Insights^

Find our analysis on legislation, regulations, MedPAC meetings, and more. 

It Is Time to Separate Food Safety from the FDA?

Between the baby formula debacle and longer-than-expected review periods for COVID-19 vaccines, it’s been a rough year for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  The extent of the FDA’s problems is reflective of all the different responsibilities the vast agency has, ranging from control and supervision of food safety and tobacco products to pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices.  With the FDA’s plate so full, some policymakers feel splitting off food safety into its own agency is the best way forward.

The latest proposal to split up the FDA is the Food Safety Administration Act.  Introduced by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Rep. Rose DeLauro (D-CT), the bill would spin-off the FDA’s food-related responsibilities into a separate Food Safety Administration.  DeLauro has referred to food safety as a “second-class citizen” at the FDA, and both she and Durbin have said creating a separate agency led by a Senate-confirmed food expert would lead to better outcomes for consumers.

They argue that establishing a separate Food Safety Administration would improve food safety and benefit consumers by applying “focused leadership” from a food safety expert capable of providing more accountability.  Additionally, the newly formed agency’s unified structure and direct oversight capabilities would ensure constant attention to food safety issues and more bandwidth to stay on top of foodborne illnesses.

Indeed, policymakers have been discussing the separation of food safety from other FDA-regulated industries for years, or at least instituting reforms that would bolster the agency’s food safety responsibilities.  Here are some key examples from the past 15 years.

  • Some critics called for the FDA to be split into two agencies – one that handles drugs/medical devices and another than handles food safety and cosmetics – in the wake of a salmonella outbreak in 2008.
  • Other approaches have attempted to provide more resources and authorities for the FDA’s food safety arm as a way to bring about change from within.  In 2011, Congress enacted new measures that provided new regulatory programs for food importers, foreign producers, and fresh produce growers.
  • In 2010, the Obama administration established the new position of a deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine to provide direct oversight on food issues.  However, the Trump administration later took away the deputy commissioner’s authority over the agency’s respective policymaking units on food and veterinary medicine.  Notably, neither administration gave the deputy commissioner oversight authority on the agency’s food inspection and import activities.
  • In June 2018, the Trump administration proposed a plan to consolidate the FDA’s food safety functions into a new agency within the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) known as the Federal Food Safety Agency.  The FDA would have been renamed the Federal Drug Administration, but Congress would not extend him the power to reorganize the government. This similarly happened during the Obama administration where the administration put together a similar proposal to fold the FDA’s food inspection and enforcement services into the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service in 2015.

The FDA is also focusing on ways to improve.  Scrutiny over the agency’s regulation of electronic cigarettes and baby formula prompted the agency to order an external review of its activities on tobacco regulation and food safety.  The review will focus on the agency’s Human Foods Program, which Commissioner Robert Califf said has been stressed from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Reagan-Udall Foundation, which has been tasked with reviewing the agency, is set to complete its report by the end of September.  While it remains to be seen what the foundation will recommend, breaking up the agency into a separate entity focused on food might be the best move for consumers.  Former Deputy Commissioner for Food Michael Taylor recently wrote that food has been a “low priority” at the agency for decades.  One reason for this is the fact that most FDA commissioners are physicians whose expertise pertains to drugs, meaning they have little time or bandwidth set aside for food.

Another reason for FDA’s second-class status is a lack of sufficient funding.  Over the past 10 years, FDA’s food funding has grown by 42%, while funding for the agency’s drug and device-related programs has increased 122%.

But does the FDA even have to wait for Congress to split it up?   As Taylor argued, the FDA commissioner and the secretary of health and human services (HHS) could use their own authority to unite all the FDA’s food offices under a single deputy commissioner with strong oversight powers.  But until any serious reforms are made, the agency will likely struggle to find a way to give the proper time and attention to its long list of priorities.

What Happened, What You Missed: July 18-22

Odds of September CR Increase

Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL) said bicameral appropriators aren’t likely to agree on topline Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 spending levels until after the midterm election in November, meaning Congress will probably have to pass a continuing resolution (CR) to ensure government funding beyond the current deadline of September 30.  To date, the Senate has yet to introduce any appropriations bills, while the House is much further along in the process, having passed a six-bill minibus on Tuesday.

