Henry Waxman and The Fight Against HIV/AIDS

When former President Ronald Reagan assumed office, he made it a clear goal to cut government spending.  Naturally, the federal healthcare sector wasn't spared – in fact, nearly half of the CDC and NIH’s immunization budgets would be cut in half in the proposed cuts (Green). This perplexed Henry Waxman, who, as a US representative from California, represented West Hollywood, a so-called “gay ghetto” (Muto/Waxman). He saw the present danger brewing with the increased prominence of Kaposi’s Sarcoma, a hallmark of what would soon be known as AIDS. In 1982, Over 75% of all cases at the time were found in homosexual men (Pasteur Institute) and seeing his constituents suffer and fall ill, he understood the great public health danger that would soon become the AIDS Epidemic. 

Maybe Waxman felt compelled to support his constituents through this “gay disease”, one that everyone else seemed to ignore (Altman). Maybe he felt that the government’s inaction towards a disease affecting a marginalized community was a betrayal of the very foundations the United States was built on; the president should act as a figurehead for the voice of the people, yet the president chose to stir in silence while the people are plagued by disease. 

Nevertheless, Waxman turned the federal government's inaction into a narrative on the true power of speaking your voice. His advocacy for AIDS research and public awareness despite facing backlash demonstrated immense courage, and paved the path for further HIV/AIDS legislation & bueraucratic public health directives.  

In 1982, Henry Waxman held the first ever congressional hearings on AIDS. He aimed to understand the full scale as to what was happening, attempting to create an effective “plan of attack” towards the disease while also raising awareness and calling for funding for AIDS research. He held over 30 hearings in the course of a year, bringing in family members, friends, distinguished researchers, and AIDS victims themselves to discuss their experience with the disease. (United States, House of Representatives). This humanized the plight of the American public while also educating them on the true intricacies of this disease, which realized itself as the main issue with AIDS and the general public.

 A major issue with public awareness of AIDS was the fact that it was only thought to have affected gay men, who have generally been a minority and were considered mentally ill for most of American history. The alienation of this disease to the American people exacerbated their discrimination, intensified stigma, and reduced their fears of contracting it themselves, despite AIDS being able to infect everyone. Little was done to then help the struggling population. This mythos continued to be highlighted in the media that AIDS used to be called “GRID”, or Gay-related immune deficiency (Altman). However, by connecting to the American people, Waxman aimed to drop this willful ignorance on the travesty of the disease – he believed that the people would recognize a fellow American and fight for their health in fear of contracting it too. 

While Waxman’s congressional hearings brought attention to the issue, the veins of prejudice ran too deep in the American people and government for them to care. He faced severe backlash from various congressmen: Jesse Helms, a senator from North Carolina, opposed funding for AIDS research, and cited the disease itself as retribution for engaging in it homoseuxal behavior (Holmes). Rep. Bell Dannemeyer argued that “gay men ought to be incarcerated simply for being gay, and if they had AIDS, they had to be taken to an island and left there,” (Green), and Larry Speakes, the acting white house press secretary, notably laughed at reporters for asking about the administration's approach towards mitigating AIDS from ‘82 to ‘85 (HIV.gov); Speakes once said “I don't have [AIDS]... Do you? [Laughter]” (Speakes). Few people took the disease seriously in its formative years – speaking about a “minor” disease that only affects homosexuals was far out of left field for most officials to address - why would it be relevant to me, anyway?

Despite the negative attitude of most officials in the government, Waxman’s congressional hearings proved to be a valuable asset in educating the general populace, raising awareness on a critical topic that the federal government failed to address until 1985 (Altman), where by then over 12000 people had died (HIV.gov). Moreover, Waxman’s hearings inspired a slew of AIDS legislation aimed at supporting the marginalized communities at risk; in 1983, CA Rep Philip Burton and NY Rep Ted Weiss would go on to propose the first bill proposing directing $5 Million towards AIDS research (Bill HR 7192) and in 1988, the AIDS amendments would be passed, which directed federal funds towards AIDS education, prevention, research and testing (HRSA.gov).

Waxman demonstrated courage through his congressional hearings not because they immediately led to change, but rather forced public recognition of AIDS when silence was easier and safer. It legitimized the disease as a serious public health crisis, and not some moral punishment given to certain people. Using the hearings as a tool to educate the masses on the disease via direct conversations with patients and researchers, he stood up and raised the voices of those who were going ignored by the federal government. This direct stand for the marginalized groups destroyed echoes broader sentiments that are carried into the modern day, calling for the federal government to serve all of the people, not just those deemed “normal”.  As John F. Kennedy wrote in Profiles in Courage, “The courage of life is often a less dramatic spectacle than the courage of a final moment; but it is no less a magnificent mixture of triumph and tragedy.” (Kennedy  Waxman’s courage, and the broader history of the AIDS crisis, stand as a warning against misplaced bigotry. His choice to respond early and trust his intuition on the future impacted every single American - it transformed AIDS from an ignored condition to a drastic, real responsibility.