Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gonzoflip 548 days ago
Where did you get the idea that their funding has been cut? Their appropriations have been steadily increasing for most years over the time frame you call out. In addition to the the congressionally appropriated funds, their "user fees" income has grown significantly to the point where it makes up a very significant portion of their total budget. The impact of almost half of their income coming from the orgs they are supposed to be regulating is _in my opinion_ a better place to look for them overlooking violations from their "users". https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44576
4 comments

It's worth noting that the "user fees" component of the FDA's budget isn't growing primarily because the FDA has increased those fees, but because Congress have consistently authorized new categories of feeds corresponding to changes in the medical environment. That paints a very different (although incomplete) picture than the FDA raking in cash: they're collecting fees to compensate for a larger regulatory picture, including new drug classes and categories developed over the last 30 years.

This is broken down on the FDA's website[1].

[1]: https://www.fda.gov/industry/fda-user-fee-programs/fda-user-...

Yeah in real terms, the total budget divided over the total number of specific cases/inquiries/complaints/mandates/etc… has shrunk enormously.
Federal agencies don’t just get $X billion to be spent at the direction of the agency executive. Each program gets funded at a very low level.

I did some contracting for a federal agency, the area I was meeting with was a hot area… Aeron chairs, nice office spaces, new computers.

One time we had to cut through an office area on the other side of the floor that was being starved. 1970s orange carpets, DOS computers, people who looked like they worked in a coal mine.

Same agency, different budgets. IRS is the famous example, Republicans when they control the house always starve the enforcement division as much as possible.

This is the nature of government agencies. Budgets are set by inertia, not need or output.

When I worked for an agency, there was always a mad rush at the end of the year spending millions on useless crap. The rationale was that any budget surplus would be reallocated and cut from next years budget, putting future programs at risk.

Can you explain why you think user fees are a conflict of interest?

My understanding is that the FDA gets paid either way and have a monopoly on approval. It's not like the users will go somewhere else if they received an unfavorable ruling.

Where did they get that idea? They made it up to fit their narrative. Shocking, I know.