Launch of 988 Deemed a Success

Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Xavier Becerra touted last Saturday’s rollout of the new 988 national suicide hotline number a success, with the hotline seeing a 60% jump in calls compared to the previous weekend for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline.  The administration has spent over $430 million to help states prepare for higher call volumes by hiring more mental and behavioral health counselors to take calls.  Meanwhile, Congress is working on its own proposals to boost access to mental health care services.  In particular, the Senate Finance Committee is set to release legislation that would expand the behavioral health care workforce and allow the integration of mental and primary health care.

Advocates Call for More Government Action on Long COVID     

The federal government really needs to step up its work on addressing long COVID, according to health care providers and patients who testified before a House Oversight and Reform Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis hearing on Tuesday.  Some of the reforms witnesses called for include paid medical leave for patients, enhanced access to disability benefits, and more support for long COVID clinics.  During the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman James Clyburn (D-SC) stressed that more research is needed to understand the causes, risk factors, and effects of long COVID.  Witnesses also discussed the economic impact of long COVID, such as patients leaving the workforce.

Senate Weighs in on Reforms to Electoral College

A pair of bipartisan Senate bills aim to reform the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which controls the acceptance of presidential votes.  One proposal would increase the threshold to one-fifth of the members of the House and the Senate to object to the election results. Currently, only a single member of the House and Senate can object to a state’s Electoral College votes.  Another bill would increase the maximum penalty for people convicted of intimidating or threatening candidates, voters, and election officials to two years and make tampering with voting systems a federal crime.  Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has said that she hopes both bills can be signed into law by the end of the year.

ICYMI: 8 House Offices Are Unionizing

Eight House Democrat offices filed petitions to form unions after a new rule went into effect to allow legislative branch employees to unionize.  Relatively low pay as well as cases of harassment and burnout are among the reasons why staff have long been pushing for the right to organize on the Hill over the past few years.  Now, staff in the eight Democratic offices must wait on the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights to review the petitions before they can hold a secret ballot election to ultimately decide on unionizing.

pexels-sobia-akhtar-5652364-scaled

Implicit Bias Is CMMI’s Latest Problem to Tackle

Advancing health equity is one of the five strategic objectives the CMS Innovation Center (CMMI) outlined in its Strategy Refresh back in November 2021.  It’s no surprise that health equity is becoming an increasingly important goal at CMMI as the Biden administration has made health equity a major priority since day one.

However, CMMI has its work cut out for itself.  According to a July 2022 reportimplicit bias is pervasive in at least three payment models, which signals challenges if CMMI is serious about advancing equity.

Implicit bias is an involuntary bias that a person is unaware of.  Often times, negative attitudes and stereotypes can play a powerful role in shaping implicit bias, or “unconscious prejudice.”  Two top CMMI officials authored the report on implicit bias to analyze how implicit bias may be impacting beneficiary groups in payment models. (https://www.firstchoicedentrepair.com/)

In its analysis, CMMI only reviewed three models: the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) ModelKidney Care Choices (KCC) Model, and Million Hearts® Cardiovascular Risk Reduction Model.  CMMI selected these models because they represent a microcosm of CMMI models that vary by mandatory/voluntary status, financial methodology, and risk stratification.

Overall, the report found that use of certain risk-assessment and screening tools, provider tools, and payment design and risk-adjustment algorithms has led to the exclusion of some beneficiaries from these models.  Here are some key findings:

  • The CJR Model tests bundled payment plans for participating providers that perform knee and hip replacements.  The report found beneficiaries receiving joint replacements were “less medically complex” than those receiving joint replacements at the same hospitals before model participation began.  The report also found that beneficiaries in the model are less likely to be dual-eligible, which indicates a lower socio-economic status.  It is also worth noting that Black Americans are likely to receive knee and hip replacements than White Americans.
  • The KCC Model encourages nephrologists, dialysis facilities, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) practices to focus on the total care of their patients and incentivizes kidney transplants for chronic kidney disease beneficiaries.  The analysis found that the model’s medical eligibility criteria may have inadvertently excluded Black American beneficiaries, despite the fact that Black Americans are over three times more likely to have ESRD.
  • The Million Hearts Model provides financial incentives for practices to lower 10-year cardiovascular disease risk for the 30% of high-risk Medicare beneficiaries.  The evaluation found that despite being developed specifically for Black and White populations, the risk calculator used to predict risk scores underestimated risk among patients in other racial and ethnic groups that do not identify as White or Black as well as patients in lower-income households.

CMMI acknowledged that its findings are “troubling” and underscore a need for a “more systematic evaluation of implicit bias in current and new models.”  As a next step, CMMI says it is working on a “step-by-step guide” to detect and address bias in current models and prevent bias from forming in future one.

