posted on December 8, 2006 05:57:39 PM new
Here's how the present administration is keeping our health a #1 priority....ya, right.
Budget Slashes Enforcement at FDA, EPA
The White House�s fiscal year 2006 budget submission will mean big cuts in food and drug safety inspection as well as state enforcement of environmental protections.
FDA
Amidst mounting concern over the safety of our food supply from threats such as mad cow disease and bioterrorism and after a storm of criticism about FDA�s botched inspection of British flu vaccine facilities, which led to a vaccine shortage this winter, FDA�s budget proposes cuts to nearly all of its inspection programs.
The new FDA budget proposes major cuts in both foreign and domestic inspection programs, including significant spending reductions in the following areas:
5 percent for domestic food safety inspections,
5.8 percent for foreign drug plant inspections, and
4.7 percent for inspections of national blood banks.
According to an agency statement given to USA Today, FDA will stretch its meager budget by targeting inspection towards only high risk cases: �Intelligent, risk-based inspections are more important than absolute numbers of inspections.� Still, overall inspections will drop significantly if the proposed budget is approved. Despite FDA promises to Congress to increase vaccine plant inspections from once every two years to once a year in response to the flu vaccine debacle, the number of drug plant manufacturing inspections will drop from 1,430 this year to 1,355 next year. Inspections of foreign drug plants will fall from 515 to 485 per year.
The $1.9 billion budget provides a 4.5 percent overall increase in the FDA budget. FDA has taken the hint from the storm of public outrage over Vioxx and has asked for increased funding for drug safety reviews. The budget also includes an expansion of bioterrorism food safety programs.
Considering the controversy surrounding FDA this past year, the budget cuts for inspection are particularly ironic. Last fall, contamination at a British flu vaccine plant left the U.S. scrambling for vaccines weeks before the flu season. Congressional hearings and news media coverage revealed that the FDA had failed to frequently inspect the plant, which accounted for half of the U.S. flu vaccine supply.
EPA
Bush�s proposed budget for the Environmental Protection Agency not only cuts overall budgetary spending by 5.6 percent but specifically targets money that passes through EPA to the states.
Despite the central role states play in carrying out environmental protections, Bush�s budget request has cut $271 million of EPA funds that pass through the states. In fact, the cuts to the states are proportionally greater than the overall cut in the agency funding request. The White House asked for $400 million less than what Congress allocated to the agency in 2005 and $220 million less than the White House 2005 budget request.
The 2006 budget represents the second year in a row that the state portion of EPA�s budget has decreased while the agency�s portion increased. The ratio of funding that stays at EPA to funding allocated to the states is generally about 5 to 3, which in the past has meant about $3 billion of EPA�s budget has been funneled to the states. On top of that, states spend another $15 billion, approximately, on environmental protections with money that comes from both state sources and permit fees.
EPA delegates 75 percent of its work to the states, and the states are responsible for 90 percent of enforcement efforts. Therefore, as EPA�s portion of funding to the states decreases, so will state enforcement and permitting, according to Steven Brown, executive director of Environmental Council of the States (ECOS).
The situation for state environmental protection is made even more dismal by growing state deficits. Currently 26 states are running a funding deficit, forcing state legislatures to cut discretionary spending, which often includes cuts to environmental enforcement.
Over the past five years, EPA has promulgated 160 new rules that have major impacts on the states. Despite the necessity of these rules to protect public health and the environment, dwindling state funding has hindered implementation and enforcement of these important safeguards. At the same time, environmental enforcement has already dropped off significantly over the past several years.
posted on December 8, 2006 10:40:56 PM new
Budget Slashes Enforcement at FDA, EPA The White House�s fiscal year 2006 budget submission will mean big cuts in food and drug safety inspection as well as state enforcement of environmental protections.
posted on December 8, 2006 11:26:19 PM new
Something to keep you busy for the rest of the night.....
....you might review your crazy OP copy and paste and TRY to figure out what's WRONG with it. LOL LOL LOL
IF YOU CAN.
As I've pointed out many times before....it's quite obvious why you don't post supporting links.
lol lol lol omg....
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
OMB Watch was formed in 1983 to lift the veil of secrecy shrouding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB oversees federal regulation, the budget, information collection and dissemination, proposed legislation, testimony by agencies, and much more. While OMB's actions were having an enormous impact on agency operations and the pursuit of social justice, it remained largely behind the scenes -- unaccountable and little understood by the public and public interest groups. By explaining governmental processes and monitoring OMB, OMB Watch helped bring sunshine to this powerful and secretive agency.
Over the years, we at OMB Watch have expanded our focus to address the substantive issues we originally began tracking in the course of monitoring OMB. We now concentrate on four main areas:
In all our work, we are committed to improving access to decision-makers and energizing citizen participation to strengthen civil society and make government more just, equitable and accountable. We work primarily with and through the nonprofit sector because of its vital and powerful role in supporting and securing our communities and democracy.
At the national level, OMB Watch is deeply engaged in policy debate and formulation, and is well-known for convening diverse coalitions comprising nonprofits that deal with environmental, low-income, health, education, consumer, labor, religious, and other public interest issues. For example, in 1995 we initiated Citizens for Sensible Safeguards with the endorsement of 300 organizations calling for the strengthening and vigorous enforcement of regulatory protections for public health, safety, civil rights, and the environment.
Similarly in 2004, we launched OpenTheGovernment.org, an unprecedented coalition of journalists, environmentalists, labor, and consumer and good government groups seeking more open and accountable government. We continue to coordinate and grow both campaigns. Other coalitions and campaigns in which we play a key role include Americans for a Fair Estate Tax, Community Toxics Watch, and Nonprofitadvocacy.org.
At the same time, OMB Watch works closely with state and community groups across the country. Since our first days we have conducted workshops and briefings on a range of federal issues in collaboration with hundreds of grassroots organizations that today regularly help us with our work. In 1989 we created RTK NET, an online service providing environmental data. We have since taught thousands of small groups how to use RTK NET and other online and Internet technologies effectively to address problems in their communities.
Other current OMB Watch projects include opposing the politicization of science and Data Quality Act; soaring federal deficits and tax cuts that favor the wealthy; and efforts to censor and suppress nonprofit advocacy. In a number of areas, we are also working to create long-term, proactive initiatives, to break the defensive cycle of reaction that for too long has dominated progressive movements.
posted on December 9, 2006 09:19:46 AM new
So....... tell me, Linda.......... in order to call more names did you first have to pull on your big girl panties and put on your "Gosh-I-really-care" face or are you still wearing both from the other day?
posted on December 9, 2006 09:24:31 AM new
Linduh, Idiots LOL all the time and fail to recognize common dangers in their environment. You've made three posts to this thread and failed to recognize those dangers mentioned in the topic or make any statement with substance. "Idiot" appears to describe you.
posted on December 9, 2006 09:36:20 AM new
And bereft of words or ideas, they usually copy paste a response that they read on a bumper sticker or a cheap coffee mug. Something about "big girl panties", for example.
posted on December 9, 2006 09:50:10 AM new
sure....here's one just for kiara - she to can't see the obvious.
et tu dufus?
and for you, helen, mingotree AND kiara -
Let's hope intellignet life exists in space. I'm so lonely here.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 9, 2006 10:22:27 AM new
Now maybe one of these geniuses [BIG EYEROLL HERE] lol lol - can show us PROOF of what the FDA FY2006 budget really WAS. LOL
Not what was being SPECULATED on TWO YEARS AGO?
Wanna bet they can't????
[by the way - in two months our congress will be working on our 2008 budgets
posted on December 9, 2006 11:19:12 AM new
your mother may be a lady....but you're certainly NOT. lol
STILL can't answer the question about how much the FY2006 FDA budget was INCREASED??????
OR how much the FY 2007 FDA budget was ALSO INCREASED???
tsk tsk tsk ....nope, having knowledge is not what you're best at.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Dec 9, 2006 11:26 AM ]
posted on December 9, 2006 01:53:03 PM new
Mingo leaves and then linda leaves. It must be some kind of symbiotic relationship -- they need each other, like the bumblebee and the flower.
posted on December 9, 2006 03:20:31 PM new
Helen, you're just jealous because linduh's stalking ME ...sheesh can't you share...you've been fighting with her longer than I have
It's too bad linduh's reading capabilities don't extend to the END of the OP
ALL I gave was the name, address, fax and phone number
It sure got her going though, didn't it What a hissy fit !!!
posted on December 11, 2006 04:41:38 AM new
Why the hell do you libtards want the goverment to keep you safe?? Are you too stupid to do it yourself?? Do you want them to wipe your behind too??
posted on December 11, 2006 07:46:45 AM new
mingo said:
"It's too bad linduh's reading capabilities don't extend to the END of the OP"
LOL...another one like kiara...thinks just because there's a current date is on the page they're viewing....then THAT'S the date the article was written/pertains to.
Again, they show their own lack of knowledge.
No problem with my 'reading capabilities' ...
the problem here is that YOU have no CLUE what budget year we are currently in - and it's NOT 2006.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Dec 11, 2006 07:50 AM ]
posted on December 11, 2006 08:09:38 AM new
Duhlinduh says, ""LOL...another one like kiara...thinks just because there's a current date is on the page they're viewing....then THAT'S the date the article was written/pertains to.
Again, they show their own lack of knowledge.
No problem with my 'reading capabilities' ...
the problem here is that YOU have no CLUE what budget year we are currently in - and it's NOT 2006. """
Oh, you can read DATES but but not what's IN THE POST....why is that?
Because it shows the bush administration cutting into OUR safety and protection???
Now here's a really hard question....what does the DATE have to do with it? I'll answer for you because you can never answer questions....the answer is NOTHING.
posted on December 11, 2006 08:16:17 AM new
LOL.....you still don't get it. figures.
"[i]Budget Slashes Enforcement at FDA, EPA The White House�s fiscal year 2006 budget submission
will mean big cuts in food and drug safety inspection as well as state enforcement of environmental protections[/i]."
If you weren't so stupid you'd know how to go to the FY2006 budget and SEE for yourself that the FDA budget was NOT cut...but rather increased from 2005 to 2006.
Then you could ALSO SEE, maybe not grasp, that the FDA budget was AGAIN INCREASED from 2006-2007.
But....SIGH.....instead you post an article written in Feb of 2005....that speaks to what WOULD happen IF Congress approves what was SUBMITTED. NOT what actually PASSED....rather what was SUBMITTED ONLY.
So...the facts are there were NO CUTS in the FDA budget for those years. NONE.
AND....matter of fact an additional $20 million was added to protect our food against possible terrorist attempts to hurt Americans that way.
Does that make it simple enough to penitrate your hard skull????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Dec 11, 2006 08:21 AM ]
What a hissy fit !!!