I was reading a cute blog about Winnie the Pooh and blogging, and was struck by a conversation between Rabbit and Pooh:
“I don’t see much sense in that,” said Rabbit. “No,” said Pooh humbly, “There isn’t. But there was going to be when I began it. It’s just that something happened to it along the way.”
As happens so many times these days, I was reminded of CPSIA when I read that. In this particular conversation, Rabbit reminds me of the citizens and companies of this country who are looking at the CPSIA law and wondering where the sense or logic in it can be hiding.
And of course, Pooh reminds me of Congress (my apologies to Pooh). Of course, they can't be quite as forthright as Pooh and actually admit that something happened along the way with a concept that may have initially made sense. (Protecting children from lead -- good idea. CPSIA -- very bad implementation of that concept.)
I don't remember the rest of this particular Pooh story, but like all Pooh stories, it would have had to be a happy ending. Those of us that are fighting the ill-conceived CPSIA can only hope that we will yet come to a happy ending to this saga!
Monday, April 27, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Amendments to CPSIA
I still believe that CPSIA is so bad that it should be repealed entirely, and then rewritten, dealing with ONLY the limited products it should have dealt with. Not a very long list of those: I would suggest the new law apply to toys for children 3 and under, and jewelry intended for children 5 and up. I think that about does it.
But, in the meantime, it appears that even getting this law amended will be a minor miracle. There are at least a couple of amendments languishing in committees right now. While they would still leave major problems with the law, they would fix at least some of the issues.
Senate bill 608 has a great sounding name: "Common Sense in Consumer Product Safety Act of 2009" It is "A bill to amend the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 to exclude secondary sales, repair services, and certain vehicles from the ban on lead in children's products, and for other purposes." Govtrack currently lists Senator Tester as the sponsor, and 2 co-sponsors.
On the House side, there's H.R. 1587: "To amend the lead prohibition provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008..." It would give an exemption to the ATV folks, but that's about it. "To amend the lead prohibition provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 to provide an exemption for certain off-highway vehicles, and for other purposes." It is sponsored by Representative Rehberg, and currently has 38 co-sponsors listed.
At some point, surely this craziness will come to an end...Preferably before the next stage gets here in August...
But, in the meantime, it appears that even getting this law amended will be a minor miracle. There are at least a couple of amendments languishing in committees right now. While they would still leave major problems with the law, they would fix at least some of the issues.
Senate bill 608 has a great sounding name: "Common Sense in Consumer Product Safety Act of 2009" It is "A bill to amend the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 to exclude secondary sales, repair services, and certain vehicles from the ban on lead in children's products, and for other purposes." Govtrack currently lists Senator Tester as the sponsor, and 2 co-sponsors.
On the House side, there's H.R. 1587: "To amend the lead prohibition provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008..." It would give an exemption to the ATV folks, but that's about it. "To amend the lead prohibition provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 to provide an exemption for certain off-highway vehicles, and for other purposes." It is sponsored by Representative Rehberg, and currently has 38 co-sponsors listed.
At some point, surely this craziness will come to an end...Preferably before the next stage gets here in August...
Monday, April 13, 2009
Random Quotes and Their CPSIA "Connection"
I was reading quotes someone had collected for a homeschooling project, and I found numerous ones that could be tied to CPSIA.
"Nobody is bored when he is trying to make something that is beautiful, or to discover something that is true." Playwrite William Inge Unfortunately many crafters will lose the ability to make something beautiful with an unfixed CPSIA!
"The highest reward for a person's toil is not what they get for it, but what they become by it." Author John Ruskin Again, so true of those who make wonderful, one-of-a-kind items for children, that Congress has outlawed in their "infinite wisdom".
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." President Theodore Roosevelt Much of what has suddenly become outlawed falls in this category as well.
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them." Author Mark Twain And with CPSIA, there will be a lot less good books to read!
And my two favorites:
"It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem." Author G.K. Chesterton In this case, Congress and CPSIA is the problem (not the CPSC who are just trying to do their job.) And they refuse to admit that, so they refuse to apply the proper solutions (amendments would be a good start -- though I still vote for repealing the entire law!).
"Cowardice asks - Is it safe? Expediency asks - Is it politic? Vanity asks - Is it popular? But conscience asks - Is it right?" Civil Rights Worker Martin Luther King, Jr. I think MLK's statement sums it up the best! Congress can't get past the "safe" and the political to do what's right!
"Nobody is bored when he is trying to make something that is beautiful, or to discover something that is true." Playwrite William Inge Unfortunately many crafters will lose the ability to make something beautiful with an unfixed CPSIA!
"The highest reward for a person's toil is not what they get for it, but what they become by it." Author John Ruskin Again, so true of those who make wonderful, one-of-a-kind items for children, that Congress has outlawed in their "infinite wisdom".
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." President Theodore Roosevelt Much of what has suddenly become outlawed falls in this category as well.
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them." Author Mark Twain And with CPSIA, there will be a lot less good books to read!
And my two favorites:
"It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem." Author G.K. Chesterton In this case, Congress and CPSIA is the problem (not the CPSC who are just trying to do their job.) And they refuse to admit that, so they refuse to apply the proper solutions (amendments would be a good start -- though I still vote for repealing the entire law!).
"Cowardice asks - Is it safe? Expediency asks - Is it politic? Vanity asks - Is it popular? But conscience asks - Is it right?" Civil Rights Worker Martin Luther King, Jr. I think MLK's statement sums it up the best! Congress can't get past the "safe" and the political to do what's right!
