The Corner

Regulatory Policy

House Republicans Were Right to Vote against More FDA Funding

Empty shelves show a shortage of baby formula at a Target store in San Antonio, Texas, May 10, 2022. (Kaylee Greenlee Beal/Reuters)

The House of Representatives passed a bill yesterday that purports to address the baby-formula shortage. Introduced by House Democrats, the “Infant Formula Supplemental Appropriations Act” simply gives the Food and Drug Administration $28 million and doesn’t address any actual problems with the baby-formula market or the current shortage.

The bill passed 231 to 192, and all 192 votes against it came from Republicans. In response to criticism for voting against the bill, Representative Peter Meijer (R., Mich.) tweeted, “This one-page bill is just a $28M increase for FDA salaries. That’s it. If baby formula shortage was caused by an underfunded FDA, this would help. But it wasn’t.”

Meijer is absolutely correct. Here’s the text of the bill:

For an additional amount for “Salaries and Expenses”, $28,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2023, shall be available to address the current shortage of FDA-regulated infant formula and certain medical foods in the United States and to prevent future shortages, including such steps as may be necessary to prevent fraudulent products from entering the United States market: Provided, That the Commissioner of Food and Drugs shall report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate on a weekly basis on obligations of funding under this heading in this Act to address the shortage of infant formula and certain medical foods in the United States: Provided further, That such amount is designated by the Congress as being for an emergency requirement pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) and section 4001(b) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022.

The FDA doesn’t need more money. As Meijer went on to say, the bill rewards “an agency that is performing its mission poorly with more money without connecting the funds requested to better achieving the mission. The moral hazard is self-evident.”

The FDA’s overly stringent regulation of baby formula — which mirrors its overly cautious approach to everything it regulates and costs American lives by denying safe treatments to patients who need them — is part of the reason the baby-formula market is so brittle in the first place. The other reasons involve the WIC program, which is administered by the Department of Agriculture and is unrelated to the FDA. Rewarding one of the agencies that contributed to the current crisis with more funding as a response to that same crisis is how you guarantee more crises in the future.

Republicans have a superior alternative available. Senator Mike Lee (R., Utah) has proposed the FORMULA Act, which (cheesy name aside) is a much better approach to the problem. It would waive baby-formula tariffs from friendly countries with high health standards (e.g., Australia, Japan, the U.K., and the European Union). It would also waive FDA regulations on labeling and facility approval that have made it nearly impossible to import safe baby formula from those friendly countries. It would make the newly available imported baby formula eligible for WIC beneficiaries to purchase. Those provisions are excellent. They would expire in six months under Lee’s proposal, but Congress should strongly consider making them permanent.

The 192 Republicans who voted against more FDA funding yesterday did the right thing and resisted the just-do-something urge that often overcomes politicians during crises. Democrats’ approach to this shortage does not sufficiently address the problems at hand. Lee’s approach is much stronger, and Republicans should support it instead.

Dominic Pino is the Thomas L. Rhodes Fellow at National Review Institute.
Exit mobile version