I highly advise that anyone concerned about the CPSIA read Rick Wolderberg's blog CPSIA - Comments & Observations. I'm using such a small amount of the material from just two posts.
The CPSC had a hearing December 2, a hearing on extending the testing stay and about interium enforcement policy. According to "CPSIA - Hearing on testing Stay and Interim Enforcement Policy," the Commission and the CPSC Staff are asking better questions
such as if there is enough lab capacity to the required tests."
However none of the discussion involved "Safety" or any discussion of risk. Rather concern seems to be the overwhelming paperwork. Nothing that mentioned the purpose of this law or huge governmental mistake - supposedly safety for children.
Rick Woldenberg continued by saying, "The sad fact is that the CPSC cannot create a workable solution, even with a smile on their faces and good intentions in their hearts, without addressing the deficiencies of the law. A nonsensical law cannot be fixed with implementing rules. At some point, the CPSC is going to figure this out when they see that compliance is very low, and they are overflowing with violations."
One of the items discussed as the possible extension of the testing and certification stay.
Woldenberg shared more in his "CPSIA - An Open Letter on the Testing Stay" December 8.
The discussion by the CPSA concerning possibly extending the testing and certification stay may not turn out well without massive pressure from us, all of us, steamroll the commissioners with an avalanche of emails.
I'm going to quote Woldenberg again, because he organized it and explained so well:
What kind of disaster would the termination of the Stay in February mean to you? Let me count the problems:
* The "15 Month Rule" was never issued when due on November 14th. The "15 Month Rule" was supposed to address testing frequency, sampling regimes, the need for additional testing, component testing rules, etc. [Component testing rules were cited as critical by Nancy Nord when the original stay was issued on January 30, 2009. How time flies . . . .] There is a workshop to be held on Thursday and Friday this week to solicit feedback from stakeholders. More than 200 people will attend and many more will watch and participate online in the web simulcast. Presumably this feedback needs to be fully digested before the Commission acts on the stay.
* Comments on the "15 Month Rule" issues are due on January 11. For perspective, the original comments on the penalty factors were due in late December 2008, and a second round of comments were due on October 1. The revised penalty factors have not been released, and we are now within days of a full year since the first comment letters were received. With this as precedent, we are clearly MANY months from a completed "15 Month Rule". Arguably, without a fully articulated "15 Month Rule", an active testing requirement will be incomplete and utterly confusing.
* The CPSC has not issued its phthalate testing standard.
* The CPSC has not certified ONE phthalates lab yet.
* The CPSC admits that it has not certified enough labs to handle a full burden of testing for many product classes or safety tests. They have not provided any quantification of this deficit besides acknowledging that for bikes, based on current accredited labs, it would take a full year to complete testing on all bikes on the U.S. market. That's one round of testing only, btw.
* The CPSC has not certified labs for ASTM F963 testing yet.
* The CPSC has not defined "children's product", "toy", "play" or "childcare article" yet, making the application of the rules completely opaque.
* The CPSC has not leveled the playing field, acknowledging that fixed test costs place a disproportionately high burden on small businesses. This competitive disadvantage has no ready solution under current rules.
* The CPSC has acknowledged that many companies have not acted to fill market gaps like component testing because the rules are not final (or even drafted in this case).
* The CPSC is on its third enforcement policy on lead and lead-in-paint. With the enforcement-policy-of-the-week, the agency ensures that companies will have devote considerable resources to relearning the rules that they had previously mastered, leading to confusion and exhaustion. Imposing a further layer of incomplete, vague and unarticulated testing policies and plans will only reinforce chaos as the working standard for the children's product industry.
* The rules that the CPSC has implemented are so ornate, confusingly worded, scattered among multiple documents, letters, and even video testimony, that only the most obsessive observers can claim an accurate understanding of every nuance. This group would not even include me, even though I have given up sleeping in favor of the CPSIA.
Now, I've emailed all five of the commissioners, but only one replied, Nancy Nord, agreeing the stay should be extended.
Send these five commissioners an email now with your concerns if the stay should be lifted.
Chairman Inez Tenenbaum itenenbaum@cpsc.gov
Commissioner Bob Adler radler@cpsc.gov
Commissioner Thomas Moore tmoore@cpsc.gov
Commissioner Nancy Nord nnord@cpsc.gov
Commissioner Anne Northup anorthup@cpsc.gov
Let's show the commissioners that we know what is going on and that we feel the destructive law, which should be destroyed, needs to have the stay extended.