Saturday, April 11, 2009
"Protecting the American Consumers" YouTube
This video from August 2008 is nothing more than a celebration of the short-sightedness of Congress with CPSIA.
The first speaker is Majority Leader Harry Reid who speaks proudly of the "priority of restoring credibility and accountability to Washington" (Oh there, we go, the publicity angle of CPSIA.) He talks of their ability to "celebrate CPSIA" (As opposed to the Consumers and Companies who are primarily cursing CPSIA now.)
Then Nancy Pelosi comes up to talk of the "Year of the Recalls", and proudly brags of "removing those products and more importantly preventing those products from getting to those shelves in the first place". (Never mind that 99.9% of the products they are removing are perfectly safe!)
Then the mother from Oregon comes up to thank Congress, and explain that CPSIA makes "Parents like me breathe easier." (I'm glad she's breathing easier -- this parent is not! Nor are most of the parents I know.)
And Reid comes back to tell us that "Our government can work for people." (Can anyone say Amen? No, I didn't think so.)
And let's not forget Representative DeLaury who practically screams at us, "We need to remain vigilant. We need to ensure that our families and our children are protected from harmful products." (And safe ones too...Never mind that that's parents' jobs!)
And Reid comes back to remind us that this law "applies to all consumer products" and is "good legislation". (I'm glad he thinks so, most of us would disagree.)
The first speaker is Majority Leader Harry Reid who speaks proudly of the "priority of restoring credibility and accountability to Washington" (Oh there, we go, the publicity angle of CPSIA.) He talks of their ability to "celebrate CPSIA" (As opposed to the Consumers and Companies who are primarily cursing CPSIA now.)
Then Nancy Pelosi comes up to talk of the "Year of the Recalls", and proudly brags of "removing those products and more importantly preventing those products from getting to those shelves in the first place". (Never mind that 99.9% of the products they are removing are perfectly safe!)
Then the mother from Oregon comes up to thank Congress, and explain that CPSIA makes "Parents like me breathe easier." (I'm glad she's breathing easier -- this parent is not! Nor are most of the parents I know.)
And Reid comes back to tell us that "Our government can work for people." (Can anyone say Amen? No, I didn't think so.)
And let's not forget Representative DeLaury who practically screams at us, "We need to remain vigilant. We need to ensure that our families and our children are protected from harmful products." (And safe ones too...Never mind that that's parents' jobs!)
And Reid comes back to remind us that this law "applies to all consumer products" and is "good legislation". (I'm glad he thinks so, most of us would disagree.)
Nancy Pelosi CPSIA YouTube
I finally had a chance to watch one of the YouTube CPSIA videos. I started with one showing Speaker Nancy Pelosi talking to Congress, last July, just before the bill was signed into law.
I realize that I go into this already biased, having now fought CPSIA for more than 3 months (my hat is off to those who have been in the fight for even longer than that!).
Nancy wants to make sure that we realize that they are "A Congress for America's Children" (I lost track of how many times she said that.) I wonder how many of America's children would not agree with that assessment right about now? She also made sure to point out that "This bill is long overdue" (Why exactly is it long overdue? She didn't really answer that question, we just have to believe that it is.)
The bill has the "support of Community Groups that care about children". (So, let's see, by inference, those of us who are fighting CPSIA do not care about children...Sorry, Nancy, I have to strongly disagree with you on that!)
"...do something for America's children." (Why? Because it sounds good? Because it makes good publicity? Yes, I am beginning to agree with the other bloggers who make that point! This is not about 'doing good'...It is about 'sounding good'.)
"We have to depend on the Government to protect our children." (I had to rewind to make sure I heard that part correctly...No, I'm sorry, Nancy, I don't think that's the role of government. In fact, looking through my pocket Constitution I can't find that in the job description of government anywhere. Please let parents do their jobs, and go back to doing yours...The first Article of the Constitution, Section 8, has a really nice explanation of what that is, in case you've forgotten.)
Nancy sounds very distressed when she gets to her point about 45 million toys that were recalled the year before -- before they had written CPSIA we might add. Twice she asks, "What is a parent to do?" And of course, she has the answer -- more legislation!
"Dangerous toys should be an oxymoron." (I do agree with that, Nancy. But how many children were injured or killed from those 45 million "dangerous toys" that were recalled? None that I've been able to determine...And unfortunately, CPSIA deals with so much more than those "dangerous toys"...since it was written to include ALL Children's Products! Let's go back to assessing actual risk -- and write a law that deals with those things that actually pose dangers to our children -- instead of removing perfectly safe items from their lives!)
I realize that I go into this already biased, having now fought CPSIA for more than 3 months (my hat is off to those who have been in the fight for even longer than that!).
Nancy wants to make sure that we realize that they are "A Congress for America's Children" (I lost track of how many times she said that.) I wonder how many of America's children would not agree with that assessment right about now? She also made sure to point out that "This bill is long overdue" (Why exactly is it long overdue? She didn't really answer that question, we just have to believe that it is.)
The bill has the "support of Community Groups that care about children". (So, let's see, by inference, those of us who are fighting CPSIA do not care about children...Sorry, Nancy, I have to strongly disagree with you on that!)
"...do something for America's children." (Why? Because it sounds good? Because it makes good publicity? Yes, I am beginning to agree with the other bloggers who make that point! This is not about 'doing good'...It is about 'sounding good'.)
