Federal lawmakers have for the second year in a row seen the wisdom of increasing the funds they want the government to spend on research and treatment services related to mental illness, including drug and alcohol abuse.

After the now-routine delays and political posturing that accompany each year’s appropriations process, the Clinton Administration and the Republican-controlled Congress arrived at a budget compromise that the President felt comfortable signing. He signed the appropriations bill on November 29, 1999.

The agreement provided the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) with budget increases for FY 2000 of between 13 percent and 15 percent.

With all the contentious issues that kept Congress and the White House from reaching agreement on spending levels until nearly two months after the new fiscal year had begun, the amount the government should allocate for mental health research and services was not a matter of dispute. Both sides concurred that these efforts were worthy of considerable additional investment of federal dollars.

The substantial increase earmarked for research at NIH and the boost in the institute’s research budget received in Fiscal 1999 are positive signs that a multiyear campaign by APA and other professional and advocacy organizations is succeeding. The campaign’s goal is to convince Congress and the White House to double NIH’s mental health research budget over five years. This is the second year of that campaign and the second year that the mental health–related appropriation enjoyed a sizable jump.

Research efforts were not the only projects in the mental health arena that will have more money to invest this year. Policymakers also appeared to have recognized the value and importance of several mental health service programs, which they rewarded with increases, some of them substantial.

All government programs will have to cut 0.38 percent out of their discretionary programs as a result of the Fiscal 2000 budget agreement. While Republicans pushed for a far more substantial across-the-board cut in government funds, President Clinton would agree to no more than this token amount, which Congressional leaders eventually accepted.

Since several influential committee members who have supported increases in federal mental health funding are leaving Congress, APA is planning to intensify its grass-roots organizing efforts to ensure that Congress and the White House do not lessen their commitment to boosting the government’s investment in mental health research.