Showing posts with label CPSIA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CPSIA. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
They're doing it again ...
Everyone needs to visit Holly Jahangiri's blog and see what Mattel is doing now. Not only do they get to "test" their own products per CPSIA (remember Mattel caused the problems in the first place, triggered the CPSIA nightmare), now more products are lead-fested.
My battle-weary body and mind can't fight any more, but I'm extremely angry -- again and still.
.
Friday, August 28, 2009
The government's unfair treatment - CPSIA
I hadn't planned on blogging again until I announced my VBT schedule, not the full schedule already posted, but my posts about Kathy Stemke. However, something happened that caused my ire to rise.
I posted about the Consumer Product Safety Inspection Act of 2008 several times:
Will we lose a treasure of children's lit?
CPSIA and libraries - breaking the law?
What? The CPSC didn't say what it said? Libraries are not criminals?
The fight against the CPSIA continues
Those listed above are just a few of the many posts about the CPSIA, which became law as a result of Mattel importing toys from China with heavy lead content in their paint, causing illness and death.
Small companies are folding as a result, because the massive law requires third party testing, expensive and prohibitive testing.
Oh, but wait, one major company, the one that caused all the trouble, gets a waiver. The law doesn't apply to them. They don't have to have their products, whether imported or made in the U.S., tested by a third party. That's right, Mattel was granted a waiver.
Quoted from Mattel gets a CPSIA waiver(also found on News Inferno.com):
After consumers discovered an influx of lead-tainted toys imported by Mattel and other companies, Congress acted to strengthen protections through the Consumer Protection Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). The legislation created almost impossible hurdles for small manufacturers and resellers for testing products, while earlier this month the CPSC announced it would send inspectors fanning out across the USA to enforce the laws in thrift shops. Now one of the companies that created the problem in the first place has gotten a waiver from the CPSIA’s requirements for third-party testing:
Toy-makers, clothing manufacturers and other companies selling products for young children are submitting samples to independent laboratories for safety tests. But the nation’s largest toy maker, Mattel, isn’t being required to do the same.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission recently, and quietly, granted Mattel’s request to use its own labs for testing that is required under a law Congress passed last summer in the wake of a rash of recalls of toys contaminated by lead. Six of those toys were produced by Mattel Inc., and its subsidiary Fisher-Price. …
Mattel is getting a competitive advantage, Green said, because smaller companies must pay independent labs to do the tests. Testing costs can run from several hundred dollars to many thousands, depending on the test and the toy or product.
Mattel had to recall more than 2 million toys from the market after inspectors discovered lead in the imported products. Now they claim that their “firewalled” labs will protect consumers and block out “corporate influence”. Where are the labs that Mattel will use? Mexico, Malaysia, Indonesia, and China — and China is where the dangerous toys originated.
Oh, yes, our government is so fair and helps small businesses and individuals -- sure, sure, and I have some beach front property on the outskirts of Oklahoma City, and I don't mean the Great Salt Plains.
Ish! Big guys get bailouts and special considerations, but the rest of us, individuals and small business, get to pay for everything and get nothing but that large knife in the back.
Let's let everyone we can know how angry we are.
.
I posted about the Consumer Product Safety Inspection Act of 2008 several times:
Will we lose a treasure of children's lit?
CPSIA and libraries - breaking the law?
What? The CPSC didn't say what it said? Libraries are not criminals?
The fight against the CPSIA continues
Those listed above are just a few of the many posts about the CPSIA, which became law as a result of Mattel importing toys from China with heavy lead content in their paint, causing illness and death.
Small companies are folding as a result, because the massive law requires third party testing, expensive and prohibitive testing.
Oh, but wait, one major company, the one that caused all the trouble, gets a waiver. The law doesn't apply to them. They don't have to have their products, whether imported or made in the U.S., tested by a third party. That's right, Mattel was granted a waiver.
Quoted from Mattel gets a CPSIA waiver(also found on News Inferno.com):
After consumers discovered an influx of lead-tainted toys imported by Mattel and other companies, Congress acted to strengthen protections through the Consumer Protection Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). The legislation created almost impossible hurdles for small manufacturers and resellers for testing products, while earlier this month the CPSC announced it would send inspectors fanning out across the USA to enforce the laws in thrift shops. Now one of the companies that created the problem in the first place has gotten a waiver from the CPSIA’s requirements for third-party testing:
Toy-makers, clothing manufacturers and other companies selling products for young children are submitting samples to independent laboratories for safety tests. But the nation’s largest toy maker, Mattel, isn’t being required to do the same.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission recently, and quietly, granted Mattel’s request to use its own labs for testing that is required under a law Congress passed last summer in the wake of a rash of recalls of toys contaminated by lead. Six of those toys were produced by Mattel Inc., and its subsidiary Fisher-Price. …
Mattel is getting a competitive advantage, Green said, because smaller companies must pay independent labs to do the tests. Testing costs can run from several hundred dollars to many thousands, depending on the test and the toy or product.
