January, 30 2009, 12:54pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Consumer and Science Groups Set the Record Straight: Landmark Product Safety Law Makes the Marketplace Safer
Organizations Urge President Obama to Appoint New Leadership at the CPSC
WASHINGTON
In recent weeks, a number of misleading statements about the testing requirements of an important new product safety law have appeared in the media, on blogs and on other Web sites. While we have urged the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to promptly address reasonable concerns that have been raised regarding compliance, and provide better information about the new law, our organizations all agree that the law is fundamentally sound and essential to ensuring a safer marketplace. At the same time, we urge President Obama to appoint new leadership at the CPSC to help implement this important new consumer safety law.
Congress overwhelmingly passed, and President Bush signed, the landmark Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) last year, because of a dire need to stop the flood of dangerous, often life-threatening, products entering the marketplace. In 2007, there were 473 recalls of children's products, including millions of toys that contained dangerous levels of lead paint and other toxins. In 2008, consumers fared even worse with 563 recalls, including nearly 8 million toys.
In the past two months, the CPSC announced the recall of over 147,000 children's products for excessive levels of lead - including cribs, toys, jewelry, and school supplies. Three of the recalled products involved less than 500 units. These recalls prove that the law's implementation cannot come too soon. In fact, one of its most important provisions requires that children's products be tested for safety before they are sold. Few would dispute the value of this requirement, which many Americans thought was already the law.
The CPSIA is a strong consumer protection law that already provides safety regulators with the authority they need to ensure the safety of consumer products, especially those designed for children. For example, it has strengthened the agency's scientific integrity by making it easier for employees to anonymously report threats to the agency's science, and encouraging CPSC scientists to publish in peer-reviewed journals. Importantly, it also authorizes the CPSC to address issues voiced on behalf of small businesses - authority that the agency has begun to slowly exercise in some cases.
Unfortunately, heated rhetoric surrounding compliance is clouding the facts. For example, critics cite as "extreme" and "absurd," the testing for lead of products made purely from wood. In truth, the CPSC has the authority to exempt materials from testing requirements where there is no risk of harm to the public health, and it has already issued a proposed rule to exempt wood and untreated wool and cotton, which we agree is the right thing to do. The CPSC also may permit some businesses to meet the testing requirements by certifying that each component used is certified or exempt. These two simple types of rules - exemptions for materials that inherently do not pose safety risks, and allowing certification of components as free of lead and other toxins - would address nearly all of the concerns raised on behalf of small businesses.
Safety testing may impose costs on small businesses that were not already testing their products, but the testing costs have been exaggerated. Further, testing carries substantial benefits. For the first time, U.S. law will require proper safety testing for all children's products subject to mandatory standards no matter where they are made. That means big corporations can't skimp on safety by manufacturing toys in countries with lower safety standards, such as China. Further, on past occasions, small businesses have manufactured unsafe products that had to be recalled. Pre-market testing will assure consumers that products entering the market are safe. This testing also will help manufacturers avoid the substantial costs - both financial and to reputation - that can result from putting dangerous products on the market.
Critics also have claimed that secondhand retailers will have to test their products or dump their existing inventories. Both claims are incorrect. The new law does not require retailers to test and certify goods. While stores should not sell toys or nursery items that fail to meet safety standards, the responsibility and expense of certifying the safety of a product belongs to manufacturers. The CPSC has said that resellers should focus on checking their inventory for certain riskier product categories, including "recalled children's products, particularly cribs and play yards; children's products that may contain lead, such as children's jewelry and painted wooden or metal toys; flimsily made toys that are easily breakable into small parts; toys that lack the required age warnings; and dolls and stuffed toys that have buttons, eyes, noses or other small parts that are not securely fastened and could present a choking hazard for young children." The agency also said it will continue to put the most resources into removing high risk items, such as painted toys and children's metal jewelry, from the market.
As these examples demonstrate, the CPSC can provide implementation guidelines and grant exclusions from the testing requirements once businesses show that there is no risk of harm from the materials used. The CPSC is authorized to address most, if not all, the concerns of small business in a way that maintains the integrity of the law while offering relief to independent manufacturers.
Our organizations welcome commonsense, lawful exclusions from the CPSIA that do not diminish safety. Yet we are also cognizant of the fact that the CPSC in recent years repeatedly has put business interests ahead of its mission to protect public safety, and that it has a record of suppressing the research of its own scientists and technical experts if that research failed to deliver or support a particular outcome. Indeed, the CPSC's slow approach to providing guidance and information about the CPSIA has contributed to the growing resentment against the new law among small businesses.
We called on the agency several weeks ago to urge them to offer more guidance. But there are numerous other problems with the agency's implementation of the law. For instance, the Commission has expressly refused to begin work on a database that will make safety information available to consumers. Such actions demonstrate the urgent need for new, committed leadership at the agency.
The continued circulation of misinformation about the new law helps no one. The law offers important and long overdue protections for children, and it includes mechanisms to solve many concerns raised by industry. The CPSC must use its authority effectively and in a timely manner to implement this law as intended. So far, the law's implementation only highlights the need for President Obama to appoint new leadership at the CPSC immediately. At the same time, our organizations urge other stakeholders to focus their energy on joining us in seeking reasonable, readily available answers and solutions already in the law rather than attempt to weaken critical and popular new consumer protections.