While it’s encouraging to see CMMI has a plan to address implicit bias, the revelation that unconscious prejudice is prevalent in three key payment models only adds to the list of challenges CMMI needs to address.  According to an August 2021 report, only a handful of CMMI’s 40-plus models have met the center’s statutorily required goal of reducing costs or improving quality.  In addition to the Biden administration’s emphasis on health equity, the report’s findings likely catalyzed CMMI to lay out its strategic refresh in November 2021, which makes reducing costs and improving quality its “overarching goal.”  On top of CMMI’s difficultly of meeting its statutory obligations, the center now faces the challenge of addressing implicit bias, which may also be prevalent in additional payment models.

All in all, CMMI’s issues with reigning in costs, boosting quality, and stopping implicit bias could signal larger structural problems within the center.  Of note, CMMI’s problems are not lost on lawmakers, in May 2022, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL) introduced bicameral legislation to require the center to work with experts on health equity when developing and reviewing payment models.

At least CMMI has acknowledged its challenges and is laying out plans to address them, including its strategic refresh and a forthcoming “step-by-step guide” on tackling implicit bias.  However, CMMI won’t be able to solve its problems overnight, and the center has a long way to go if it not only wants to achieve its statutory goals of bringing down costs and enhancing quality, but also take on new priorities like improving health equity.

markus-spiske-QozzJpFZ2lg-unsplash-scaled

What Happened, What You Missed: July 11-15

Administration Mulls Additional Boosters as Part of BA.5 Strategy

Biden administration officials are considering whether to allow all US adults to receive a second COVID-19 booster as part of a broader strategy to lessen brunt against a BA.5 wave this summer.  Currently, only adults over age 50 are eligible for a second booster, as well as individuals 12 years of age or older who are immunocompromised.  While some administration officials say a second booster would provide additional protection against hospitalization and death, others are concerned about the limited data on the benefits of an additional booster and warn too many boosters of the same vaccine could prevent the immune system from adapting to new variants.  While discussions on a second booster continue, any final decision would be up to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (Zolpidem)   On Tuesday, White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Ashish Jha told reporters that if FDA and CDC officials sign off on a second booster, individuals who receive it will still be eligible for Omicron-specific boosters this fall.

FDA Approves Novavax’s COVID-19 Vaccine for Emergency Use

On Wednesday, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for Novavax’s COVID-19 vaccine for individuals 18 years of age and older. .  Unlike the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, Novavax’s vaccine utilizes a more traditional protein-based model that may be more appealing to people who are skeptical of new mRNA technology or are allergic to the components of mRNA vaccines.  The Biden administration has already purchased 3.2 million doses  from Novavax in anticipation of the EUA.  Novavax shots could become available as soon as next week, after Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory panel convenes on  July 19 to vote on whether to recommend the vaccine.

New National Suicide Hotline Goes Live This Weekend

The new 988 mental health hotline is schedule to go live on Saturday, replacing the 800-273-TALK National Suicide Prevention Lifeline network that was launched in 2005.  For the past few months, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has been providing states millions in dollars of funding to ensure their crisis call centers are adequately staffed.  However, both federal and state officials are concerned that some states will be unable to handle a high volume of incoming calls once the new hotline is live.  While some states have fully staffed call centers that operate 24/7, others rely on volunteers and are forced to route their calls out-of-state when incoming call volume is high.  Additionally, many states have encountered challenges requesting permanent call center funding from their state legislatures due to the difficulty of predicting long-term demand.

House Aims to Approve FY23 Spending Bills by August

The House is hoping to pass all 12 of its Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 appropriations bills before August, according to House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT).  Next week, the House is schedule to vote on a package to fund six accounts (Transportation-HUD; Agriculture; Energy-Water; Financial Services; Interior-Environment; and Military Construction-VA), with votes for three of more spending bills expected for the week of July 25.  However, disagreements between both parties on abortion access and closing the Guantánamo Bay detention facility threaten to thwart DeLauro’s goal of finishing all spending bills before August recess.  Meanwhile, Senate appropriators are awaiting a bipartisan, bicameral topline agreement before introducing their own FY 2023 spending bills.

