In the 1980s and 1990s, single-disease interest groups emerged as an influential force in U.S. politics. This article explores their effects on federal medical research priority-setting. Previous studies of advocacy organizations’ political effects focused narrowly on direct benefits for constituents. Using data on 53 diseases over 19 years, I find that in addition to securing direct benefits, advocacy organizations have aggregate effects and can systemically change the culture of policy arenas. Disease advocacy reshaped funding distributions, changed the perceived beneficiaries of policies, promoted metrics for commensuration, and made cultural categories of worth increasingly relevant to policymaking.
AgnewBruce. 1996. “Body-Count Budgeting: New Pressure to Shift Funding among Diseases.” Journal of NIH ResearchJune:21–22.
2.
AllsopJudithJonesKathrynBaggottRob. 2004. “Health Consumer Groups in the UK: A New Social Movement?” Sociology of Health and Illness26:737–56.
3.
AmentaEdwinCarenNealChiarelloElizabethSuYang. 2010. “The Political Consequences of Social Movements.” Annual Review of Sociology36:287–307.
4.
AmentaEdwinYoungMichael P.1999. “Making an Impact: Conceptual and Methodological Implications of the Collective Goods Criterion.” Pp. 22–41 in How Social Movements Matter, edited by GiugniM.McAdamD.TillyC.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
5.
AndrewsKenneth T.2001. “Social Movements and Policy Implementation: The Mississippi Civil Rights Movement and the War on Poverty, 1965 to 1971.” American Sociological Review66:71–95.
6.
AndrewsKenneth T.2002. “Movement-Countermovement Dynamics and the Emergence of New Institutions: The Case of ‘White Flight’ Schools in Mississippi.” Social Forces80:911–36.
7.
AndrewsKenneth T.EdwardsBob. 2004. “Advocacy Organizations in the U.S. Political Process.” Annual Review of Sociology30:479–506.
8.
AnglinMary K.1997. “Working From the Inside Out: Implications of Breast Cancer Activism for Biomedical Policies and Practices.” Social Science and Medicine44:1403–1415.
9.
ArmstrongElizabeth A.BernsteinMary. 2008. “Culture, Power, and Institutions: A Multi-Institutional Politics Approach to Social Movements.” Sociological Theory26:74–99.
10.
Banaszak-HollJane C.LevitskySandra R.ZaldMayer N., eds. 2010. Social Movements and the Transformation of American Health Care, 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
BaumgartnerFrank R.LeechBeth L.1998. Basic Interests: The Importance of Groups in Politics and in Political Science. Ewing, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
BenfordRobert D.SnowDavid A.2000. “Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology26:611–39.
13.
BerezinMabel. 1997. “Politics and Culture: A Less Fissured Terrain.” Annual Review of Sociology23:361–83.
14.
BerryJeffrey M.1999. The New Liberalism: The Rising Power of Citizen Groups. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
15.
BonastiaChristopher. 2000. “Why Did Affirmative Action in Housing Fail during the Nixon Era? Exploring the ‘Institutional Homes’ of Social Policies.” Social Problems47:523–42.
16.
BowkerGeoffrey C.StarSusan Leigh. 2000. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
17.
BrownPhilZavestoskiStephen. 2004. “Social Movements in Health: An Introduction.” Sociology of Health and Illness26:679–94.
18.
BrownPhilZavestoskiStephenMcCormickSabrinaMayerBrianMorello-FroschRachelAltmanRebecca Gasior. 2004. “Embodied Health Movements: New Approaches to Social Movements in Health.” Sociology of Health and Illness26:50–80.
19.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2008. “Updated CPI-U-RS, All Items and All Items Less Food and Energy, 1978–2007.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
20.
BursteinPaul. 1991. “Policy Domains: Organization, Culture, and Policy Outcomes.” Annual Review of Sociology17:327–50.
21.
BursteinPaul. 1998. “Interest Organizations, Political Parties, and the Study of Democratic Politics.” Pp. 39–72 in Social Movements and American Political Institutions, edited by CostainA. N.McFarlandA. S.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
22.
BursteinPaul. 1999. “Social Movements and Public Policy.” Pp. 3–21 in How Social Movements Matter, edited by GiugniM.McAdamD.TillyC.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
23.
BursteinPaulEinwohnerRachel L.HollanderJocelyn A.1995. “The Success of Political Movements: A Bargaining Perspective.” Pp. 275–95 in The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives on States and Social Movements, edited by JenkinsJ. C.KlandermansB.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
24.