"We have to depend on the Government to protect our children." (I had to rewind to make sure I heard that part correctly...No, I'm sorry, Nancy, I don't think that's the role of government. In fact, looking through my pocket Constitution I can't find that in the job description of government anywhere. Please let parents do their jobs, and go back to doing yours...The first Article of the Constitution, Section 8, has a really nice explanation of what that is, in case you've forgotten.)
Nancy sounds very distressed when she gets to her point about 45 million toys that were recalled the year before -- before they had written CPSIA we might add. Twice she asks, "What is a parent to do?" And of course, she has the answer -- more legislation!
"Dangerous toys should be an oxymoron." (I do agree with that, Nancy. But how many children were injured or killed from those 45 million "dangerous toys" that were recalled? None that I've been able to determine...And unfortunately, CPSIA deals with so much more than those "dangerous toys"...since it was written to include ALL Children's Products! Let's go back to assessing actual risk -- and write a law that deals with those things that actually pose dangers to our children -- instead of removing perfectly safe items from their lives!)
Youtube Videos about CPSIA
Someone has put together a playlist of CPSIA related you tube videos. I look forward to (sort of) getting to watch some of them.
Friday, April 10, 2009
From the Mainstream Media we get Headlines such as:
Popular Purses May Carry Dangerous Levels Of Lead It comes complete with this disturbing quote from the Center for Environmental Health Director "If a child is exposed to lead it can permanently effect development of the brain. Lead exposure in adults is attached to increased risk of heart attack, stroke and memory problems."
If we were talking about chew toys, I would be concerned, but I don’t know any little girls old enough to play with a purse that are chewing on them.
Good intentions gone astray
It comes complete with this disturbing quote from the Center for Environmental Health Director "If a child is exposed to lead it can permanently effect development of the brain. Lead exposure in adults is attached to increased risk of heart attack, stroke and memory problems."
If we were talking about chew toys, I would be concerned, but I don’t know any little girls old enough to play with a purse that are chewing on them.
Though some get it, especially at the local levels:
Stores caught in wake of new lead law
This article author certainly sees the impact of CPSIA on Resellers, and those who shop at those stores:
“But now, the items that once made up a quarter of revenue at Top Drawer Resale Clothier in Traverse City are tucked out of view, held back by a thin rope and a handwritten sign. ‘Sorry, these items are not for sale.’…
Since the law took effect, some area thrift stores like Top Drawer stopped taking any children's items. Others have developed more stringent practices, in some cases reducing the amount of items taken to the floor.”
And this op-ed piece dealing with numerous “troublesome chemicals”:
Good intentions gone astray
“It's fine to be out in front - when necessary. And it is absolutely right to provide consumers, especially children, with strict protections - but not when that claim of protection is without basis and contradicts the risk-based, scientific study that is the traditional foundation for law and safety standards in the United States. So as the House Consumer Protection Committee considers ‘the chemical bills,’ its members should amend the proposals to give sound science priority over emotion, and to recognize that existing federal laws have already set the consumer protection standard for the nation - including Oregon.” Amen! Let’s hear it for science over emotion! And for “risk-based scientific study”.
More Attention Being Paid in Blogs to CPSIA than by Congress
More and more of us get the feeling that "Congress is fiddling, while our industries are burning."
Congress continues to refuse to fix the CPSIA mess they created....Mainstream media still pretty much ignores the issue...But bloggers will get the word out there, one blog entry at a time.
Only Congress could ruin the kids motorcycle business and endanger children at the same time: Hugh points out: "90% of the youth fatalities and injuries on motorcycles occur when kids ride adult vehicles." Which is going to happen more and more because of CPSIA.
Of course, not all the blogs out there understand how bad CPSIA is, especially if they are connected to Consumer Union or U.S. PIRG. Here's another one that makes us out to be the bad guys. (For some reason, those blogs always seem to be short facts...but maybe that's just me.)
Congress continues to refuse to fix the CPSIA mess they created....Mainstream media still pretty much ignores the issue...But bloggers will get the word out there, one blog entry at a time.
Only Congress could ruin the kids motorcycle business and endanger children at the same time: Hugh points out: "90% of the youth fatalities and injuries on motorcycles occur when kids ride adult vehicles." Which is going to happen more and more because of CPSIA.
Of course, not all the blogs out there understand how bad CPSIA is, especially if they are connected to Consumer Union or U.S. PIRG. Here's another one that makes us out to be the bad guys. (For some reason, those blogs always seem to be short facts...but maybe that's just me.)
Thursday, April 9, 2009
H.R. 1692 "To Amend the CPSIA to Exempt Ordinary Books..."
It is still amazing to me that Congress passed CPSIA in the first place. But it is even more amazing that they refuse to fix the mess they have created. Since it doesn't appear that we will get them to repeal the entire law any time soon, it looks like the best we can hope for is small fixes -- in some cases, very small fixes.
Such is the case with H.R. 1692...It will not make major improvements, but it will help some. Congressman Fortenberry's amendment admits that Congress did not intend CPSIA to apply to ordinary books (defined as those printed using conventional methods and intended to be read, not played with). It also points out that the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has determined that books pose minimal risk.
As has been the pattern with this law, this amendment does not answer all the questions it will bring up. My first question is, which books does it apply to? Those that are printed from this point forward? Those that were printed after 1985? Or all books?
As a reseller, an educator, and a mother, those are very important questions.
It is really a shame that we have to applaud efforts such as HR1692 in our push to get this law fixed. But, for now, at least, it seems the best we are going to be able to do....Please, Congress, pass this amendment, and any others that will do ANYTHING to fix this disaster!