Mattel had to recall more than 2 million toys from the market after inspectors discovered lead in the imported products. Now they claim that their “firewalled” labs will protect consumers and block out “corporate influence”. Where are the labs that Mattel will use? Mexico, Malaysia, Indonesia, and China — and China is where the dangerous toys originated.
Oh, yes, our government is so fair and helps small businesses and individuals -- sure, sure, and I have some beach front property on the outskirts of Oklahoma City, and I don't mean the Great Salt Plains.
Ish! Big guys get bailouts and special considerations, but the rest of us, individuals and small business, get to pay for everything and get nothing but that large knife in the back.
Let's let everyone we can know how angry we are.
.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Science and the CPSIA
Scientist material I am not, but even I know that the claims made by supporters of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act are bogus. However, being non-scientific I didn't know how to "prove" anything. I just have intellect and logic on my side.
Thankfully, other people recognize the fallacies found in the CPSIA also understand and know science. They can point out the exact errors in CPSIA thinking. One such person, Michael D. Shaw (Executive Vice President of Interscan Corporation) wrote an interesting article for HealthNewsDigest.com, Disrupting The -Endocrine Disruptor- Hypothesis.
Shaw explained several of the fallacies in arguments supporting the need for the CPSIA and in the methodology of tests advocates use to show the "inherent" dangers of phthalates. The law and its supporters worry about possible dangers to children, dangers caused by certain materials including lead and phtalates. Dangers abound in this world, but the over-reaction to things that really are already controlled can be worse than perceived dangers.
One point Shaw made, with which I definitely agree, is as follows:
At the heart of this is the so-called precautionary principle which states: "When an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically."
To the uninitiated, this principle may sound good, but in practice there have been virtually no demonstrated benefits to balance the well-documented failures and even catastrophes. All but the most strident Greens now agree that the banning of DDT was a tragic mistake, leading to the deaths of millions of Africans from malaria. Closer to the present, a mostly moronic Congress was quick to exploit the lead-poisoning death of young Jarnell Brown, with the patently absurd and destructive Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act—quite possibly the worst law passed in the last 50 years.
I recommend everyone read Mr. Shaw's article complete article found here. The scientific information alone is worth the read.
Personally, I'm still afraid that my publishing house, 4RV Publishing, libraries, and many other small businesses and households are in danger of prosecution under this "quite possibly the worse law passed in the last 50 years."
.
Thankfully, other people recognize the fallacies found in the CPSIA also understand and know science. They can point out the exact errors in CPSIA thinking. One such person, Michael D. Shaw (Executive Vice President of Interscan Corporation) wrote an interesting article for HealthNewsDigest.com, Disrupting The -Endocrine Disruptor- Hypothesis.
Shaw explained several of the fallacies in arguments supporting the need for the CPSIA and in the methodology of tests advocates use to show the "inherent" dangers of phthalates. The law and its supporters worry about possible dangers to children, dangers caused by certain materials including lead and phtalates. Dangers abound in this world, but the over-reaction to things that really are already controlled can be worse than perceived dangers.
One point Shaw made, with which I definitely agree, is as follows:
At the heart of this is the so-called precautionary principle which states: "When an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically."
To the uninitiated, this principle may sound good, but in practice there have been virtually no demonstrated benefits to balance the well-documented failures and even catastrophes. All but the most strident Greens now agree that the banning of DDT was a tragic mistake, leading to the deaths of millions of Africans from malaria. Closer to the present, a mostly moronic Congress was quick to exploit the lead-poisoning death of young Jarnell Brown, with the patently absurd and destructive Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act—quite possibly the worst law passed in the last 50 years.
I recommend everyone read Mr. Shaw's article complete article found here. The scientific information alone is worth the read.
Personally, I'm still afraid that my publishing house, 4RV Publishing, libraries, and many other small businesses and households are in danger of prosecution under this "quite possibly the worse law passed in the last 50 years."
.
