Blog Archives

The Club PUBlication 03/31/2025

3/31/2025

A WATCHDOG WITHERS;
HOMEBUYERS BEWARE
Story by ANN CARRNS
Illustration by TILL LAUER The New York Times

House prices are stubbornly high, and mortgage rates remain substantially above their pre-pandemic level. Now, with the spring homebuying season looming, shoppers have a new worry: A major federal consumer watchdog has been hobbled.

Without the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the agency responsible for overseeing most aspects of the homebuying process, consumer advocates say homebuyers need to be their own watchdogs.
"Now when you buy a house, you are much more vulnerable to being misled," said Sharon Cornelissen, housing director with the Consumer Federation of America. "It's important to be on guard, because guardrails are being taken away."

Buying a home is the biggest financial decision most Americans will make in their lives. The typical home price is about $397,000, according to the National Association of Realtors, but prices are far higher in some parts of the country. In several California counties, for instance, the median price at the end of last year was over $1.5 million, with monthly mortgage payments over $8,000.

What role has the consumer bureau played in homebuying?

The consumer bureau was created after the financial and housing crisis in 2007-08 to streamline oversight of lenders and financial companies serving consumers. Over the years, the bureau has moved to ease the mortgage shopping process by offering simplified forms and educational tools, and has taken action against an array of banks and lenders.

In 2022, for instance, the bureau ordered Wells Fargo to pay $3.7 billion for mishandling a variety of customer accounts, including improperly denying thousands of requests for mortgage loan modifications that in some cases led borrowers to lose their homes to "wrongful" foreclosures.

On Jan. 17, in the final days of the Biden administration, the bureau reached a settlement with Draper and Kramer Mortgage Corp. for discouraging borrowers from applying for loans to buy homes in majority Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in Chicago and Boston. In an email, the lender's lawyers said Draper and Kramer "considers the matter closed and denies" the bureau's claims but chose to settle in part to avoid "protracted legal costs."

What has changed under the Trump administration?
Since President Donald Trump took office Jan. 20, the consumer bureau has taken a hands-off approach. Last month, it dropped legal action against Rocket Homes Real Estate, which had been accused in December of illegally steering prospective borrowers to an affiliate, Rocket Mortgage. In an emailed statement, Rocket Homes said it "has always connected buyers with top performing agents based only on objective criteria like how well they helped homebuyers achieve their dream of homeownership."
The bureau also dropped a suit against Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, owned by Berkshire Hathaway, for making loans to buyers of manufactured homes who it knew could not afford to repay them. A rule requiring mortgage lenders to verify that borrowers are able to pay was a key aspect of changes put in place after the financial crisis, when many people lost their homes because they couldn't make their loan payments.
In a prior statement, Vanderbilt said the lawsuit was "unfounded and untrue, and is the latest example of politically motivated, regulatory overreach."

Vanderbilt also said it exceeds legal requirements for assessing a borrower's ability to pay.

Alys Cohen, a senior attorney with the National Consumer Law Center, said the bureau had effectively stopped overseeing whether lenders were complying with consumer protection laws. Other federal regulators oversee banks, she said, but their main focus is an institution's overall safety and soundness, rather than its treatment of consumers. States also regulate banks and other lenders.

"People may be exposed to high prices and hidden relationships they may not know about," she said. (The center has joined a lawsuit opposing the administration's efforts to dismantle the consumer bureau.) The consumer bureau didn't respond to an email seeking comment on its activities.

How can homebuyers manage costs and reduce risks?
Research by the consumer bureau found that only about half of borrowers shop for better terms and interest rates when taking out a new home loan or refinancing a mortgage.

That may be because getting quotes takes time, and consumers may get confused when comparing complex choices, leading them to rely on a loan officer they already know or a single referral from a real estate agent or friend.

Yet shopping around with different lenders to compare costs can save borrowers thousands of dollars, according to research from Freddie Mac.
Getting two rate quotes could save as much as $600 annually, and getting at least four quotes could save more than $1,200 a year, Freddie Mac said.
Homebuyers use referrals from their real estate agents for providers like title insurers and home inspectors, but borrowers should shop around for these providers as well, housing advocates say. The consumer bureau found last year that home loan closing costs had risen significantly, in part because rising interest rates were leading more borrowers to pay upfront for "discount points" to reduce the rate on their loans.