READ the coalition fact sheet that sets the record straight on the CPSIA.
LATEST NEWS
Nikki Haley Wins 'Billionaire Primary' With Koch Network Endorsement
A DNC representative said it is "no surprise" given that she "checks all of their boxes: slashing taxes for the ultrawealthy, gutting Social Security and Medicare, and ripping healthcare away from millions of Americans."
Nov 28, 2023
While former U.S. President Donald Trump remains the Republican Party's front-runner for 2024, the political network founded by right-wing billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch announced Tuesday that it is instead backing Nikki Haley.
The Americans for Prosperity Action (AFPA) endorsement is a big win for Haley, who served as Trump's ambassador to the United Nations during the first half of his presidency and before that as governor of South Carolina. She has been battling Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for the second GOP spot, and the Iowa caucuses are now less than two months away.
"Subtext: Prior to the democratic primaries are the billionaire primaries," journalist Jane Mayer—who has reported extensively on the Koch Brothers and other rich donors behind the rise of the radical right in the United States—wrote on social media Tuesday.
Both DeSantis and Haley trail Trump significantly in national polling, but the ex-president is facing four criminal cases and legal arguments that he is constitutionally disqualified from holding office after inciting an insurrection, so the next top GOP candidate could end up challenging Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection next year.
"AFP Action is proud to throw our full support behind Nikki Haley, who offers America the opportunity to turn the page on the current political era," says a memo from Emily Seidel, a senior adviser to the group. "She has what it takes to lead a policy agenda to take on our nation's biggest challenges and help ensure our country's best days are ahead."
"With the grassroots and data capability we bring to bear in this race, no other organization is better equipped to help her do it," the memo continues. Citing internal polling, the document claims that Haley is "in the best position to defeat Donald Trump in the primaries" and "by far the strongest candidate Republicans could put up against Joe Biden in a general election."
The memo adds that "in sharp contrast to recent elections that were dominated by the negative baggage of Donald Trump and in which good candidates lost races that should have been won, Nikki Haley, at the top of the ticket, would boost candidates up and down the ballot, winning the key independent and moderate voters that Trump has no chance to win."
Some critics have pushed back against such presentations of Haley. Stephen Prager wrote last month for Current Affairs that "the media framing of Haley and other candidates as 'moderate' helps to soften their vicious policy prescriptions and inure liberals who'd ordinarily be skeptical of them. As a result, liberals who despise Trump end up having a favorableview of someone like Haley—even though she often holds more conservative policy inclinations in many places."
As Common Dreamshighlighted when Haley confirmed her candidacy in February, Christina Harvey, executive director of progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, warned, "Make no mistake: Nikki Haley is no moderate."
"From her support of Trump's policy of putting children in cages and the regressive reproductive health policies she pushed as governor of South Carolina to her opposition to federal voting rights legislation and her unwavering support of Donald Trump—even after he incited the January 6 insurrection—Nikki Haley has shown her true colors," Harvey said.
The Democratic National Committee similarly pointed to her policy positions in response to the AFPA endorsement on Tuesday. DNC national press secretary Sarafina Chitika said that "it's no surprise the Koch network, architects of Trump's MAGAnomics agenda, found their match in Nikki Haley, who checks all of their boxes: slashing taxes for the ultrawealthy, gutting Social Security and Medicare, and ripping healthcare away from millions of Americans."
"Republicans have entered a new stage in their primary—lighting millions of dollars on fire to attack each other, all the while reminding voters that every MAGA Republican candidate is in lockstep support of the same extreme, out-of-touch agenda the American people rejected in 2018, 2020, 2022, 2023, and will also reject next November, regardless of who emerges from this messy primary," Chitika charged.
Haley, meanwhile, shared an AFPA video about her on social media and said that she was "honored" to have the group's support.
DeSantis spokesperson Andrew Romeo said: "Congratulations to Donald Trump on securing the Koch endorsement. Like clockwork, the pro-open borders, pro-jail break bill establishment is lining up behind a moderate who has no mathematical pathway of defeating the former president. Every dollar spent on Nikki Haley's candidacy should be reported as an in-kind to the Trump campaign. No one has a stronger record of beating the establishment than Ron DeSantis, and this time will be no different."
Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung toldThe New York Times that "Americans for Prosperity—the political arm of the China First, America Last movement—has chosen to endorse a pro-China, open borders, and globalist candidate in Nikki 'Birdbrain' Haley" and claimed that no amount of "shady money" would stop the former president from winning the party nomination.
The newspaper noted that AFPA "has been among the country's largest spenders on anti-Trump material this year, buying online ads and sending mailers to voters in several states, including Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. All told, the group has spent more than $9 million in independent expenditures opposing Mr. Trump."
Keep ReadingShow Less
McDonald's Fined 0.0002% of 2022 Profits for Child Labor Violations
"Less than $1,000 per child," said one critic. "For one of the biggest franchises on Earth."