Such is the case with H.R. 1692...It will not make major improvements, but it will help some. Congressman Fortenberry's amendment admits that Congress did not intend CPSIA to apply to ordinary books (defined as those printed using conventional methods and intended to be read, not played with). It also points out that the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has determined that books pose minimal risk.
As has been the pattern with this law, this amendment does not answer all the questions it will bring up. My first question is, which books does it apply to? Those that are printed from this point forward? Those that were printed after 1985? Or all books?
As a reseller, an educator, and a mother, those are very important questions.
It is really a shame that we have to applaud efforts such as HR1692 in our push to get this law fixed. But, for now, at least, it seems the best we are going to be able to do....Please, Congress, pass this amendment, and any others that will do ANYTHING to fix this disaster!
I finally had a chance to get addresses together to mail my old picture books to.
I'm starting with the CPSC, a couple of key Congressmen and most of the Senators who voted against DeMint's amendment. These should go in the mail tomorrow:
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
4330 East West Highway
Bethesda, MD 20814
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Senator Daniel Akaka
141 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
511 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Evan Bayh
131 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Michael Bennet
702 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Jeff Bingaman
703 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Barbara Boxer
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
713 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Roland Burris
523 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Maria Cantwell
511 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Benjamin Cardin
509 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Thomas Carper
513 Hart Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Robert Casey
383 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Susan Collins
413 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Kent Conrad
530 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator John Cornyn
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Christopher Dodd
448 Russell Building
Washington D.C., 20510
Senator Byron Dorgan
322 Hart Senate Office Bldg
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Richard Durbin
309 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Russell Feingold
506 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Dianne Feinstein
331 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
1478 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Judd Gregg
201 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Tom Harkin
731 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Daniel Inouyye
722 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Mike Johanns
404 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Tim Johnson
136 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Edward Kaufman
G11 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg
Washington, DC 20510
Senator John Kerry
218 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Herb Kohl
330 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Mary Landrieu
328 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Frank Lautenberg
324 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Joseph Lieberman
706 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator John McCain
241 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Harry Reid
522 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Senator John D Rockefeller, IV
531 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
H.R. 1815 "Consumer Product Safety Solutions Act"
Another attempt at fixing CPSIA, this one coming out of the House.
Here is my first analayis of it, that I also posted on amendthecpsia.com
I am certainly anxious to hear what others have to say about this amendment. I have only had time to give it a brief, "once over". I need to go over it again, with the original law next to it, but no time for that tonight.
I like the title: "This Act may be cited as the 'Consumer Product Safety Solutions Act of 2009'" -- and I definitely believe it will solve some of the problems with CPSIA -- but I think there will still be many problems remaining.
For instance, on page 2, it proposes making the February 9, 2009 ppm requirement only apply to items manufactured after that date -- UNTIL 2010! And it does the same thing with the lower ppm requirement -- putting it into effect 2 years after the law was enacted, for items manufactured after that date, but then applying it to all children's products.
I wear many hats in my life right now -- but in my role as a reseller, this makes me want to scream! All it is doing is postponing the very real pain of having no idea what the ppm lead content is of the countless used items we receive. This would give me some additional time, until February 2010 to be able to sell some of those items -- but the longer this "fix" takes, the less that impresses me. And every item of unknown chemistry that were to come into my shop between now and February would do so with the distinct possibility that it would then become illegal for me in less than a year. This is not the type of help resellers need. We need exemption, period.
These limits should only be applied into the future -- not retroactively like they are currently, or like this bill would propose.
I do see more flexibility being given to the CPSC as well -- but I don't think it's going to be adequate, not with these few modifications.
And did I miss it, or are there no changes to:
1) the outrageous age limits of the current law?
2) no protection for crafters or others who make one of a kind items?
3) no change in the outrageous fines under CPSIA?
Personally, I liked DeMint's amendment better -- and see this one as only putting a small bandage on a gushing wound!
Here is my first analayis of it, that I also posted on amendthecpsia.com
I am certainly anxious to hear what others have to say about this amendment. I have only had time to give it a brief, "once over". I need to go over it again, with the original law next to it, but no time for that tonight.
I like the title: "This Act may be cited as the 'Consumer Product Safety Solutions Act of 2009'" -- and I definitely believe it will solve some of the problems with CPSIA -- but I think there will still be many problems remaining.
For instance, on page 2, it proposes making the February 9, 2009 ppm requirement only apply to items manufactured after that date -- UNTIL 2010! And it does the same thing with the lower ppm requirement -- putting it into effect 2 years after the law was enacted, for items manufactured after that date, but then applying it to all children's products.
I wear many hats in my life right now -- but in my role as a reseller, this makes me want to scream! All it is doing is postponing the very real pain of having no idea what the ppm lead content is of the countless used items we receive. This would give me some additional time, until February 2010 to be able to sell some of those items -- but the longer this "fix" takes, the less that impresses me. And every item of unknown chemistry that were to come into my shop between now and February would do so with the distinct possibility that it would then become illegal for me in less than a year. This is not the type of help resellers need. We need exemption, period.
These limits should only be applied into the future -- not retroactively like they are currently, or like this bill would propose.
I do see more flexibility being given to the CPSC as well -- but I don't think it's going to be adequate, not with these few modifications.
And did I miss it, or are there no changes to:
1) the outrageous age limits of the current law?
2) no protection for crafters or others who make one of a kind items?
3) no change in the outrageous fines under CPSIA?
Personally, I liked DeMint's amendment better -- and see this one as only putting a small bandage on a gushing wound!
Shakespeare and CPSIA
We can't get away from CPSIA anywhere, not even in Shakespeare class.
Last week, we found this when reading Love's Labour's Lost: “The way is but short; away!” “As swift as lead, sir” “…Is not lead a metal heavy, dull, and slow?...I say, lead is slow.”
And today, there was that pesky CPSIA lurking in Love's Labour's Lost again:
“Sir, he hath never fed of the dainties that are bred in a book; he hath not eat paper."
Last week, we found this when reading Love's Labour's Lost: “The way is but short; away!” “As swift as lead, sir” “…Is not lead a metal heavy, dull, and slow?...I say, lead is slow.”
And today, there was that pesky CPSIA lurking in Love's Labour's Lost again:
“Sir, he hath never fed of the dainties that are bred in a book; he hath not eat paper."
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
The Myth of Good Intentions
DownsizeDC runs another great article on Washington politics and politicians being out of control: This one on "The Myth of Good Intentions" of CPSIA. The author makes a good point, "... I think these assumptions about 'good intentions' are a little naive . . .Their motive was good publicity, not good intentions."
I have been watching the CPSIA mess for almost 3 months now, and I am certainly beginning to believe that this law did not ever have good intentions. While it might be plausible (though not encouraging) to think that over 500 Congressmen/women and Senators managed to not read the bill before they voted for it last summer, and that they might have gotten through last fall without knowing how bad this law really was....But it is very unlikely that by two months into this mess that they could be unaware of the damages they are doing now.
So, if this isn't about the good intentions of protecting our children...then what is it about? It really isn't too far fetched to think that all Congress was/is thinking of with CPSIA is the good publicity they got from "protecting our children".... And they certainly aren't getting much BAD publicity as a result of all the damage they are doing.
I have been watching the CPSIA mess for almost 3 months now, and I am certainly beginning to believe that this law did not ever have good intentions. While it might be plausible (though not encouraging) to think that over 500 Congressmen/women and Senators managed to not read the bill before they voted for it last summer, and that they might have gotten through last fall without knowing how bad this law really was....But it is very unlikely that by two months into this mess that they could be unaware of the damages they are doing now.
So, if this isn't about the good intentions of protecting our children...then what is it about? It really isn't too far fetched to think that all Congress was/is thinking of with CPSIA is the good publicity they got from "protecting our children".... And they certainly aren't getting much BAD publicity as a result of all the damage they are doing.
Senate Amendment 964 Fails April 2
One of first amendments to CPSIA to finally get voted on failed:
S.AMDT.964
Amends: S.CON.RES.13
Sponsor: Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] (submitted 4/2/2009) (proposed 4/2/2009)
S.AMDT.964
Amends: S.CON.RES.13
Sponsor: Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] (submitted 4/2/2009) (proposed 4/2/2009)
AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to protect small and home businesses from the burdensome and impractical requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.
- Amendment SA 964 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 39 - 58. Record Vote Number: 151.
COSPONSORS(5):
Sen Bennett, Robert F. [UT] - 4/2/2009
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY] - 4/2/2009
Sen Brownback, Sam [KS] - 4/2/2009
Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] - 4/2/2009
Sen Vitter, David [LA] - 4/2/2009
Old Library Books to Washington, D.C.
I purchased 38 old children's books at a library book sale. I am sending them to Washington, D.C. to the staff at CPSC, several Senators, and several members of Congress who think that old books are not still around and/or are not still important. They will be accompanied by the following letter:
To Whom It May Concern In Washington, D.C.
It is a shame that CPSIA has been allowed to continue causing problems for so long already. It is regrettable that Congress continues to have so little concern for the pain they are causing both Consumers and Companies. That pain is being felt by those in so many industries: ATV/bicycles, crafters, clothing, toys, books, and so much more.
And all of this over a fallacy, the fallacy that the presence of lead is a danger. No, the CDC has clearly shown the ingestion of lead is dangerous. And children are not ingesting the above mentioned products.
Contrary to what many of you are claiming, this law does not protect children! It is hurting their ability to have inexpensive, pre-owned clothes, books, and more! And soon it will limit their ability to purchase many of those things new as well.
I am enclosing an old children’s book I purchased from a library book sale. Contrary to the popular opinion of some in D.C., this book is not dangerous. But it is now illegal for me to sell this book, because I cannot prove it is effectively lead free. And it is, or soon will be, illegal for the library to even loan out a book such as this. How do decisions like this get made? Can you really think it is in the best interest of children to deprive them of books such as this?
Sincerely yours, a concerned mother and businesswoman,
National School Supply & Equipment Association
CPSIA is being fought on many different levels, and yet Congress still is not getting it!
This page from the National School Supply & Equipment Association does a great job, in one place, of covering the law, the problems with it, the Rally, letters that have been sent in more. I would say this is one of the best "all in one" places I've seen with coverage of CPSIA!
Of course most of what they are saying is what so many of us have been saying for so long. I hadn't read their position paper on CPSIA or their letter to Congressman Dingell before. It was good to see CPSIA problems presented from the school standpoint.
This page from the National School Supply & Equipment Association does a great job, in one place, of covering the law, the problems with it, the Rally, letters that have been sent in more. I would say this is one of the best "all in one" places I've seen with coverage of CPSIA!
Of course most of what they are saying is what so many of us have been saying for so long. I hadn't read their position paper on CPSIA or their letter to Congressman Dingell before. It was good to see CPSIA problems presented from the school standpoint.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Is CPSIA Unconstitutional?
I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I still think CPSIA is unconstitutional...What could we argue?
How about?
1st amendment -- "Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right of the people...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
(Congress is certainly not allowing this under the CPSIA disaster.)
5th amendment -- "No person shall be...deprived of...property without due process of law."
(I think we would all agree that manufacturers, retailers, and resellers have all been deprived of property without due process of law.)
8th amendment -- "Excess bail shall no be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
(Let's see...Up to $100,000 fine, and 5 years in jail -- for selling a used item I didn't know had lead in it...Sounds excessive and cruel and unusual to me!)
10th amendment -- "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
(I think this has to be one of my all time favorite "forgotten amendments". I don't see Article 1, Section 8 giving Congress enough power to pass CPSIA -- surely "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States..." doesn't go this far?)
How about?
1st amendment -- "Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right of the people...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
(Congress is certainly not allowing this under the CPSIA disaster.)
5th amendment -- "No person shall be...deprived of...property without due process of law."
(I think we would all agree that manufacturers, retailers, and resellers have all been deprived of property without due process of law.)
8th amendment -- "Excess bail shall no be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
(Let's see...Up to $100,000 fine, and 5 years in jail -- for selling a used item I didn't know had lead in it...Sounds excessive and cruel and unusual to me!)
10th amendment -- "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
(I think this has to be one of my all time favorite "forgotten amendments". I don't see Article 1, Section 8 giving Congress enough power to pass CPSIA -- surely "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States..." doesn't go this far?)
Senator Durbin on CPSIA in the Illinois Channel
I was very unhappy when I read Senator Durbin's comments about CPSIA in the Illinois Channel blog: Durbin: CPSIA Most Important Consumer Legislation in More than 30 years.
This erroneus claims particularly bothered me: “In the last few years, dozens of children were killed and thousands more injured because of dangerous toys on our store shelves. Recall after recall had many in Congress wondering if America’s consumer watchdog agency had lost its bite.”
I quickly answered back: "Where do these statistics come from? Dozens of children have NOT been killed by lead laden or phthalate laden products! And thousands have not been injured by them. This law is an outrage, and Senator Durbin and the Illinois Channel are adding to the lies that helped get it passed in the first place."
I was pleasantly surprised when my comments were actually posted, and then to read the comment that followed mine. I was even more impressed by the email I got from someone connected to the Illinois Channel blog explaining that they were merely passing on Durbin's positions, not reporting them as the truth. The fact that comments refuting them were posted is certainly a good indication of that claim.
I guess we can see that there is still some balanced reporting out there on the subject of CPSIA, as limited as it may be.
This erroneus claims particularly bothered me: “In the last few years, dozens of children were killed and thousands more injured because of dangerous toys on our store shelves. Recall after recall had many in Congress wondering if America’s consumer watchdog agency had lost its bite.”
I quickly answered back: "Where do these statistics come from? Dozens of children have NOT been killed by lead laden or phthalate laden products! And thousands have not been injured by them. This law is an outrage, and Senator Durbin and the Illinois Channel are adding to the lies that helped get it passed in the first place."
I was pleasantly surprised when my comments were actually posted, and then to read the comment that followed mine. I was even more impressed by the email I got from someone connected to the Illinois Channel blog explaining that they were merely passing on Durbin's positions, not reporting them as the truth. The fact that comments refuting them were posted is certainly a good indication of that claim.
I guess we can see that there is still some balanced reporting out there on the subject of CPSIA, as limited as it may be.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Consumer Reports Blog: Businesses Rally Against CPSIA
Today's blog in the Consumer Reports blasts yesterday's rally: Businesses Rally Against CPSIA.
As happens so many times it is full of half-truths and misleading comments. I wrote the following response to it today (time will tell whether they will post it):
I do not have time to point out all of the issues with the above report right now. But for now, I would like to point out the fallacies in this law, and in this report.
1) The presence of lead is not dangerous. The ingestion of lead is dangerous. The CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) has been leading and winning the battle on lead poisoning for almost 20 years. They point out that the biggest threat of lead poisoning is from old lead-based paint, primarily in older homes.
2) The absence of lead in children's products does not make them inherently safer. Bicycles, ATVs, and many more rely on lead for its properties. There is no scientific basis to show that these children's products will be safer without lead.
3) The recall of toys and cribs in the recent past shows that the current laws, prior to CPSIA, were working. Dangerous items were being discovered, and removed from the market place.
4) The recalls of the above items were seldom because of lead.
5) The above recalls were seldom, if ever, done on books, clothes, etc. Those items have been lumped together in the "all children's products" being effected by this law. This is the fault of Congress, not the leadership at the CPSC.
6) Businesses are not rallying against CPSIA because of a lack of concern for children. Many of us in these businesses are parents, and it is our concern for children, ours and others, that makes us fight this dreadful legislation.
As happens so many times it is full of half-truths and misleading comments. I wrote the following response to it today (time will tell whether they will post it):
I do not have time to point out all of the issues with the above report right now. But for now, I would like to point out the fallacies in this law, and in this report.
1) The presence of lead is not dangerous. The ingestion of lead is dangerous. The CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) has been leading and winning the battle on lead poisoning for almost 20 years. They point out that the biggest threat of lead poisoning is from old lead-based paint, primarily in older homes.
2) The absence of lead in children's products does not make them inherently safer. Bicycles, ATVs, and many more rely on lead for its properties. There is no scientific basis to show that these children's products will be safer without lead.