Cohen, of the consumer law center, also suggested taking a homebuyer education course, particularly if you are a first-time buyer. (Lenders may require the courses in some cases, such as if you seek help with a down payment.) The courses, offered in person or online, help shoppers understand what's involved in finding, financing and owning a home, including how to select a lender. To find a course approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, check the agency's website.
What if I run into a problem with my mortgage or my home lender?
You can file a complaint with the consumer bureau, although it's unclear whether complaints are being processed. "The law stands," Cornelissen said. "It's just harder to enforce" without the bureau.
In a court filing this week, the chief of staff for the bureau's office of consumer response said that many people "are not receiving timely responses to their complaints" and that for those facing urgent situations, like losing their home to an imminent foreclosure, "there is simply no one at the CFPB to help."
Christopher Peterson, a professor at the University of Utah's Quinney College of Law and an expert in consumer law, said, "I still think it's worth complaining."
It's not yet clear, he said, how legal fights over efforts to "de-staff" the consumer bureau will be resolved, but the law requires the bureau to maintain a complaint process.
After showing an error message for weeks, the consumer bureau's website now opens directly onto its complaint portal.
You can also complain to the consumer protection arm of your state attorney general's consumer office, Peterson said.
State regulators may not always have the same resources and expertise as federal agencies, he said, but they may take on a larger enforcement role if the consumer bureau is diminished.
Can I take my mortgage lender to court?
Some consumer loans require private arbitration of disputes outside the courts, but that's not the case with mortgages, Peterson said. If you believe you were overcharged or otherwise mistreated, you can bring legal action yourself. Such claims can be complicated, he said, but because a home purchase "can affect your financial destiny for a long period of time," a lawsuit may be worth it.
One way to find a lawyer who specializes in consumer rights law is to search the website of the National Association of Consumer Advocates.

The Club PUBlication 03/24/2025

3/24/2025

New rules on Social Security ID imposed
By FATIMA HUSSEIN The Associated Press

WASHINGTON - In an effort to limit fraudulent claims, the Social Security Administration will impose tighter identity proofing measures — which will require millions of recipients and applicants to visit agency field offices rather than interact with the agency over the phone.

Beginning March 31, people will no longer be able to verify their identity to the SSA over the phone and those who cannot properly verify their identity over the agency's "my Social Security" online service will be required to visit an agency field office in person to complete the verification process, agency leadership told reporters Tuesday.

The change will apply to new Social Security applicants and existing recipients who want to change their direct deposit information.

Retiree advocates warn that the change will negatively affect older Americans in rural areas, including those with disabilities, mobility limitations, those who live far from SSA offices and have limited internet access.

The plan also comes as the agency plans to shutter dozens of Social Security offices throughout the country and has already laid out plans to lay off thousands of workers.

In addition to the identity verification change, the agency announced that it plans to expedite processing of recipients' direct deposit change requests — both in person and online — to one business day. Previously, online direct deposit changes were held for 30 days.

"The Social Security Administration is losing over $100 million a year in direct deposit fraud," Leland Dudek, the agency's acting commissioner, said on a Tuesday evening call with reporters. "Social Security can better protect Americans while expediting service."

He said a problem with eliminating fraudulent claims is that "the information that we use through knowledge-based authentication is already in the public domain."

More than 72.5 million people, including retirees and children, receive retirement and disability benefits through the Social Security Administration.

Connecticut Rep. John Larson, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee, said in a statement that "by requiring seniors and disabled Americans to enroll online or in person at the same field offices they are trying to close, rather than over the phone, Trump and Musk are trying to create chaos and inefficiencies at SSA so they can privatize the system."

The DOGE website says that leases for 47 Social Security field offices across the country, including in Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Kentucky and North Carolina, have been or will be ended.

The Club PUBlication 03/17/2025

3/17/2025

TRUMP’S CALL TO SCRAP CHIPS SPREADS PANIC
President derided program that helped U.S. rebuild its semiconductor industry.
By TRIPP MICKLE and ANA SWANSON The New York Times

WASHINGTON - As President Donald Trump addressed Congress last week, he veered off script to attack a sensitive topic, the CHIPS Act, a bipartisan law aimed at making the United States less reliant on Asia for semiconductors.

