FDA, Appropriations, and Chaos: The Risk of a Perfect Storm

Divided government is always messy, but the current political situation foreshadows a deeper and less easily bridged set of forces that will make compromises even harder to find. That is, I believe, the key takeaway from the current appropriations process in the House.

Before the August recess, the House barely got to the FY 24 Military Constructions/VA appropriations bill—universally acknowledged as the least controversial of this year’s funding bills. Next in line—and viewed as the second least controversial bill—was the Ag/FDA appropriations bill, which is the main interest of FDA stakeholders. 

House leadership hoped to get the Ag/FDA appropriations bill passed before the August recess began—a target they couldn’t meet. The reality is a bit worse: it is no certainty that Ag/FDA funding would have passed even if the House was in session for another week. 

Among the unresolved issues: overall funding levels, SNAP work requirements, and restrictions on mailing abortion pills. To varying degrees, these same types of issues–particularly further spending cuts–are delaying the advancement in the House of other FY 24 appropriations bills. 

This is not just a conflict between the House and Senate. OMB has issued a Statement of Administration Policy on the Ag/FDA funding bill,  specifying concerns and objections. It also says that the President would veto the House-passed version of the FY 24 Ag/FDA appropriations bill. While such statements of position are commonplace, actual veto threats are not. 

We were able to find only two examples of veto threats involving the Ag/FDA funding bill: in 2006 and 2012. The last agency appropriations bill that received a Presidential veto involved FY08 and FY01 funding and were for bills other than Ag/FDA.

So, this year we have a narrowly divided House (Republicans are +5) and a narrowly divided Senate (Democrats are +2 and can break ties using the Vice President), and a President willing to veto funding bills to which he objects. It is not unreasonable to predict a chaotic process with unknown twists and turns. Those with weak stomachs and faint hearts may need to look away.

Eventually, funding disputes will be resolved, although it may take a government shutdown and might not be resolved in 2023.  As to “who will be blamed” and “how long do voters retain negative views of the shutdown” here is an analysis by the widely-respected FiveThirtyEight analysts: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/government-shutdown-polls/ (Hint: they usually blame Republicans, but the effect is relatively short-lived). 

It is the Alliance’s job to continue its advocacy for the preservation and growth of FDA funding, regardless of the macro limitations (discussed here and here). 

If the FY 24  appropriations process proves unpredictable and chaotic at the macro level, we will continue to provide analysis that will help the FDA stakeholder community understand the micro implications for FDA. Over the last four weeks, we have discussed FDA’s situation in case of a Continuing Resolution (here) and discussed FDA’s situation in case of a sequester (here).

Editorial Note:
The Analysis and Commentary section is written by Steven Grossman, Executive Director of the Alliance for a Stronger FDA.