Friday, April 10, 2009
CPSIA for food? H.R. 875, Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009
Our government has gone crazy with power. No checks and balances exist any more. No true care for those of us who are supposed to be in charge of those we elect. We have a government out of control: a leader of the House who insists that those of us who are planning or worked for our retirements need to be taxed more so that illegal immigrants and others who haven't bothered to work or save can have more. Huh? I don't mind helping those who are not able to work, but illegal immigrants and people who don't but could ...
The latest debacle is H.R. 875, Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009. The propaganda meant to calm our concerns sound much like that of the Consumer Product Improvment Act of 2008. According to Overlawyered, "At Treehugger, one finds language which with a word changed here or there is virtually identical to the reassuring language one recalls hearing from CPSIA backers ..."
According to Jennifer Lance on Eco Child's Play, "H.R. 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 could end farmers’ markets as we know it by requiring growers to register, be subject to inspections of their gardens by federal agents, and maintain safety records related to food production or face large fines."
Yep, that's right, it will be small farmers and gardeners harmed by this law, and of course the public as prices of food rises and is limited more and more.
My doctors told me I have to reduce stress in my life, so I can't take on the fight as I did the CPSIA, but that doesn't mean I won't contact my state's Washington delegation. I will, but I can't be as passionate as I was before. Hopefully others are willing to go to battle on this issue -- and the fight still continues against the CPSIA.
Our government has lost its collective minds, and they don't even care.
Power corrupts; absolute power absolutely corrupts. God help us.
.
The latest debacle is H.R. 875, Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009. The propaganda meant to calm our concerns sound much like that of the Consumer Product Improvment Act of 2008. According to Overlawyered, "At Treehugger, one finds language which with a word changed here or there is virtually identical to the reassuring language one recalls hearing from CPSIA backers ..."
According to Jennifer Lance on Eco Child's Play, "H.R. 875: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 could end farmers’ markets as we know it by requiring growers to register, be subject to inspections of their gardens by federal agents, and maintain safety records related to food production or face large fines."
Yep, that's right, it will be small farmers and gardeners harmed by this law, and of course the public as prices of food rises and is limited more and more.
My doctors told me I have to reduce stress in my life, so I can't take on the fight as I did the CPSIA, but that doesn't mean I won't contact my state's Washington delegation. I will, but I can't be as passionate as I was before. Hopefully others are willing to go to battle on this issue -- and the fight still continues against the CPSIA.
Our government has lost its collective minds, and they don't even care.
Power corrupts; absolute power absolutely corrupts. God help us.
.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
What? The CPSC didn't say what it said? Libraries are not criminals?
What! I've heard of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing, but the latest news is astounding and more confusing than ever. The CPSC doesn't know what the CPSIA is supposed to do, and members of the CPSC don't know what each other does or should do.
As Walter Olson on Overlawyered, "CPSC: No, we didn’t ask libraries to pull pre-1985 books," wrote, an associated press article yesterday quoted Scott Wolfson, a spokesman for the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Wolfson's message, as found also here this morning, stated that libraries should take steps to put pre-1985 books out of reach for children.
Now,commission chief of staff, Joe Martyak, says that Wolfson “misspoke." He says the commission never made any such recommendation. Huh?
Another CPSC commissioner, Thomas Moore, declared a few weeks ago that a large section of older books should be be “sequestered” from children for the time being.
When will the government admit defeat and scrap this poorly written law that does not protect children but harm them?
For updates on the CPSIA debacle, Overlawyered is an excellent source.
Are you as confused as I am? Apparently the CPSC is confused, too. Hmmm ... maybe the members ate too many lead filled books as adults.
.
As Walter Olson on Overlawyered, "CPSC: No, we didn’t ask libraries to pull pre-1985 books," wrote, an associated press article yesterday quoted Scott Wolfson, a spokesman for the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Wolfson's message, as found also here this morning, stated that libraries should take steps to put pre-1985 books out of reach for children.
Now,commission chief of staff, Joe Martyak, says that Wolfson “misspoke." He says the commission never made any such recommendation. Huh?
Another CPSC commissioner, Thomas Moore, declared a few weeks ago that a large section of older books should be be “sequestered” from children for the time being.
When will the government admit defeat and scrap this poorly written law that does not protect children but harm them?
For updates on the CPSIA debacle, Overlawyered is an excellent source.
Are you as confused as I am? Apparently the CPSC is confused, too. Hmmm ... maybe the members ate too many lead filled books as adults.
.
CPSIA and libraries - breaking the law?