BursteinPaulHirshC. Elizabeth. 2007. “Interest Organizations, Information, and Policy Innovation in the U.S. Congress.” Sociological Forum22:174–99.
25.
CallahanDaniel. 2003. What Price Better Health? Hazards of the Research Imperative. Berkeley: University of California Press.
26.
CallonMichel. 2003. “The Increasing Involvement of Concerned Groups in R&D Policies: What Lessons for Public Powers?” Pp. 30–68 in Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance, edited by GeunaA.SalterA. J.SteinmuellerW. E.Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
27.
CampbellJohn L.2002. “Ideas, Politics, and Public Policy.” Annual Review of Sociology28:21–38.
28.
CarpenterDaniel. 2010. Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
CarterRichard. 1961. The Gentle Legions. New York: Doubleday.
30.
ClarkeAdele E.ShimJanet K.MamoLauraFosketJennifer RuthFishmanJennifer R.2003. “Biomedicalization: Technoscientific Transformations of Health, Illness, and U.S. Biomedicine.” American Sociological Review68:161–94.
31.
ClemensElisabeth S.1993. “Organizational Repertoires and Institutional Change: Women’s Groups and the Transformation of U.S. Politics, 1890–1920.” American Journal of Sociology98:755–98.
32.
ClemensElisabeth S.1997. The People’s Lobby: Organizational Innovation and the Rise of Interest Group Politics in the United States, 1890–1925. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33.
ClemensElisabeth S.2005. “Two Kinds of Stuff: The Current Encounter of Social Movements and Organizations.” Pp. 351–65 in Social Movements and Organization Theory, edited by DavisG. F.McAdamD.ScottW. R.ZaldM. N.New York: Cambridge University Press.
34.
ClemensElisabeth S.CookJames M.1999. “Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining Durability and Change.” Annual Review of Sociology25:441–66.
35.
CobbRoger W.ElderCharles D.1983. Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda-Building. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
36.
Cook-DeganRobertMcGearyMichael. 2006. “The Jewel in the Federal Crown? History, Politics, and the National Institutes of Health.” Pp. 176–201 in History and Health Policy in the United States: Putting the Past Back In, edited by R. A.StevensRosenbergC. E.BurnsL. R.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
37.
CressDavid M.SnowDavid A.2000. “The Outcomes of Homeless Mobilization: The Influence of Organization, Disruption, Political Mediation, and Framing.” American Journal of Sociology105:1063–1104.
38.
DahlRobert A.1961. Who Governs?New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
39.
DanowskiJames A.2009a. “Network Analysis of Message Content.” Pp. 421–30 in The Content Analysis Reader, edited by KrippendorffK.BockM. A.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
40.
DanowskiJames A.2009b. WORDij. Chicago: University of Illinois at Chicago.
41.
della PortaDonatella. 1999. “Protest, Protesters, and Protest Policing: Public Discourses in Italy and Germany from the 1960s to the 1980s.” Pp. 66–96 in How Social Movements Matter, edited by GiugniM.McAdamD.TillyC.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
42.
DonovanMark C.2001. Taking Aim: Target Populations and the Wars on AIDS and Drugs, illustrated ed. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
43.
DresserRebecca. 1999. “Public Advocacy and Allocation of Federal Funds for Biomedical Research.” Milbank Quarterly77:257–74.
44.
DresserRebecca. 2001. When Science Offers Salvation: Patient Advocacy and Research Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
45.
EarlJennifer. 2004. “The Cultural Consequences of Social Movements.” Pp. 508–530 in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, edited by SnowD. A.SouleS. A.KriesiH.Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
46.
EdwardsBobMcCarthyJohn D.2004. “Resources and Social Movement Mobilization.” Pp. 116–52 in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, edited by SnowD. A.SouleS. A.KriesiH.Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
47.
EliasRobert. 1985. Victims of the System: Crime Victims and Compensation in American Politics and Criminal Justice. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
48.
EpsteinSteven. 1996. Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
49.
EpsteinSteven. 2007. Inclusion: The Politics of Difference in Medical Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50.
EpsteinSteven. 2008. “Patient Groups and Health Movements.” Pp. 499–539 in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed., edited by HackettE. J.AmsterdamskaO.LynchM.WajcmanJ.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
51.
EspelandWendy NelsonStevensMitchell L.1998. “Commensuration as a Social Process.” Annual Review of Sociology24:313–43.
52.