Republican lawmakers had sought and received reassurances over the past few months that the Trump administration would support the program Congress created. But halfway through Trump's remarks, he called the law a "horrible, horrible thing."

"You should get rid of the CHIP Act," he told House Speaker Mike Johnson as some lawmakers applauded.

The CHIPS program was one of the few things to unite much of Washington in recent years, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle worked with private companies to draft a bill that would funnel $50 billion to rebuild the U.S. semiconductor industry, which makes the foundational technology used to power cars, computers and coffee makers. After President Joe Biden signed it into law in 2022, companies found sites in Arizona, New York and Ohio to construct new factories. The Commerce Department vetted those plans and began to dole out billions of dollars in grants.

Now, Trump is threatening to upend years of work. Chip company executives, worried that funding could be clawed back, are calling lawyers to ask what wiggle room the administration has to terminate signed contracts, said eight people familiar with the requests.

After the speech, Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., who championed CHIPS, said he reached out to the White House to seek clarity about Trump's attack because the criticism was "in tension" with the administration's previous support.

"If it needs to transform into a different model over a period of time, I'm certainly supportive of that," Young said last week. "But let's be clear, the CHIPS and Science Act, at least the chips portion, has mostly been implemented.

It has been one of the greatest successes of our time."

The United States pioneered the semiconductor industry, designing the first microchips and the processes for making them, allowing it to become an early tech leader. But in the 1980s, companies began outsourcing most production to Asia.

U.S. lawmakers began pushing to rebuild domestic chip production after the pandemic created a global chip shortage that forced some U.S. auto factories to shutter, resulting in the CHIPS Act.

But the Trump administration has already taken steps to whittle away at the program.

In late February, Michael Grimes, a senior official at the Department of Commerce and former investment banker at Morgan Stanley, conducted brief interviews with employees of the CHIPS Program Office, which oversees the grants.

In interactions some described as "demeaning," Grimes asked employees to justify their intellect by providing test results from the SAT or an IQ test, said four people familiar with the evaluations. Some were asked to do math problems, like calculate the value of four to the fourth power or long division.

Last week, the Commerce Department laid off 40 of the CHIPS office employees, nearly a third of the entire team, these people said.

The administration has also begun discussing changes to projects that received chip-related subsidies, according to three people familiar with the internal conversations. The Biden administration gave preferential treatment for recipients that hired unionized construction workers and provided child care for employees, guidelines that could be changed, the people said.

The reviews and layoffs were previously reported by Reuters and CNBC.

On Wednesday, the day after Trump's speech, the Semiconductor Industry Association organized a call with member companies, said three people familiar with the discussion.

During the call, people chalked up Trump's frustration with the law to personal animus with Biden.

Some said that Trump's criticism could create challenges by drawing public attention to their projects, according to the people. But many also expressed confidence that their legal agreements with the Commerce Department couldn't be changed.

The Semiconductor Industry Association declined to comment.

So far, the Commerce Department has signed contracts to grant more than $36 billion in federal subsidies under the CHIPS Act. Samsung, Intel, Micron, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., known as TSMC, and others in response have pledged to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in U.S. chipmaking facilities.

Trump has proposed replacing those incentives with tariffs that increase the cost of making chips overseas. On Tuesday, he said that the threat of tariffs had compelled TSMC, the world's biggest maker of advanced semiconductors, to increase its U.S. investment by $100 billion and double the number of plants it is building in Arizona, to six.
"We don't have to give them money," Trump said. "We just want to protect our businesses and our people, and they will come because they won't have to pay tariffs if they build in America."

It's unclear how much of a factor tariffs played in TSMC's plans. The company had already acquired land and drafted plans to expand its footprint in Arizona once it had the customers to support three additional plants, said three people familiar with the CHIPS Act. TSMC is investing earlier than previously planned, partly because customers like Apple and Nvidia committed to buying more U.S.-made chips, the people added.

TSMC and Intel declined to comment.

Micron and Samsung didn't respond to requests for comment.
Some in the chips industry have been formulating plans to try to convince Trump of the law's value since the election, including at the industry's annual gathering in San Jose, California, in November.

The initial legislation was spurred partly by a request from officials during the first Trump administration that TSMC invest in the United States, which kick-started an effort from Congress to secure funding for the company.

That soon snowballed into a broader effort to fund the industry, as other companies and lawmakers wanted to participate.

The risk of losing funding has caused some industry executives to complain that the government was too slow to provide subsidies in the first place.

While the law went into place in August 2022, the Biden administration spent months carefully vetting each project.

Most of its largest grants were finalized after the election.

"Is it perfect? No," said Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., during a Washington tech and policy conference last week.

"But without it, there would not have been another fabrication facility built in America."

The Club PUBLICATION 03/10/2025

3/10/2025

DOGE driving Social Security cuts
Outsiders will make mistakes as they slash jobs, budgets, acting head says.
By LISA REIN, JEFF STEIN, HANNAH NATANSON The Washington Post

Your Social Security office has been permanently closed to save money!

The newly installed caretaker at the Social Security Administration acknowledged this week that Elon Musk's government efficiency program is calling the shots as the agency races to slash thousands of jobs and shrink its budget, telling a group of advocates, "Things are currently operating in a way I have never seen in government before."

In a meeting Tuesday with his senior staff and about 50 legal-aid attorneys and other advocates for the disabled and elderly, acting SSA Commissioner Leland Dudek referred to the tech billionaire's costcutting team — known as the Department of Government Efficiency — as "outsiders who are unfamiliar with nuances of SSA programs," according to a meeting participant's detailed notes that were obtained by the Washington Post.

"DOGE people are learning and they will make mistakes, but we have to let them see what is going on at SSA," Dudek told the group, according to the notes. "I am relying on longtime career people to inform my work, but I am receiving decisions that are made without my input. I have to effectuate those decisions."

His remarks to skeptical advocates came on Dudek's 12th day in a role that the White House rewarded him with after he secretly shared information with DOGE. His short tenure — while President Donald Trump's nominee to permanently run the agency waits in the wings — has been consumed by a whirlwind downsizing of the staff in charge of the safety-net gram used by 73 million retired and disabled Americans.

Dudek has announced plans to slash 7,000 jobs, a cut of more than 12%. He has moved to close regional hubs and field offices that serve the public, eliminated entire programs and consolidated departments.
An exodus of senior executives on his watch — some voluntary, others forced — is fast depleting decades of expertise. And last week, the longstruggling disability benefits system came under threat as backlogged state offices that review claims were told there would be no more overtime or hiring.

Yet it's still not clear what Trump and Musk have in mind as an endgame for Social Security, which has long been a political third rail in Washington.

The president has made promises that "we're not touching Social Security," even as DOGE races to shrink the government. About a dozen Muskaligned tech engineers have gained access to databases containing reams of taxpayer information, and the cost-cutting goal appears to overlap with an urgency to find fraud.

Meanwhile, a group of labor unions are asking a federal court for an emergency order to block DOGE's access. A motion for emergency relief was filed late Friday in federal court in Maryland by the legal services group Democracy Forward against the Social Security Administration and Dudek.

After Musk's claim that vast numbers of centenarians were fraudulently receiving retirement benefits was debunked, Trump doubled down Tuesday night in his address to a joint session of Congress. "We're also identifying shocking levels of incompetence and probable fraud in the Social Security program for our seniors," Trump falsely stated.

Musk's attacks last week on Social Security — he described it as "the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time" — have further heightened alarm and uncertainty for lawmakers, policymakers and the public about whether Americans' earned benefits will end up as collateral damage.
"They're alleging that they're uncovering massive fraud in the system," said Kathleen Romig, director of Social Security and disability policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "But where are they going with this? There's very little fraud in the retirement system. Since they're mispresenting the data in such extreme ways, it's hard to know."

On Thursday morning — three hours after the publication of this story online — an all-staff email went out to SSA employees informing them that they would be prevented "effective today" from accessing certain websites on their government devices, including "online shopping," "general news" and "sports."

"These additional restrictions will help reduce risk and better protect the sensitive information entrusted to us in our many systems," the email stated, according to a copy obtained by the Post.

The new guidance will further limit the beleaguered staff's ability to do their jobs, one SSA employee warned, because news sites — especially obituaries — are key sources staff rely on to prevent fraud.

Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme, a fraudulent investment scam that pays early investors with money from later investors in an attempt to appear profitable. It is an earned benefit program for seniors and disabled Americans funded through payroll taxes that has never missed a payment — though uncertainty about the program's solvency because of falling birthrates and growing life spans has made it a political minefield.

Democrats have pounced on what they say is reckless rhetoric and thoughtless cuts unfolding at the agency of 57,000 employees. Social Security is the government's central hub for some of Americans' most sensitive personal and financial information, and it is the country's largest payer of benefits, issuing more than $126 billion a month in mostly earned benefits — a massive sum that courses through the economy. One of the top motivations for constituents to contact their members of Congress is when they can't get help processing a retirement or disability claim.

"Now we know that something we Senate Democrats have feared for a long time is coming true," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at a news conference on Capitol Hill last week. "Social Security is under attack and at risk."

Other lawmakers said they fear the benefit is on the path to being privatized. In recent days, Martin O'Malley, who served a year as SSA commissioner under President Joe Biden, sounded the alarm in a rare public swipe at a successor.

"Ultimately, you're going to see the system collapse and an interruption of benefits," O'Malley said. "I believe you will see that within the next 30 to 90 days."

Even some Republicans privately acknowledge discomfort with Dudek, who was appointed as acting commissioner when the career senior executive in the role abruptly retired after refusing his push to give DOGE employees unauthorized access to private data.

Dudek — a mid-level data analyst with no management experience until his sudden promotion — has been open about his rapid moves to cut costs.

"For too long, the Social Security Administration has operated on autopilot, creating inefficiencies that burden our employees and all Americans," he wrote in a message to the staff on March 1 . "We have spent billions annually doing the same things the same way leading to bureaucratic stagnation, inefficiency, and a lack of meaningful service improvements. It is time to change that."

Meeting with advocates on Tuesday, Dudek sought to cast himself as someone on their side. He described his parents as blue-collar workers with little formal education who divorced when he was young, according to the notes obtained by the Post. His mother was injured and went on disability benefits, he explained. In high school, he would eat leftovers from the school cafeteria trash, he said.

Dudek said the old ways of "setting goals, doing studies, discussion, getting information and data before making decisions" are gone. Those in charge now "will make mistakes, but I need to move them in a direction that is best for SSA," he said, and asked the advocates for their support.

After Trump's claims Tuesday night, Dudek issued a news release on Wednesday that referred to "significant progress" in identifying and correcting records of people 100 years or older whose date of death was not listed in agency databases, leading to the perception that they were receiving retirement benefits. Dudek thanked Trump for "highlighting these inconsistencies."

The Social Security Administration did not respond to a request for comment. A White House spokeswoman referred a reporter to the president's comments to Fox News host Sean Hannity on Feb. 18. "Look, Social Security won't be touched — other than if there's fraud or something — we're going to find it. It's going to be strengthened but won't be touched."

The spokeswoman said in an email: "President Trump has nominated a highly qualified individual, Frank Bisignano, to lead the Social Security Administration. As President of Fiserv, he has experience delivering the right checks to the right people at the right time — which is the top priority!"

The Senate Finance Committee has yet to schedule a confirmation hearing for Bisignano.

Andrew Biggs, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right think tank, said shrinking Social Security's roughly $15 billion operating budget would represent just a small fraction of the program's $1.5 trillion in annual costs.

"If you're talking about Social Security solvency, this stuff is a drop in the bucket," Biggs said. "It doesn't make any sense at all."

The uncertainty about Musk's intentions has been fueled by statements from senior Trump administration officials that appear difficult to reconcile with the realities of the federal budget.

On the one hand, Trump and many of his senior advisers have repeatedly promised that Social Security's beneficiaries will not be harmed by the massive cost-cutting underway at federal agencies and that any reductions will only affect fraudulent payments. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reiterated that pledge in an interview on Tuesday, telling Fox Business that "we're going to pay every single person who deserves Social Security." During his first term as president, Trump largely stuck by his 2016 campaign pledge not to pursue spending reductions to the program.

