I am not sure what you're saying.  Two edges?  One is payment from big pharma? The other, the funds allow the FDA to do its job?

If so, no reason for the funds from big pharma.  

A submitted budget reasonably close to need (think trailing 5-year expenses and current projections) can always be ushered in every year by the Congress with any unexpected needs met with a line of credit like any other business, guaranteed by the Congress till next budget's payment.

No need of 2/3 or ANY money coming from the regulated as 'user fees'. BS total conflict of interest, like the revolving door with the executives and FDA employees allowed to buy into what they regulate on the exchanges (or their kin).  

And then again, the FDA holds what it gets close to its chest to protect the regulated and itself from unnecessary prying eyes while it is trying to do its business. At least that's the story and they're sticking to it. It makes sense, of course, until the special interests have something to hide and then it is incredibly useful. Power corrupts.

“Fear clouds critical thinking……this problem now is something called willful blindness…so it’s human beings turning a blind eye to the truth in order to feel safe, to avoid conflict, reduce anxiety, and to protect prestige.   How do we combat that? It has to be done with cold hard facts and in a compassionate but courageous way.”