $75,000. I don't even
make the latter figure. As Wilson points out in his

memo to me, both Gerry and I are thinking of a junior
person for this job. If it were possible, I would really
recruit a parttime person for this job. What_in hell is
he going to be doing five days a week? As I conceive of
it, I will be doing the major planning and contact and
practically all of the writing. I don't care how much

you pay a guy in this town, you just can't seem to buy
anyone who can write. At one time, we had an Inner City
Project for Hypertension, generously financed by Smith
Kline. We hired a University of Pennsylvania graduate
social worker, who had done a lot of work with a community:
coalition connected with the University of Pennsylvania
Medical School while he was employed. He was highly
recommended by Fred Foard. He talked a great game but

he couldn't write worth a damn. His newsletters were
impossible; I had to rewrite all of them. Then we hired

a psychologist from Johns Hopkins who was running a
community hypertension project in Baltimore. His resume
was terrific and we paid him $50,000. He couldn't write
worth a damn, and we gave up on him after two years. So
there you have a five-year history of an Inner City Project
which had a terrific goal - to start community coalitions
in the big urban areas which would then push for monies to
finance hypertension detection and control. At the present
time, the Inner City Project is in limbo because Fred Foard
and SKF don't want to give up on it. Why? Because it

For The Prevention of Heart Disease, Stroke and Kidney Failure
Mr. Tony Fiskett
July 27, 1983
Page 2

had a good deal of success in New York, Cleveland, Memphis,
Detroit, etc. But the success was not due to the Inner City
Project Director - practically everything that was achieved was
done through Gorman and Wilson going into the communities and
ferreting out the heavy hitters.

The Wilson budget also includes $16,200 for an office for
the Associate Director. He points out in the text of his memo to
me that we pursue the possibility of housing the Associate Director
as close to his office as possible to take advantage of shared
clerical services, perhaps even shared office space, equipment,
etc. This makes a lot of sense. There is some office space open
next to his office, but the guy who has it is on vacation. He
thinks that he may work out a deal to get a piece of the office
at considerably less than $16,200, which Bill Ogden wants for his
Space. Besides, the Ogden office is ridiculously large for someone
who is carrying on a junior function.

Other aspects of the Wilson budget are equally tight. For
example, he has a consultant figure of $6,000. What we mean by
a consultant is a local lobbyist who can get state and local monies
for glaucoma and has connections at the local level with state
legislators, city and county officials, etc. Under the SmithKline
budget, we picked up state lobbyists in New York, New Jersey and
Pennsylvania. In each case, these lobbyists were professionals who
had other accounts and were not cheap to hire. In New York State,
we got someone parttime for $20,000, but through his work and
visits by myself and Wilson to Albany, we got one million dollars
for hypertension this year. That is a miracle ina tight budget
year like this one. We achieved a similar success in New Jersey
on the authorizing legislation by the gal we hired - a real pro who
helped us tremendously in getting a model hypertension bill mandating
hypertension screening through the State Conference on Model Laws ~
recently. I have been working on this for two years, but this gal
was able to add the extra shove to get it adopted at the San Fran-
cisco Model Law Commission. I am going to get a newsletter out
on this in the fall because it is one of the big triumphs of
Citizens. However, all this costs money. The Wilson budget
lists only $6,000 for consultant fees. This will not buy you
very much.

I will be doing the major part of the planning, writing,
and contacting. What you are buying in me is years of experience
in doing this sort of thing in a number of health areas. You are
buying in Wilson a person who has grown tremendously on the job
over the past six years and who now has a tremendous set of contacts
at the state and local level.
Mr. Tony Fiskett
July 27, 1983
Page 3

I don't know how we set the fees for myself and for Wilson.
In his memo he sets a fee of $5,000 a month to cover both of our
fees and administrative expenses charged to our offices. I
will be willing to negotiate this fee - possibly down to $4,000
per month - but that doesn't leave me with an exactly grandiose
fee for my services. I would naturally have to pay Wilson a fee
out of this sum. There are innumerable administrative expenses
to both our offices as we found out when we tried to run the Inner
City Project as a separate operation, costing us nothing administra-
tively. This proved to be an illusion.

The Wilson budget does not include any expenses for the
production costs of newsletters, educational materials, etc.
These - which should be well produced and in color - cost a good
deal of money. Both the Central Office and the Field Office of
Citizens have never been able to afford - out of their regular
budgets - the production of these materials. They have been supported
on a project basis from either Mary Lasker or the drug houses.
I have not discussed your projected figure of $150,000 for 1984 and
then a drop to $100,000 for 1985. Off the top of my head, it seems
somewhat strange to project a reduction in the second and third
years of a tough project which will take three years to get off
the ground in a big way. However, we can leave that for further
discussion.

I await your proposed budget. I would like to resolve this
matter as soon as possible. I am just beginning a rather lengthy
project with the life insurance industry with the goal of reducing
the premiums of every hypertensive who has been brought under control
but has not been rerated. I am heading a task force on this subject
for the Coordinating Committee of the National Heart Institute and
if we are successful we think we can improve compliance to drug
regimens by at least 25%. Adequate financing for this project is
the only thing which is holding me up at the present time but,
frankly, I have not had the time to do any fundraising for it.

One final note: your initial proposal to us was, from my
point of view, just a first step. It is like the first draft of
legislation which I sometimes write and then rewrite four or five
times as I sit down with key technical staff people on Capitol Hill.

If we _ ar o go forward with this project, Wilson and I have to
sit down for at least three or Four hours with you and Dick and
shake down the issues I have cited. ©

Hoping to hear from you soon. I am leaving town for vacation
on August 5 and will be away through Labor Day.

Cordially,

Mike Gorman

U gots)