Nov 28, 2023
McDonald's, one of the largest employers in the world, was fined just $26,000—a tiny fraction of its profits—on Monday for violating child labor laws in Pennsylvania, with two franchisees found to be violating numerous rules in five stores.
The U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Wage and Hour Division found that Paul and Meghan Sweeney, owners of a company called Endor, which runs five McDonald's locations, employed 34 children who were 14 and 15 years old.
The employers scheduled the teenagers to work outside the times that 14- and 15-year-olds are legally permitted to work, including during school hours, earlier than 7:00 am and 7:00 pm during the school year, and more than three hours on a school day.
Writer and organizer Joshua P. Hill said the $26,000 fine—amounting to less than $1,000 per child who was affected by the Sweeneys' employment practices—was "not even a slap on the wrist," especially considering that the $200 billion multinational fast food company is one of the world's largest companies.
John DuMont, district director for the Wage and Hour Division in Western Pennsylvania, said in a statement that the Sweeneys employed young teenagers "at the expense of their education or well-being."
"Fast food restaurants offer young workers an opportunity to gain valuable work experience," said DuMont. "The Fair Labor Standards Act allows for developmental experiences but restricts the work hours of 14- and 15-year-olds and provides for penalties when employers do not follow the law."
Earlier this year, the DOL found that three McDonald's stores in Kentucky were illegally employing more than 300 children—some as young as 10. A coalition of McDonald's shareholders demanded a third-party human rights assessment in June, citing the Kentucky case and that of a 15-year-old employee in Tennessee who was injured at work.
The AFL-CIO pointed out that the violations at stores in Brookville, Clarion, Punxsutawney, and St. Mary's, Pennsylvania, took place amid a right-wing push to roll back child labor laws.
With the backing of powerful conservative donors like Richard Uihlein, lawmakers in Florida, Iowa, Arkansas have pushed legislation to weaken child labor protections in recent months. Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican, signed a bill in May removing so-called "unnecessary restrictions" that keep minors from working in hazardous workplaces, and GOP Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed a bill in March allowing companies to hire children under the age of 16 without verifying their age.
The finding at the Pennsylvania McDonald's locations serves as a reminder that "any lawmaker who votes to roll back child labor laws is a disgrace," said the AFL-CIO.
The fine announced on Monday only represents "two ten-thousandths of a single percent" of McDonald's gross profits in 2022, said the labor group.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Admin Sued for Hiding Records on Opposition to Fossil Fuel Phaseout
The lawsuit aims to "shed light on the Biden administration's dumbfounding refusal to align our country's federal fossil fuel programs with its own climate goals," said one campaigner.
Nov 28, 2023
A national conservation group sued the Biden administration on Tuesday for failing to respond to a public records request pertaining to the Interior Department's dismissal of a petition that called for a phaseout of oil and gas extraction on federal lands and waters.
Submitted last year, the petition from more than 360 environmental and Indigenous organizations called on the Interior Department to initiate a rulemaking process aimed at reducing oil and gas production on public lands and waters by 98% by 2035.
The department rejected the petition earlier this year, claiming that it "has a robust rulemaking agenda already underway to address the climate crisis and implement reforms to our conventional energy programs" and doesn't have adequate resources to "undertake the proposed rulemaking at this time."
The administration's reply came after the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) sued the administration for not responding to the petition for more than a year.
CBD is now taking legal action against the Interior Department again, this time for violating the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
In July, CBD requested that the Interior Department turn over records related to the agency's deliberations about the fossil fuel phaseout petition and its response.
"At the time of the filing of this complaint, over 130 days have passed since the Center submitted its FOIA request to Interior. To date, however, Interior has not provided any requested records," the new lawsuit states. "Accordingly, the Center challenges Interior's FOIA violations resulting from its failure to respond to the Center's request and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to require Interior to promptly search for and produce all responsive records without further delay."
"The administration needs to explain its failure to take bold, urgent action but instead it's hiding public records."
Taylor McKinnon, CBD's southwest director, said in a statement that the lawsuit "will shed light on the Biden administration's dumbfounding refusal to align our country's federal fossil fuel programs with its own climate goals."
"All-time high federal oil production is causing our planet's life support systems to shut down under the stresses of the climate emergency," said McKinnon. "The administration needs to explain its failure to take bold, urgent action but instead it's hiding public records."
The suit comes days before the start of the COP28 climate summit in the United Arab Emirates, closely watched and critically important talks that Biden has decided to skip.
Under Biden's leadership, U.S. crude oil production is on pace to surge to a record 12.9 million barrels this year. During his first two years in office, the Biden administration approved more than 6,400 permits for oil and gas drilling, exceeding the number of approvals during former President Donald Trump's first two years.
According to a CBD analysis released Monday, drilling projects that the Biden administration has approved could "erase" emissions-reduction progress from the Inflation Reduction Act, the president's signature legislative achievement.
"The Biden administration is canceling out its own climate progress by greenlighting major oil and gas projects," said Shaye Wolf, CBD's climate science director.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular