The Honorable Nydia M. Velazquez
The United State House of Representatives
Rayburn House Office Building Suite 2466
Washington DC 20515-3212
The Honorable Charles Schumer
The United State Senate
Hart Senate Office Building Suite 313
Washington DC 20510-3201
Please Repeal the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
Between 1997 and 2006, incidence of elevated blood lead levels in children fell by 84%. According to the Center for Disease Control, the remaining area of concern is lead paint in older homes, and a few other “potential” dangers mainly related to the household environment. Toys and other children’s products are nowhere mentioned.
Clearly, lead poisoning is an issue that’s already well under control in this country, not one that requires invasive government “help.” As your constituent, I implore you to consider the larger picture, not just a few highly publicized and unfortunate incidents. Don’t make rash, under-thought decisions that negatively affect our entire economy in these hard times.
This Act will cost business owners thousands of dollars, de-incentivize innovation and environmentalism and drive many out of business if it is not repealed. Small, “green” manufacturers, using only organic materials, could be wiped out because they can’t afford the per-unit testing on their small production runs. This will increase the market share for large companies that are better able to absorb the compliance costs. Ironically, large toy makers, like Mattel, were responsible for the lead scare in the first place. Do we really want to reward them while punishing small, environmentally friendly businesses?
Please fight to repeal this law.
Ms. Irene Malatesta
XXX XXX XXX XXX
New York, NY 10009-5952
February 12th, 2009 - 1:30 pm
Our pediatrician told us that 90% of children born and raised in Brooklyn have “unacceptably high” levels of lead in their blood, and be careful if we move there. Also, some 3rd-party organizations have found all sorts of unsavory things in certain toy lines.
So… I don’t know all the details of the act, but it seems like the problem isn’t solved yet.
In the same way that buying “local” tends to be safer/better than buying the government-sanctioned “organic”, it seems like “small/local” craftspeople should be exempted from fairs, markets and the like, as long as they are able to be held legally accountable for the negative effects of using any contaminants in their products.
February 12th, 2009 - 1:33 pm
Well, the Brooklyn part would be “the remaining area of concern is lead paint in older homes”.
February 12th, 2009 - 3:18 pm
I agree with your sentiment here, but disagree that the act should be completely repealed.
The week Caleb was born, a whole bunch of baby food had been pulled from the shelf for being toxic. Right before and right after his birth, there were stories filling the news about toys from China being pulled from store shelves for containing lead and other horrible things. So, when we bought toys, we avoided plastic for as long as he was sticking everything in his mouth and bought a bunch of wooden things from Vermont and Europe, often by the small mom and pop outfits that would be out of business by this act. As a huge fan of all the people who have sprung up recently to make toys that are safe, clever and not sold at Toys R Us, I was sick when I first read about this act. But, I think that rather than scrapping the whole thing, there should be an exception for companies that have small production. I am ALL FOR all of the international toy companies having to submit to safety testing since it is clear that their internal quality control is bullshit.
February 12th, 2009 - 3:29 pm
Kerry: The problem is definitely not solved, but this Act targets nothing, instead sweeping across many things that aren’t a danger. That’s why I think it should be repealed, not amended; it should be written from scratch.
February 12th, 2009 - 3:34 pm
Erin: I think the large toy companies deserve to be raked over the coals for their lax standards. However, I think there’s too much wrong with this act to amend it and that it should be created from scratch in such a way as to target the products (plastics, toys, paint, etc) that are actually causing harm. Mom and pop crafters making blankets and wooden toys shouldn’t be bothered with this crap and we can’t afford this type of government nonsense during a recession, a time when the government should, if anything, be creating more incentives for small businesses.
February 12th, 2009 - 4:25 pm
Okay, I can go with replacing the act.
Problem solved. (sound of gavel)
Next, please!