ICYMI: House Votes to Make It Easier to Report UFOs

The House voted Wednesday to create a secure government system for reporting unidentified flying objects (UFOs) via a bipartisan amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-NM) and Mike Gallagher (R-WI) proposed the amendment to offer a way for military and intelligence officials to discreetly report UFOs without fear of stigma or reprisal.  Gallego said that gathering more reports on UFO sightings is important from a national security standpoint because it will ensure the military has the best possible intelligence.  Of note, the amendment would allow people bound by non-disclosure agreements to submit reports on UFOs.

viktor-forgacs-FcDqdJUM6B4-unsplash-scaled

Fixing Medicare’s Insolvency Requires Both the Administration and Congress – So Where Are They?

The 2022 Medicare Trustees Report was full of grim news – namely, that the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is projected to hit insolvency by 2028.  Given the serious implications insolvency could have on access to care, stakeholders have been begging Congress and the administration to do something.

However, Washington has avoided serious attempts to address the HI Trust Fund’s insolvency for years, primarily because the most obvious fixes would be unpopular among voters.  Since the payroll taxes predominantly finance the HI Trust Fund, lawmakers could opt to raise payroll taxes to add more years to the fund.  Unfortunately, higher payroll taxes would mean less take-home pay for employees and would put pressure on employers, which sounds like a sure-fire way to anger the electorate.  Inflation and general concerns over cost-of-living issues would also exacerbate the impact of higher payroll taxes on workers.

Lawmakers could also maximize existing revenue streams by cutting Medicare spending, but this would spark political backlash from the health care sector.  The pandemic has stretched hospitals’ operating margins even thinner and reducing already-low Medicare reimbursement rates would make life even more difficult for providers.  Medicare could shift costs to beneficiaries in the form of higher deductibles and co-payments, but this would once again be political damaging as seniors will then have to grapple with the combined effects of higher health care costs and inflation.

The federal government could also incur Medicare savings by making the program more cost effective, but that’s no easy task.  During a series of congressional hearings of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 budget request for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Secretary Xavier Becerra repeatedly said value-based payment models could be used to save Medicare dollars and extend the HI Trust Fund’s solvency.  Unfortunately, these payment models haven’t had much of effect on Medicare’s finances.  Out of the 40 payment models launched by HHS over the past 10 years, only five have delivered “statistically significant savings.”  Even if all value-based payment models were to start immediately reducing costs, it would likely take years for these savings to make a serious dent on Medicare’s finances.

Congressional Action in Sight?

The urgency of addressing Medicare Part A’s finances isn’t lost on members of Congress.  During Becerra’s appearances before congressional committees last spring, Republican lawmakers repeatedly questioned the secretary about the administration’s plans for addressing the HI Trust Fund’s pending insolvency.  In response, Becerra repeatedly told lawmakers that they will have to work with HHS to develop legislation to improve the outlook for the HI Trust Fund. Rep. Adrien Smith (R-NE), one of the GOP members to question Becerra about the HI Trust Fund, penned a June 2022 op-ed that underscored the need for “bipartisan action” to shore up Part A revenue.

It’s not that Congress hasn’t taken action in the past.  There is a statutory requirement for the administration to submit a report to Congress when more than 45% of Medicare hospital spending is projected to come from general revenue – not the HI Trust Fund – within seven years.  However, as both Smith and Becerra confirmed in the recent HHS budget hearings, the Biden administration has no plans to meet this requirement.

Fortunately, a viable proposal to address the HI Trust Fund has emerged in recent days.  On July 7,  Senate Democrats reached an agreement to extend the solvency of the HI Trust Fund to 2031 by closing a Net Investment Income tax (NIIT) loophole involving pass-through businesses.  Primarily targeting high-income earners, the proposal to close the tax loophole was first put forth by the Biden administration back in 2021 as a part of its Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 budget request.   Senate Democrats are reportedly including this proposal in a broader reconciliation package to secure the support of Sen. Joe Manchin (D-VW), whose decision to withdraw support from last year’s package caused it to fall apart.

The proposal from Senate Democrats is getting attention in the House, too.  On July 11, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) introduced legislation that would similarly close the NIIT loophole.

However, the proposal is still in its infancy at this point, and it doesn’t have a strong likelihood of becoming law.  The Senate Parliamentarian has yet to complete the review of the new reconciliation proposal, and as last year has shown, delicate negotiations on a new reconciliation bill could collapse at any point.  However, as the Senate attempts to revive a reconciliation bill and the comments made during recent congressional hearings show that lawmakers are definitely concerned about Part A’s finances and recognize the importance of taking action before it’s too late.

joshua-sukoff-SYHi8oX0JC8-unsplash

Subscribe to Us Now!

Be a DC insider by getting our updates straight to your inbox