EvansJohn H.2002. Playing God? Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
53.
GamsonWilliam A.1990. The Strategy of Social Protest, 2nd ed.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
54.
GilensMartin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
55.
GiugniMarco. 1999. “How Social Movements Matter: Past Research, Present Problems, Future Developments.” Pp. xiii–xxxiii in How Social Movements Matter, edited by GiugniM.McAdamD.TillyC.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
56.
GiugniMarco. 2004. Social Protest and Policy Change: Ecology, Antinuclear, and Peace Movements in Comparative Perspective. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
57.
GoldstoneJack A.2003. “Bridging Institutionalized and Noninstitutionalized Politics.” Pp. 1–24 in States, Parties, and Social Movements, edited by GoldstoneJ. A.New York: Cambridge University Press.
58.
GriffithDorsey. 2005. “Lung Cancer Patients Fight Societal Neglect.” The Sacramento Bee, December5.
59.
GrønbjergKirsten A.1994. “Using NTEE to Classify Non-profit Organisations: An Assessment of Human Service and Regional Applications.” Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations5:301–328.
60.
GrønbjergKirsten A.2002. “Evaluating Nonprofit Databases.” American Behavioral Scientist45:1741–77.
61.
GrossCary P.AndersonGerard F.PoweNeil R.1999. “The Relation between Funding by the National Institutes of Health and the Burden of Disease.” New England Journal of Medicine340:1881–87.
62.
GuetzkowJoshua. 2010. “Beyond Deservingness: Congressional Discourse on Poverty, 1964–1996.” ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science629:173–97.
63.
GustonDavid H.2000. Between Politics and Science: Assuring the Integrity and Productivity of Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
64.
HackerJacob S.PiersonPaul. 2010. “Winner-Take-All Politics: Public Policy, Political Organization, and the Precipitous Rise of Top Incomes in the United States.” Politics & Society38:152–204.
65.
HavemanHeather A.RaoHayagreevaParuchuriSrikanth. 2007. “The Winds of Change: The Progressive Movement and the Bureaucratization of Thrift.” American Sociological Review72:117–42.
66.
HavemannJudith. 1998. “Crusading for Cash: Patient Groups Compete for Bigger Shares of NIH’s Research Funding.” Washington Post, December15, p. Z10.
67.
HegdeDeepak. 2009. “Political Influence Behind the Veil of Peer Review: An Analysis of Public Biomedical Research Funding in the United States.” Journal of Law and Economics52:665–90.
68.
HegdeDeepakSampatBhaven N.2011. “Lobbying, Congressional Oversight and Agency Allocations in U.S. Science Policy: Evidence from Federal Funding for Rare Diseases.” SSRN eLibrary. Retrieved December 7, 2011 (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1962937).
69.
HessDavidBreymanSteveCampbellNancyMartinBrian. 2008. “Science, Technology, and Social Movements.” Pp. 473–97 in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed., edited by HackettE. J.AmsterdamskaO.LynchM.WajcmanJ.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
70.
Institute of Medicine. 1998. Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improving Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
IstookErnestJr.1997. “Research Funding on Major Diseases Is Not Proportionate to Taxpayers’ Needs.” Journal of NIH Research9:26–28.
73.
JohnsonErik W.2008. “Social Movement Size, Organizational Diversity and the Making of Federal Law.” Social Forces86:967–93.
74.
JohnsonJudith A.1994. AIDS and Other Diseases: Selected Federal Spending and Morbidity and Mortality Statistics. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
75.
JohnsonJudith A.1998. Disease Funding and NIH Priority Setting. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
76.
KedrowskiKaren M.SarowMarilyn S.2007. Cancer Activism: Gender, Media, and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
77.
KellerAnnPackelLaura. 2007. “The Patient Interest Group Phenomenon: From Service Provision to Policy Advocacy.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
78.
KingBrayden G.BenteleKeith G.SouleSarah A.2007. “Protest and Policymaking: Explaining Fluctuation in Congressional Attention to Rights Issues, 1960–1986.” Social Forces86:137–63.
79.
KitscheltHerbert P.1986. “Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science16:57–85.
80.
KlawiterMaren. 2008. The Biopolitics of Breast Cancer: Changing Cultures of Disease and Activism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
81.
KriesiHanspeterWislerDominique. 1999. “The Impact of Social Movements on Political Institutions: A Comparison of the Introduction of Direct Legislation in Switzerland and the United States.” Pp. 42–65 in How Social Movements Matter, edited by GiugniM.McAdamD.TillyC.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
82.
