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!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes, my biggest fear of these "correction" bills is that they will do just enough to dampen the protest but not enough to really fix the egregiousness of this law.
ReplyDeleteThe three points you mention, that appear not to be addressed, MUST be fixed before this law is anywhere near the ballpark of common sense.
- treating a bicycle for an 8 year old the same as a baby rattle: NONSENSE!
- treating a home crafter the same as a Mattel or Hasbro: NONSENSE!
- $100,000 starting fine and up to 5 years in prison without having to show any actual harm done, willful intent, or even much actual danger: NONSENSE!
- Congressional Democrats (I'm a Democrat) appearing to be deaf, dumb, and blind to these issues: INTOLERABLE!
The net result of this law is that children will be hurt: their creative and educational environment will be significantly degraded, many parents will have their businesses destroyed or their finances significantly diminished. And, relative to the amount of damage this law does, the safety it provides is very small.
As a parent I find this unacceptable. As a lifelong Democrat I feel I will soon be forced to re-register as a Republican. When I do I will send proof of my registration to my three Democrat representatives and let them know I feel they left me no choice.
I feel the CPSIA is that bad. I hope that other Democrats will consider protesting this way as well. Remember, we can always go back when the Congressional Democrats awake from their stupor.
I agree with the first comment! This RIDICULOUS law has kept me from getting wholesale deals around my local area! A local baby boutique likes my items but cannot purchase any because of the liability involved (which I understand.) The entire thing needs to be rewritten but I fear it will not. Thank you for keeping us posted!
ReplyDelete