Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

FDA’s First Year Under Obama: Miles Ahead, Yet Miles to Go

This post is the fourth in a series on the new CPR report Obama’s Regulators: A First-Year Report Card.

During the Bush Administration, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) simply fell further and further behind in terms of achieving its regulatory mission of protecting people from unsafe drugs, medical devices and food. A series of high profile mistakes made it clear that the American people could no longer lightly assume that the food they were eating and the drugs they were taking were safe. The challenge for the Obama Administration was to reenergize this demoralized agency, so that it could begin the difficult task of making up lost ground. FDA was able to make up a lot of this lost ground; that it still has so much further to go in order to make our food and drugs adequately safe illustrates how bad things were when President Obama assumed office.

Coming into President Obama’s first year in office, FDA faced a number of obstacles to achieving adequate food safety. Like other protector agencies, FDA has been chronically resource-starved, which hampered its ability monitor the food supply. As a result, the agency had little ability to prevent food-borne illness outbreaks, much less respond to them quickly when they did occur. FDA also suffers from a lack of adequate legal authority to ensure food safety. The task of ensuring food safety is divided among various federal agencies, and the resulting hodgepodge leads to unnecessary duplication and gaps in protection. Moreover, existing law does not authorize FDA to order recalls of tainted food—instead, the agency can only ask companies to recall their products. Finally, to make matters worse, FDA’s regulatory mission with respect to food safety has gotten a lot larger and a lot more complicated. The U.S. population has increased significantly, and the U.S. food supply is becoming more and more globalized, with food products now coming from countries that have little or no regulatory oversight over the goods they produce.

Despite these obstacles, FDA was able to make some progress on food safety—particularly with regard to the challenge of imported foods. The agency launched some promising initiatives on the inspection and enforcement front that would enable it to detect and potentially prevent food-borne illness outbreaks. For example, FDA began stationing mobile food safety laboratories at major ports of entry for imported foods. The labs test for E. coli and salmonella, the two contaminants responsible for most of the outbreaks. These labs enable FDA to test more foods, and to do so more quickly, thereby reducing the chances that such outbreaks will occur in the first place. The agency also initiated a pilot project in which it will work with state public health officials to create “rapid response” teams for investigating food-borne illness outbreaks more quickly.

On the regulatory front, though, FDA’s work on food safety was more mixed. FDA did make some progress in this area, such as launching the Reportable Food Registry, an electronic database that is intended to help the agency to more quickly identify and respond to food-borne illness outbreaks. While sound in theory, however, the Registry is not guaranteed to succeed in practice. The potential problem with the Registry is that its success ultimately depends on FDA’s ability to get the food industry to report information about food-borne illness outbreaks. To implement the program, the agency has issued regulations requiring the food industry to self-report such information. FDA must make it clear from the get-go that it intends to strictly enforce these regulations by holding the food industry accountable for failing to make timely and accurate reports about outbreaks. Otherwise, the Registry will end up being just another empty program. Time will tell if FDA can make this program a success.

As FDA’s experience with food safety this past year illustrates, the agency has been making progress—the food supply is undoubtedly safer now than it would have been if the Bush Administration had somehow extended into a ninth year. Unfortunately, and as President Obama himself recognizes, doing better than the Bush Administration is not enough. Rather, federal law mandates that FDA make the food supply safe, and that mandate is not currently being met. Obviously, it would be unfair to expect the Obama Administration to reverse years of neglect at FDA and turn the agency into the full-functioning and effective protector agency in just one year. As the Administration will quickly discover, however, four (or even eight) years can go by in a blink of an eye. If it intends to fulfill its promise of protecting the public against unsafe food, drugs, and medical devices, the Obama Administration cannot afford to delay reenergizing the FDA, by undertaking such measures as increasing its budget, limiting interference from the White House, and working with Congress to enhance the agency’s legal authority.

Showing 2,821 results

James Goodwin | January 22, 2010

FDA’s First Year Under Obama: Miles Ahead, Yet Miles to Go

This post is the fourth in a series on the new CPR report Obama’s Regulators: A First-Year Report Card. During the Bush Administration, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) simply fell further and further behind in terms of achieving its regulatory mission of protecting people from unsafe drugs, medical devices and food. A series of […]

Alice Kaswan | January 22, 2010

Murkowski Proposal Shutters the Only Game in Town: The Clean Air Act

Senator Murkowski’s proposal to disapprove EPA’s scientifically and legally justified finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and welfare would strip the federal government of its primary legal mechanism for addressing catastrophic climate change. If Congress does not think the Clean Air Act (CAA) is the best mechanism for regulating greenhouse gases, it should […]

James Goodwin | January 21, 2010

EPA’s First Year Under Obama: Reenergized, But Still Too Cautious

This post is the third in a series on the new CPR report Obama’s Regulators: A First-Year Report Card. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the biggest and most powerful of the protector agencies. Consequently, it has also become the agency that was most decimated by regulatory opponents in recent decades. Thus, when President Obama […]

Ben Somberg | January 21, 2010

EPA Makes a Good Move on Chemical Secrecy

The EPA announced yesterday that they’re changing the way they treat manufacturers’ claims that certain information about toxic chemicals should be kept secret. Richard Denison of EDF has a useful explanation and analysis of this good news. Rena Steinzor and Matt Shudtz explored the dangers of secrecy in chemical science in a 2007 CPR white […]

Daniel Farber | January 21, 2010

Of the Corporations, By the Corporations, For the Corporations? The Meaning of the Citizens United Decision

Today’s decision in Citizens United was something of a foregone conclusion. Still, it was a bit breathtaking. The Court was obviously poised to strike down the latest Congressional restrictions on corporate political expenditures. But the Court went further and struck down even restrictions that had been upheld thirty years ago. Seldom has a majority been […]

Rena Steinzor | January 20, 2010

Coal Ash First Real Test of Obama Commitment to Health and Safety Regulation

A critical test of the Obama Administration’s commitment to reviving the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is teeing up behind closed doors at the White House. Once again, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is cast in the role of regulation killer, supported by a slew of state and other federal agencies that are polluters […]

Ben Somberg | January 20, 2010

NYT Editorializes on Coal Ash Debate

The New York Times editorial page weighed in on coal ash today, saying: The EPA’s recommendations, which have not been made public, are now the focus of a huge dispute inside the Obama administration, with industry lobbying hard for changes that would essentially preserve the status quo. The dispute should be resolved in favor of […]

Frank Ackerman | January 19, 2010

Bjorn Lomborg Misreads Climate Change Economics in Washington Post Op-Ed

Bjorn Lomborg has seen the future of climate policy, and it doesn’t work. In his opinion, featured Friday in the Washington Post, a binding treaty to reduce carbon emissions – the goal that was pursued unsuccessfully at the Copenhagen conference in December – would have done more harm than good. Reducing emissions enough to stabilize […]

Ben Somberg | January 19, 2010

Coal Ash Odds and Ends

Two developments to note on coal ash from recent days: OIRA extended its review of EPA’s not-yet-publicly-proposed regulation on coal ash. That gives it an additional 30-days from the previous Jan 14 deadline. Matthew Madia explains at The Fine Print. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson mentioned coal ash in an appearance Thursday, saying, “There has been […]