3) The recall of toys and cribs in the recent past shows that the current laws, prior to CPSIA, were working. Dangerous items were being discovered, and removed from the market place.
4) The recalls of the above items were seldom because of lead.
5) The above recalls were seldom, if ever, done on books, clothes, etc. Those items have been lumped together in the "all children's products" being effected by this law. This is the fault of Congress, not the leadership at the CPSC.
6) Businesses are not rallying against CPSIA because of a lack of concern for children. Many of us in these businesses are parents, and it is our concern for children, ours and others, that makes us fight this dreadful legislation.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Govt Club Students React to CPSIA Rally Today
I don’t chew on things! I can’t even fit the books I read in my mouth.
Things I don’t like about CPS“I”A:
1. I can barely find shoes and clothes because the prices have gone up
2. My mom had to get rid of her books.
3. I am 10 and it says 13 and up, and 12 and under.
4. I just don’t like it.
Things I like about CPS “I”A
1. …I guess nothing!
Sonia, age 10
****
This law is stupid. I take this as an insult. Why to age 12? Children stop “eating” books at 1 ½! It is insulting to parents too! You have to physically eat lead to get lead poisoning! Are you really trying to make new jobs? No! Millions of people will lose their jobs after this bill.
Hardly anybody gets lead poisoning in America, so re-make this bill!
People are getting injured due to the fact that kids have to get too big bikes and such!
Aaron, age 12
****
The law is stupid ‘cause all of the lead is coming from China. There’s only 4 factories in the US that can test for lead, and when those 4 factories fill up then all of the things will have to be sent back to China where all the lead problems are coming from in the first place.
The CPSIA was meant to protect children, but I think it’s doing exactly the opposite because the law is making it illegal for kids to get ATVs that are the right size. So the kids are having to ride ATVs and bikes that are adult sized – and too big for them, thus raising the injury level.
Elijah, age 12
****
Parents should be able to make their own choices without the government in their way. But now Congress has passed a law that tells what you can and cannot buy. How dumb is that? Another thing is that they have to test the same shirt in different sizes. It’s the same material….It insults parents and kids.
Now to the penalties. These are soooo unconstitutional. A fine of $100,000. That’s outrageous and that’s not all. Five years in jail. Five years. Both of these for selling one item. One item with lead in it. CPSIA hurts kids and that’s the truth.
Student, age 13
****
Old books that are out of print are going to completely vanish, be eliminated. And twelve and younger? My two-year-old cousin doesn’t chew on things, let alone a twelve year old! Businesses are going to have to stop, people are going to be laid off, and we are already having issues with jobs! Some people can’t afford to test objects for lead, so what are they supposed to do? This bill should be repealed, there are no amounts of amendments that could fix this bill.
Katie, age 13
****
Who is going to eat a book anyway? In order to ingest lead, you would have to eat the whole book. And even then, it would probably not have enough lead in it to do anything.
They are outlawing children’s ATVs. That means that the truly devoted ATVers would ride ADULT ATVs. Which is more threatening, lead or oversized ATV’s that younger kids could easily wreck?
The law is unconstitutional. The government has no rights to not allow us to sell children’s products. It isn’t drugs. It isn’t illegal stuff.
There are a total of two cases of lead related deaths in recent years. Neither of which were due to books, toys, ATVs or car engines. They were from jewelry, from China.
Jacob, age 13
****
12 year olds do not eat random toys…testing for every color, product and size for lead is excessive and unneeded…Don’t take away One Fish Two Fish.
Student, age 14
****
Many people will lose money and jobs from this law, because where would they put all their old toys and books? They will have to throw them all away because they can’t sell them.
If you touch something with lead in it you will not die. And you will have to ingest a lot of it!
Student, age 14
****
This law makes it impossible for people who make and sell crafts to, or intended for, small children, to continue selling their products. These handmade products, which are created individually, now must be tested before they can be lawfully sold. Not only are the tests required impossibly expensive for these people to pay for, but they destroy the product in the process. How can these products be certified if they cannot afford testing, and the product ends up destroyed, anyway.
Also, lead poisoning occurs when lead is ingested. Simply touching something with lead in it does not put a person at risk. Why, then, are products such as books, bikes, and even clothes suddenly dangerous? Very few children that I am aware of, especially of the ages for which these products are intended, are chewing on their books and toys!
Kay, age 14
****
The cost and frequency of testing the law requires is outrageous. And the penalty is too costly.
Student, age 15
****
Books – everyone reads, even little kids. It helps them learn. Why would you want to keep them from learning? More importantly, why would you want to take away Dr. Seuss?
Bicycles – they’re made to have fun. A little kids isn’t going to eat it. Give them some credit, they’re smarter than you think.
Companies are going to have to cut back on their workers and during this time we need to keep as many jobs as we can. We can’t get through this without them.
Monica, age 15
****
This enrages me and I’m not even going to be directly affected by this. The rally is a good way to take the war to the enemy, which in our case is Congress. The word that kills us her is “all”. And all will be affected by this in one way or another.
Joel, age 16
****
Its inadvertent consequences hurt businesses, the economy, and children.
It completely takes the parents’ ability to choose toys for their children out of consideration.
Washington is incompetent!
Steven, age 17
****
I am offended that Congress feels we the people can’t make decisions for ourselves. By passing CPSIA, politicians have taken away parents rights to decide what products are appropriate for their children.
This law is also insulting to the children that it claims to protect. No 12-year-old has ever died because there was lead in their library books. Though the original intent may have been good, Congress took it too far. This bill goes beyond children’s protection. All it does is take away their freedom to play.
