HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Federal Budget

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

"[P]eople acting in a group can accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about." - FDR

Home :  Regulatory Policy :  RegWatch : 
RegWatch:     

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

 R    E    G    •    W    A    T    C    H 


Monday, June 25, 2007

House Moves on FDA Reform, PDUFA Renewal

Last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved a bill to reform certain drug regulation practices at FDA and renew the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA). The full Senate approved a similar bill in May. (For a detailed analysis of the Senate version, click here.

The Pharmalot blog has a good summary of some of the drug safety provisions in the House bill which go beyond what the Senate approved.

The user fee program, the other half of the bill, is a double-edged sword. While it is an important source of funding for the agency, it comes with strings attached and allows drug companies to call the shots during the approval process.

A provision in the House bill demonstrates this dichotomy. The bill would reduce the amount of fees paid by industry if federal appropriations increase. This is encouraging, because many public health and safety advocates believe the federal government, not the drug industry, should be responsible for ensuring FDA has enough resources to perform its regulatory duties.

However, there is a danger this may lead to lower funding for FDA in the long-run. If this appropriations process turns into a zero-sum game where both sides are jockeying to see who can pay less, it would ultimately force FDA to do its job for less money.

FDA is already under-funded. The House should take this provision but also force a steady rise in the drug safety budget. That would allow appropriators and the drug industry to haggle over their respective responsibility in a more productive way. It would be in industry's best interest to lobby for increased funding. Republicans would be in favor of giving industry a break, and Democrats (if they understood the problems with user fees, which they appear not to) could get behind no-strings-attached funding and a bigger role for government.



Posted by Matt Madia



Entries by Theme

All Themes

Enforcement

About This Blog

Rollbacks

Safety

Industry Influence

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In Congress

Publications

Consumer Issues

Environment

Public Health

In the Courts

Oversight

In the White House

Most Recent Entries for RegWatch

Bush Administration Politicos Will Stick Around

Rules of the Road: DOT Puts Truck Drivers and Motorists at Risk

Last-Minute Rule Allows More Dirty Oil Production

Recommendations on Regulatory Reform for the Next President and Congress

Bush Handing over Wilderness to Oil and Gas Industry

New Rule Likely to Cut Health Care for the Poor

For High Court, High Stakes Case on Preemption

Watching out for Midnight Regulations

FDA Experts Fought Rule to Protect Drug Makers

Science Advisors Chide FDA on Plastics Chemical

Archived Entries for Industry Influence

October

September

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004

September, 2004

August, 2004