Alliance for A Stronger FDA Urges Congress: Provide Additional Funding Increases To Support FDA

Alliance for A Stronger FDA Urges Congress: Provide Additional Funding Increases To Support FDA ------------------ FDA’s FY 13 Funding Would Increase $22 Million Under Senate Bill WASHINGTON, D.C., April 26, 2012 – The Alliance for a Stronger FDA expressed appreciation for the Senate Appropriation Committee’s support of additional FY 13 funding for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, saying it is a “step in the right direction,” but that higher funding is needed given the FDA’s vast responsibilities and importance to public health protection. Under proposed legislation adopted by the Committee this morning, FDA’s appropriated funding would be increased by $22 million above its FY 12 level of $2.507 billion. "In this year of austerity, we appreciate that the Senate has proposed a small increase for FDA, even while many other agencies have been cut. This is clearly a step in the right direction” said Margaret Anderson, President of the Alliance and Executive Director of FasterCures. “However, FDA’s growing responsibilities and resource needs are not diminished because federal spending is being reduced. With no other agency as fallback, we believe that FDA's funding should be further increased to reflect the agency's vast responsibilities and increased workload. Inadequate funding for the FDA has real and immediate consequences as it jeopardizes the public health." "We are grateful for Senate leadership to assure that FDA has the funds to continue its current mission. However, this is not enough when the FDA mission is expanding and the agency is providing services and protections that Americans value," added Diane Dorman, Vice President of the Alliance and Vice President for Policy at the National Organization for Rare Disorders. "The Alliance, which represents the entire FDA stakeholder community, is concerned. We need a strong FDA.” Dorman noted that FDA not only protects and advances the public health, but also provides an economic benefit to the US. The importance of FDA and its regulated industry to the American economy is detailed in the Alliance's white paper: FDA: A Cornerstone of America’s Economic Future. The Alliance’s 200 members are comprised of consumer, patient, professional and research groups, companies, trade associations, and individuals who support increased appropriated funding for FDA. The Alliance is the only multi-stakeholder group that advocates for increasing resources at FDA to match the agency’s responsibilities. More information about the Alliance can be found at www.StrengthenFDA.org.

Farm Bill Proposal Would Cut $4 Billion from SNAP, Resulting in Lost Meals for Struggling Americans

Farm Bill Proposal Would Cut $4 Billion from SNAP, Resulting in Lost Meals for Struggling Americans FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Etienne Melcher, 202.986.2200 x3012 Washington, D.C. – April 26 – The Farm Bill proposal passed today by the Senate Agriculture Committee includes a $4.49 billion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by limiting states’ ability to operate “Heat and Eat” policies. “With millions of people struggling to pay for food, housing, health, and energy costs in this tough economy, the nation’s safety net must be strengthened -- not cut. Today’s vote means less food in the refrigerator for struggling families,” said FRAC President Jim Weill. “Attempts to dismiss such cuts as ‘accounting’ fixes obscures the fact that it is a cut in benefits with real impact on people and their ability to purchase food.” Weill also noted recent polling data, which found widespread support for SNAP. Seventy-seven percent of voters said that cutting SNAP would be the wrong way to reduce government spending. “Americans recognize that SNAP works. Congress must stop these attempts to shred our safety net, and instead tackle hunger with the zeal that the situation – and that the public – demand,” said Weill. Many low-income Americans face an impossible choice between paying for food or paying for energy, but “Heat and Eat” coordinates SNAP and the Low-Income Household Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) to help them afford both. Currently, the District of Columbia and 14 states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin) implement “Heat and Eat” policies, with California soon to join them. These states’ LIHEAP agencies provide small cash LIHEAP benefits directly to SNAP households. This targeted LIHEAP benefit helps meet LIHEAP’s requirement for outreach, simplifies the SNAP shelter deduction calculation, and, by increasing SNAP benefits to more realistic levels, alleviates some of the untenable “heat or eat” choices that households face. Limiting SNAP “Heat and Eat” could trigger sizable reductions in monthly SNAP benefits for many households – an estimated $90 loss in benefits for households. “Cutting SNAP this way means lost meals for hungry Americans,” concluded Weill. “This cut is at odds with every bipartisan deficit proposal discussed over the past year, including the Budget Control Act which protected SNAP from cuts. Bipartisan groups such as Simpson-Bowles, Domenici-Rivlin, and the Gang of Six have recognized that it is a fundamental mistake to cut SNAP.”

Lucas Statement on the Senate Ag Committee's Farm Bill

Lucas Statement on the Senate Ag Committee's Farm Bill WASHINGTON – Chairman Frank Lucas issued the following statement after the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry approved the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012. "I commend Chairwoman Stabenow, Ranking Member Roberts and the other members of the Senate Ag Committee for advancing their farm bill today. This is an important first step in the development of the next Farm Bill. I look forward to concluding the House Agriculture Committee’s hearing process and working with Ranking Member Peterson and members of the Committee to write the House bill in the coming weeks. "I am disappointed by the Senate bill’s commodity title because it does not work for all of agriculture. It fails to provide producers a viable safety net and instead locks in profit for a couple of commodities. "I have made it clear that my chief priority is making certain that the commodity title is equitable and provides a safety net for all covered commodities and all regions of the country. A shallow loss program is not a safety net. It does not provide protection against price declines over multiple years and it does not work for all commodities."