KrippendorffKlaus. 2009. “Testing the Reliability of Content Analysis Data: What is Involved and Why.” Pp. 350–57 in The Content Analysis Reader, edited by KrippendorffK.BockM. A.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
83.
LamontMichèleMolnarVirág. 2002. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences.” Annual Review of Sociology28:167–95.
84.
LaumannEdward O.KnokeDavid. 1987. The Organizational State: Social Choice in National Policy Domains. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
85.
LiebermanEvan S.2009. Boundaries of Contagion: How Ethnic Politics Have Shaped Government Responses to AIDS. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
86.
LoflandJohn. 1996. Social Movement Organizations: Guide to Research on Insurgent Realities. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
87.
LoomisBurdett A.CiglerAllan J.1995. “The Changing Nature of Interest Group Politics.” Pp. 1–31 in Interest Group Politics, 4th ed., edited by CiglerA. J.LoomisB. A.Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
88.
LowiTheodore J.1964. “American Business, Public Policy, Case-Studies, and Political Theory.” World Politics16:677–715.
89.
MarshallEliot. 1997. “Lobbyists Seek to Reslice NIH’s Pie.” Science276:344–46.
90.
MayPeter J.1991. “Reconsidering Policy Design: Policies and Publics.” Journal of Public Policy11:187–206.
91.
McAdamDoug. 1982. Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
92.
McAdamDougSuYang. 2002. “The War at Home: Antiwar Protests and Congressional Voting, 1965 to 1973.” American Sociological Review67:696–721.
93.
McCammonHolly J.MuseCourtney SandersNewmanHarmony D.TerrellTeresa M.2007. “Movement Framing and Discursive Opportunity Structures: The Political Successes of the U.S. Women’s Jury Movements.” American Sociological Review72:725–49.
94.
McCarthyJohn D.ZaldMayer N.1977. “Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory.” American Journal of Sociology82:1212–41.
95.
McVeighRoryWelchMichael R.BjarnasonThoroddur. 2003. “Hate Crime Reporting as a Successful Social Movement Outcome.” American Sociological Review68:843–67.
96.
MeyerDavid S.MinkoffDebra C.2004. “Conceptualizing Political Opportunity.” Social Forces82:1457–92.
97.
Morello-FroschRachelZavestoskiStephenBrownPhilAltmanRebecca GasiorMcCormickSabrinaMayerBrian. 2006. “Embodied Health Movements: Responses to a ‘Scientized’ World.” Pp. 244–71 in The New Political Sociology of Science, edited by FrickelS.MooreK.Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
98.
National Center for Charitable Statistics. 2006. “Guide to Using NCCS Data.” Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
99.
OlzakSusanRyoEmily. 2007. “Organizational Diversity, Vitality and Outcomes in the Civil Rights Movement.” Social Forces85:1561–91.
100.
OlzakSusanSouleSarah A.2009. “Cross-Cutting Influences of Environmental Protest and Legislation.” Social Forces88:201–225.
101.
PedrianaNicholasStrykerRobin. 1997. “Political Culture Wars 1960s Style: Equal Employment Opportunity-Affirmative Action Law and the Philadelphia Plan.” American Journal of Sociology103:633–91.
102.
Perez-PenaRichard. 2006. “Beyond ‘I’m a Diabetic,’ Little Common Ground.” New York Times, May17.
103.
PescosolidoBernice A.2006. “Professional Dominance and the Limits of Erosion.” Society43:21–29.
104.
PiersonPaul. 1993. “Review: When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change.” World Politics45:595–628.
105.
PivenFrances Fox. 2006. Challenging Authority: How Ordinary People Change America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
106.
PollettaFrancescaJasperJames M.2001. “Collective Identity and Social Movements.” Annual Review of Sociology27:283–305.
107.
PorterTheodore M.1995. Trust in Numbers. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
108.
RabinowPaul. 1992. “Artificiality and Enlightenment: From Sociobiology to Biosociality.” Pp. 234–52 in Incorporations, edited by CraryJ.KwinterS.New York: Zone Books.
109.
RadcliffBenjaminSaizMartin. 1998. “Labor Organization and Public Policy in the American States.” Journal of Politics60:113–25.
RogersWilliam. 1993. “Regression Standard Errors in Clustered Samples.” Stata Technical Bulletin13:19–23.
112.
RoseNikolas. 2006. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century, annotated ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
113.
