Food Companies/Trade Associations Ask for Increased FDA Funding and more
Advocacy at a Glance offers you the bullet point summary of current advocacy issues associated with the goals of the Alliance for a Stronger FDA.
Food Companies/Trade Associations Ask for Increased FDA Funding. A group of 21 food companies and food trade associations have written to appropriators asking them to add monies for FDA to implement the Food Safety Modernization Act and asked Congress for more oversight. Specifically, the letter says: ... we need a strong FDA as our partner to fully implement FSMA and to play its proper role in ensuring the safety of the nation’s food supply. With the additional $109.5 million in new budget authority requested by FDA, we also welcome congressional oversight; not only to ensure these investments are implemented effectively, but also to make certain that the agency’s regulatory implementation of FSMA is consistent with what the law requires, and what Congress intended in adopting the law.
Congress Adopts Budget Resolution for FY 16. After several weeks of tough negotiating, the House and Senate agreed on a budget resolution for FY 16. The numbers in the final document represent guidance for appropriations and other committee actions. The central tenet is that the federal budget needs to be balanced in 10 years. One consequence is that the budget resolution proposes that non-defense discretionary be less than the budget cap, starting in FY 17. By FY 2025, this will cumulate to $496 billion below the originally agreed upon non-defense discretionary spending.
China Toughens Food Safety Laws. The Chinese government, in an effort to strengthen its food safety laws, has adopted new regulations. Among other things, it addresses the online food market, baby formula and penalties for offenders, according to state news source. Read more about the announcement here.
Is the 21st Century Cures Process Shortchanging FDA on Funding? This week’s Analysis and Commentary explores this question and explains why the answer is “No.”