Student, age 17
Things I don’t like about CPS“I”A:
1. I can barely find shoes and clothes because the prices have gone up
2. My mom had to get rid of her books.
3. I am 10 and it says 13 and up, and 12 and under.
4. I just don’t like it.
Things I like about CPS “I”A
1. …I guess nothing!
Sonia, age 10
****
This law is stupid. I take this as an insult. Why to age 12? Children stop “eating” books at 1 ½! It is insulting to parents too! You have to physically eat lead to get lead poisoning! Are you really trying to make new jobs? No! Millions of people will lose their jobs after this bill.
Hardly anybody gets lead poisoning in America, so re-make this bill!
People are getting injured due to the fact that kids have to get too big bikes and such!
Aaron, age 12
****
The law is stupid ‘cause all of the lead is coming from China. There’s only 4 factories in the US that can test for lead, and when those 4 factories fill up then all of the things will have to be sent back to China where all the lead problems are coming from in the first place.
The CPSIA was meant to protect children, but I think it’s doing exactly the opposite because the law is making it illegal for kids to get ATVs that are the right size. So the kids are having to ride ATVs and bikes that are adult sized – and too big for them, thus raising the injury level.
Elijah, age 12
****
Parents should be able to make their own choices without the government in their way. But now Congress has passed a law that tells what you can and cannot buy. How dumb is that? Another thing is that they have to test the same shirt in different sizes. It’s the same material….It insults parents and kids.
Now to the penalties. These are soooo unconstitutional. A fine of $100,000. That’s outrageous and that’s not all. Five years in jail. Five years. Both of these for selling one item. One item with lead in it. CPSIA hurts kids and that’s the truth.
Student, age 13
****
Old books that are out of print are going to completely vanish, be eliminated. And twelve and younger? My two-year-old cousin doesn’t chew on things, let alone a twelve year old! Businesses are going to have to stop, people are going to be laid off, and we are already having issues with jobs! Some people can’t afford to test objects for lead, so what are they supposed to do? This bill should be repealed, there are no amounts of amendments that could fix this bill.
Katie, age 13
****
Who is going to eat a book anyway? In order to ingest lead, you would have to eat the whole book. And even then, it would probably not have enough lead in it to do anything.
They are outlawing children’s ATVs. That means that the truly devoted ATVers would ride ADULT ATVs. Which is more threatening, lead or oversized ATV’s that younger kids could easily wreck?
The law is unconstitutional. The government has no rights to not allow us to sell children’s products. It isn’t drugs. It isn’t illegal stuff.
There are a total of two cases of lead related deaths in recent years. Neither of which were due to books, toys, ATVs or car engines. They were from jewelry, from China.
Jacob, age 13
****
12 year olds do not eat random toys…testing for every color, product and size for lead is excessive and unneeded…Don’t take away One Fish Two Fish.
Student, age 14
****
Many people will lose money and jobs from this law, because where would they put all their old toys and books? They will have to throw them all away because they can’t sell them.
If you touch something with lead in it you will not die. And you will have to ingest a lot of it!
Student, age 14
****
This law makes it impossible for people who make and sell crafts to, or intended for, small children, to continue selling their products. These handmade products, which are created individually, now must be tested before they can be lawfully sold. Not only are the tests required impossibly expensive for these people to pay for, but they destroy the product in the process. How can these products be certified if they cannot afford testing, and the product ends up destroyed, anyway.
Also, lead poisoning occurs when lead is ingested. Simply touching something with lead in it does not put a person at risk. Why, then, are products such as books, bikes, and even clothes suddenly dangerous? Very few children that I am aware of, especially of the ages for which these products are intended, are chewing on their books and toys!
Kay, age 14
****
The cost and frequency of testing the law requires is outrageous. And the penalty is too costly.
Student, age 15
****
Books – everyone reads, even little kids. It helps them learn. Why would you want to keep them from learning? More importantly, why would you want to take away Dr. Seuss?
Bicycles – they’re made to have fun. A little kids isn’t going to eat it. Give them some credit, they’re smarter than you think.
Companies are going to have to cut back on their workers and during this time we need to keep as many jobs as we can. We can’t get through this without them.
Monica, age 15
****
This enrages me and I’m not even going to be directly affected by this. The rally is a good way to take the war to the enemy, which in our case is Congress. The word that kills us her is “all”. And all will be affected by this in one way or another.
Joel, age 16
****
Its inadvertent consequences hurt businesses, the economy, and children.
It completely takes the parents’ ability to choose toys for their children out of consideration.
Washington is incompetent!
Steven, age 17
****
I am offended that Congress feels we the people can’t make decisions for ourselves. By passing CPSIA, politicians have taken away parents rights to decide what products are appropriate for their children.
This law is also insulting to the children that it claims to protect. No 12-year-old has ever died because there was lead in their library books. Though the original intent may have been good, Congress took it too far. This bill goes beyond children’s protection. All it does is take away their freedom to play.
Student, age 17
Amend CPSIA Rally April 1 Video
Video from the April 1 Rally in Washington, D.C. is now available at http://amendthecpsia.com/
Great paper from Dr Barbara Beck, one of the scientists that spoke at the Rally. She explains clearly that what we need is something that is risk-based, which CPSIA clearly isn't!
Great paper from Dr Barbara Beck, one of the scientists that spoke at the Rally. She explains clearly that what we need is something that is risk-based, which CPSIA clearly isn't!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