RosenbergCharles E.2007. Our Present Complaint: American Medicine, Then and Now, 1st ed. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
114.
SantoroWayne A.McGuireGail M.1997. “Social Movement Insiders: The Impact of Institutional Activists on Affirmative Action and Comparable Worth Policies.” Social Problems44:503–519.
115.
SchattschneiderE. E.1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.
116.
SchlozmanKay LehmanPageBenjamin I.VerbaSidneyFiorinaMorris P.2007. “Inequalities of Political Voice.” Pp. 19–87 in Inequality and American Democracy: What We Know and What We Need to Learn, edited by JacobsL. R.SkocpolT.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
117.
SchneiderAnneIngramHelen. 1993. “Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy.” American Political Science Review87:334–47.
118.
SchroedelJean ReithJordanDaniel R.1998. “Senate Voting and Social Construction of Target Populations: A Study of AIDS Policy Making, 1987–1992.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law23:107–132.
119.
SkocpolTheda. 1992. Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
120.
SkrentnyJohn D.1996. The Ironies of Affirmative Action: Politics, Culture, and Justice in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
121.
SkrentnyJohn D.2002. The Minority Rights Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
122.
SkrentnyJohn D.2006. “Policy-Elite Perceptions and Social Movement Success: Understanding Variations in Group Inclusion in Affirmative Action.” American Journal of Sociology111:1762–1815.
123.
SmithRichard A.1984. “Advocacy, Interpretation, and Influence in the U.S. Congress.” American Political Science Review78:44–63.
124.
SmithRichard A.1995. “Interest Group Influence in the U.S. Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly20:89–139.
125.
SouleSarah A.KingBrayden G.2008. “Competition and Resource Partitioning in Three Social Movement Industries.” American Journal of Sociology113:1568–1610.
126.
SteenslandBrian. 2006. “Cultural Categories and the American Welfare State: The Case of Guaranteed Income Policy.” American Journal of Sociology111:1273–1326.
127.
SteenslandBrian. 2009. “Restricted and Elaborated Modes in the Cultural Analysis of Politics.” Sociological Forum24:926–34.
128.
SteinmetzGeorge. 2007. The Devil’s Handwriting: Precoloniality and the German Colonial State in Qingdao, Samoa, and Southwest Africa. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
129.
StoneDeborah A.1989. “Causal Stories and the Formation of Policy Agendas.” Political Science Quarterly104:281–300.
130.
TarrowSidney G.1994. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
131.
TarrowSidney G.1999. “Foreword.” Pp. vii–ix in How Social Movements Matter, edited by GiugniM.McAdamD.TillyC.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
132.
TimmermansStefanEpsteinSteven. 2010. “A World of Standards but Not a Standard World: Toward a Sociology of Standards and Standardization.” Annual Review of Sociology36:69–89.
133.
U.S. Congress. 1963. House Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare Appropriations for 1964: Hearing. 88th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1–863.
134.
U.S. Congress. 1984. House Subcommittee on Health and Long-Term Care of the Select Committee on Aging. Progress in Controlling Breast Cancer: Hearing. 98th Congress, 2nd Session, pp.1–293.
135.
U.S. Congress. 1990. House Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 1991, Part 8a: Testimony of Members of Congress and Other Interested Individuals and Organizations: Hearing, 101st Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 1–1787.
136.
U.S. Congress. 1992. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Combating the Rising Influence of Breast Cancer: Hearing. 102nd Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 1–61.
137.
U.S. Congress. 1995. House Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 1996, Part 7: Testimony of Members of Congress and Other Interested Individuals and Organizations: Hearing. 104th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1–1885.
138.
U.S. Congress. 1997a. House Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 1998, Part 7a: Testimony of Members of Congress and Other Interested Individuals and Organizations: Hearing. 105th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1–1567.
139.
U.S. Congress. 1997b. Senate Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Biomedical Research Priorities: Who Should Decide?: Hearing. 105th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1–90.
140.
WeberMax. 2003. General Economic History. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
141.
WeirMargaret. 1992. Politics and Jobs: The Boundaries of Employment Policy in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
142.
WilliamsRick L.2000. “A Note on Robust Variance Estimation for Cluster-Correlated Data.” Biometrics56:645–46.
143.
WolfsonMark. 2001. The Fight against Big Tobacco: The Movement, the State, and the Public’s Health. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
144.
WoodBruce. 2000. Patient Power? The Politics of Patients’ Associations in Britain and America. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