At the same time, Musk and Trump have fueled speculation, particularly among Democrats, that they have designs to cut far more than fraudulent or mistaken payments, estimated at less than 1% of the retirement program. Democrats and advocates also warn that the massive cuts to staffing already underway at Social Security are certain to worsen service for customers.

Dudek has only raised more alarms by issuing news releases touting cuts. In his missive to staff over last weekend, he said the agency would outsource "nonessential functions to industry experts," the first step toward privatizing what could be crucial customer service functions.

Fears have been heightened in particular by false claims of far more waste in the program than has been documented by watchdog reports and audits over the years. Appearing to misread a chart, for example, Musk said on social media in February that DOGE had identified payments to "tens of millions" of deceased Americans — an incorrect assertion repeated by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.

In Tuesday's address to Congress, Trump also said Musk was finding "hundreds of billions" of dollars in wasteful spending — a number that appears possible only if entitlement programs such as Social Security are included — and he ticked through examples of those older than 100 who had allegedly received payments.

Substantial budget cuts to Social Security, the single most expensive federal program, cannot mathematically be achieved solely by targeting these kinds of payments. June data suggests that the agency paid less than $150 million to those over 99 years old, which amounts to less than one-fifth of 1% of retiree benefits. Democrats have raised the prospect that the Trump administration intends to declare large amounts of legitimate Social Security spending as "fraud" as the basis to cut benefits.

Some budget experts say it's possible that Musk and Trump are just misinformed and not covertly planning a major cut to retiree benefits. Musk may be aiming to make technical changes to improve the Social Security system, which could save a few or maybe tens of billions of dollars. That outcome would protect retirees but also come far short of meaningfully reducing spending on the program.

This story includes material from the Associated Press.

The Club PUBlication 03/03/2025

3/3/2025

Vaccine advisory meeting canceled!
Trump administration’s move could complicate production of flu shots.

By ROBERT LANGRETH and GERRY SMITH • Bloomberg News

The Trump administration has canceled an upcoming meeting of the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory committee, a move that could complicate efforts to produce flu shots in time for the upcoming season.

The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, which evaluates immunization data for the FDA, had planned to meet in March to discuss the composition of next season’s flu vaccine. The meeting is a routine but critical step in ensuring manufacturers have suffi cient time to produce doses ahead of the next flu season.

The meeting was originally planned for March 13, but several committee members were notified late Wednesday afternoon that it had been canceled.

“That was the word” that was used, said Paul Offit, a professor of pediatrics at the Children’s Hospital Philadelphia and a member of the advisory panel who received the email Wednesday at 4:18 p.m. No rea-son was provided, and there was no indication of whether it would be rescheduled, Offit and two other panel members said.

In a brief email Thursday, Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, confirmed the cancellation, and said the FDA would “make public its recommendations to manufacturers in time for updated vaccines to be available for the 2025-2026 influenza season.”

The timing of the meeting is critical because flu vaccine production is a lengthy process, with some doses still made using chicken eggs. Each year, FDA advisers meet to formally decide which flu strains to include, typically aligning with recommendations from the World Health Organization.

Once selected, manufacturers need about six months to produce large quantities of the vaccine. Any significant delay in this process could mean the vaccine isn’t ready in time for the next flu season.

The FDA can make recommendations to flu vaccine manufacturers without the advisory panel. However, eliminating advisory panels removes a key layer of public accountability and transparency in the FDA’s decisionmaking process.

“We have this meeting every year. It’s how pharmaceutical companies determine which strains to use,” Offi t said. “I don’t understand. We’re all just sort of left in the dark.” He added that it was unclear who had ordered the cancellation or why.

A representative for one major flu shot manufacturer who asked not to be identified said the company was in a wait-and-see mode. While some manufacturing can go on without the strain selection decision, the longer the delay goes on, the more uncertainty it creates around the manufacturing process, the person said.

The company will continue with manufacturing for markets other than the US based on the WHO’s recommendations, the person said.

FDA advisory panels don’t issue binding decisions, but they serve an essential role in publicly reviewing data and guiding major regulatory actions. The vaccine advisory panel played a key role during the pandemic, debating whether to authorize MRNA-based COVID vaccines from Moderna Inc. and Pfizer Inc.

The cancellation of this meeting raises concerns that other federal health advisory panels may also be in jeopardy.