The Food and Drug Administration plans to cut funding to states for produce and food inspection and recall personnel by up to 60% due to the overall agency budget remaining stagnant.
Under the Biden administration, states found out that the agency likely won't have the $34 million in carry-over funds that it provided states in cooperative agreements for food safety work.
In letters to state agriculture departments last month, the full effect of that de-facto cut began to take shape. States were informed of anticipated cuts to produce safety programs, rapid response teams and manufactured food regulatory program standards.
Under the agreements, state inspectors complete retail, field and facility inspections on behalf of the federal government. Often, local inspection is less costly than federal inspection.
There were minimal variations state by state in how much each program would be cut. Overall, the cuts add to up to hundreds of thousands of dollars, which will likely mean staff reductions, said Steven Mandernach, executive director of the Association of Food and Drug Officials. He said about 65% of the money provided through cooperative agreements pays for staff.
On average, state produce safety programs expect a 43% reduction in FDA funding, Mandernach said. This program covers produce safety inspection, training and outreach to growers. States inspect more than 90% of the nation’s produce.
The cuts come as growers are preparing to implement new food safety regulations. Last May, FDA released the final ag water rule, which aims to prevent food pathogen outbreaks by assessing and tracking water used in agricultural production.
Compliance dates stagger by farm size, with large farms expected to implement the rule in April. Small and very small farms have until April 2026 and 2027, respectively, to comply.
Mandernach said the cuts mean there will be no money to help producers understand and implement the rule. He said the federal government seems to think that farmers who produce a crop covered by the ag water rule will consistently grow that crop and won’t need continued outreach and training if they change crops.
“All of those things are just false assumptions, and that’s going to impact the ability to do what we ultimately want to do is ensure that this highly nutritional product is indeed safe and ready for human consumption,” Mandernach said.
The cuts in produce safety run counter to the "Make America Healthy Again" agenda, he said.
The largest cuts will affect state rapid response teams that react to foodborne illness outbreaks and share information with the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Minnesota was informed of a funding reduction of about $566,000, said Jeff Luedeman, assistant director of the state agriculture department’s Food and Feed Safety Division. That breaks down to a 42% cut in produce safety, 60% to rapid response teams and 55% to manufactured foods.
The cuts will take effect in the next fiscal year, or July 1.
Luedeman said the cuts will diminish the state’s capacity to support small food businesses and farms and to keep consumers safe through foodborne illness investigations.
Luedeman said states value the partnership with FDA and believe they can work together to help smaller businesses and farms comply with regulations. But reductions of this size put a lot of pressure on states, which may persuade some not to continue their cooperative agreements.
Cut through the clutter! We deliver the news you need to stay informed about farm, food and rural issues. Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse here.
“The states have to look and decide and determine if the amount of funds provided is worth it actually,” he said.
Russell Redding, Pennsylvania’s secretary of agriculture, said the department is looking at a variety of options to handle the costs. For example, he said some staff are supported entirely or partially by federal funds. Redding said states need to know if the federal government maintains its expectations and priorities for food safety and if there are resources to deliver on those.
Russell Redding (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania photo)
“To me, that’s the delta now, is that you don’t know whether these are, in fact, things that they want to do and they want to support,” he said. “We’ve got to reconcile all of these sort of statements and signal sending.” FDA did not respond to a request for comment.
Mandernach fears states could see additional cuts given the ongoing cuts in federal spending.
“We’re cutting what is the most efficient, least costly, closest to where things are happening folks in the system,” Mandernach said. “And I would argue perhaps that isn’t the best use of taxpayer resources.”
When FDA initially warned states about potential cuts, the explanation was based on stagnant budgets paired with increased regulatory requirements. Groups like the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture have pushed Congress to both increase FDA’s overall budget and require that states receive a certain amount of funding for these programs.
Congress recently passed a continuing resolution that will keep funding levels generally at fiscal year 2024 levels. Even if Congress takes action and appropriates more funding next year, that won’t make a difference for states until July 1, 2026, at which point staff may be gone.
Some food safety requirements FDA must enforce come from the Food Safety Modernization Act. The law includes rules on food traceability, produce safety and agricultural water.
“Either remove the obligation and responsibility, or fund and support it,” Redding said.
Some members of Congress have taken note of the issue. At a recent confirmation hearing for FDA Commissioner-nominee Martin Makary, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, raised concerns about funding cuts to state food safety programs.
Both House and Senate included report language in fiscal 2025 draft appropriation bills directing FDA to maintain funding for state and local programs. The bills didn't become law; Congress instead passed a continuing resolution to fund government through the end of the fiscal year.
Several senators sent a letter to FDA’s then-deputy commissioner of the Human Foods Program, Jim Jones, asking for an explanation of the cuts.
If the states decline to enter long-term food safety agreements with the federal government, Manternach said, it is unlikely that federal inspectors have the resources to make up that work.
“It’s going to be a case of where there’s less oversight over the food supply and less coordination,” Mandernach said. “I don’t think the outcomes are good.”
For more news, go to www.Agri-Pulse.com
