FDA is at Risk in Trump Budget: Alliance
When President Trump told Congress 2/28 his first budget request will seek a 10% increase in defense programs and a 10% cut in non-defense discretionary programs, he put FDA at risk, says Alliance for a Stronger FDA deputy executive director Steven Grossman in his latest weekly analysis and commentary to members. Predicting a “guns vs. butter” fight this year, he writes that the downward pressure on all non-defense program “will be enormous.”
“What the President must decide — in his budget outline (before mid-March), then reinforce or modify in the full budget request (late April-May) — is into which of three buckets to assign every non-defense federal program,” Grossman says. “The first bucket will contain programs slated for larger cuts based on policy or ideology. EPA is clearly going to be in this bucket, as will foreign aid programs and support for the arts and humanities. The second bucket will contain programs slated for an average cut (think 10-15%, probably across-the-board) in order to generate the monies necessary to pay for defense and for which the Administration sees no justification for giving special treatment. The bulk of federal programs will be in this second bucket.
“The third bucket,” Grossman continues, “will be a select group of programs for which the Administration will be advocating for a smaller cut, level funding or possibly an increase. I anticipate this bucket will include the FBI, border security, veteran’s programs and maybe air traffic controllers. Relative to the Trump Administration, the Alliance’s primary goal will be to advocate and show the justification for FDA being placed in this third bucket. This would not only benefit us in having a higher baseline in the President’s request, but would also send a strong message to Congress that FDA is a priority, whose portfolio of activities represent core functions of government.
“Getting into the third bucket is going to be a tough sell with a new Administration that hasn’t yet figured out what it thinks about FDA. Further, the process makes such advocacy almost impossible. The initial budget guidances were sent by OMB to departments only this week. It is unclear whether HHS is following the traditional pattern of sending allocations to agencies and entertaining appeals. … FDA’s fate in the Trump budget will truly be in HHS’s hands. While Congress will have the final say, it would be invaluable if the Administration would lead the way in recognizing FDA ‘exceptionalism.’”
Grossman describes the environment for funding increases for non-defense programs will be difficult. “We need to be steadfast in our message that individualized, policy-driven consideration of agency missions and responsibilities should be the key to appropriations, rather than across-the-board decisions. We hope the current process, Congressional and Executive Branch, will allow for this. If it does, we believe that FDA is a unique agency with unique responsibilities and can justify its current funding level or even the small increase that the Alliance is requesting.”