The "big brother" federal government fears lead may exist in children's books. The operative word here is "may." We can find no evidence of anyone, child or otherwise, being harmed by ingesting books. However, those in power, in their infinite wisdom, decided that many items not known for containing lead or are not eatable are dangerous to children -- including books. The Consumer Product Safety Commission finally announced that ordinary books printed after 1984 are probably safe.
Now the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, as translated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, requires that children's books (written for children twelve and under) printed before 1985 are to be destroyed or placed where children cannot access them. Of course until recently, the law was interpreted to cover all books published for children under thirteen.
Therefore, libraries were "urged" to take children's books printed before 1985 off their shelves or make those books not accessible until the federal agency "investigates" whether vintage books contain unsafe levels of lead. (Side note: What are unsafe levels of lead in items not digested?)
CPSC spokesman Scott Wolfson said libraries can safely lend any children’s book printed in 1986 or later…. Until the testing is done, the nation’s more than 116,000 public and school libraries “should take steps to ensure that the children aren’t accessing those books,” according to Wlfson. “Steps can be taken to put them in an area on hold until the Consumer Product Safety Commission can give further guidance.”
However, most libraries are not complying, as stated in CPSC Demands that Libraries Remove Books. A local television station had a segment on the nine o'clock news about libraries having more children checking out books than in the past. There in video were shelves after shelves filled with older children's books, and - horror of horrors - children were handling them, reading them, checking them out, but not eating even one, not even a nibble.
As Valerie wrote in the entry posted March 17, 2009, "Few, if any, libraries are complying, and many librarians are ridiculing the recommendation as alarmist. Even the nation’s premier medical sleuths, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, say any danger from lead in children’s books is slight."
Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the American Library Association’s Washington office, said, “We’re talking about tens of millions of copies of children’s books that are perfectly safe. I wish a reasonable, rational person would just say, `This is stupid. What are we doing?’” Where are any reasonable, rational people in Washington?
Has the federal government made our public and school libraries criminals? Where can that reasonable, sane person be found?
.
Now the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, as translated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, requires that children's books (written for children twelve and under) printed before 1985 are to be destroyed or placed where children cannot access them. Of course until recently, the law was interpreted to cover all books published for children under thirteen.
Therefore, libraries were "urged" to take children's books printed before 1985 off their shelves or make those books not accessible until the federal agency "investigates" whether vintage books contain unsafe levels of lead. (Side note: What are unsafe levels of lead in items not digested?)
CPSC spokesman Scott Wolfson said libraries can safely lend any children’s book printed in 1986 or later…. Until the testing is done, the nation’s more than 116,000 public and school libraries “should take steps to ensure that the children aren’t accessing those books,” according to Wlfson. “Steps can be taken to put them in an area on hold until the Consumer Product Safety Commission can give further guidance.”
However, most libraries are not complying, as stated in CPSC Demands that Libraries Remove Books. A local television station had a segment on the nine o'clock news about libraries having more children checking out books than in the past. There in video were shelves after shelves filled with older children's books, and - horror of horrors - children were handling them, reading them, checking them out, but not eating even one, not even a nibble.
As Valerie wrote in the entry posted March 17, 2009, "Few, if any, libraries are complying, and many librarians are ridiculing the recommendation as alarmist. Even the nation’s premier medical sleuths, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, say any danger from lead in children’s books is slight."
Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the American Library Association’s Washington office, said, “We’re talking about tens of millions of copies of children’s books that are perfectly safe. I wish a reasonable, rational person would just say, `This is stupid. What are we doing?’” Where are any reasonable, rational people in Washington?
Has the federal government made our public and school libraries criminals? Where can that reasonable, sane person be found?
.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
And the CPSIA fight goes on ...
Due to health issues, I've allowed others to continue the battle against the Customer Product Safety Improvement Act, but I need to update those who follow Brain Cells & Bubble Wrap about an important event April 1.
I've heard about the CPSIA "people's hearing" in Washington D.C. from CPSIA-Central, and now by Walter Olson in Overlawyered. Everyone needs to read the complete blog entry, but here's the first paragraph from that post:
Coming up April 1, but not a joke: Since Henry Waxman and other CPSIA defenders on Capitol Hill are still stonewalling demands for hearings on the law’s catastrophic effects, some citizen-activists are preparing an alternative event for the nation’s capital in which persons from many affected constituencies will have a chance to tell their stories; there may also be “rally” activities, as well as events in other states for those who find it more convenient to protest there. Rick Woldenberg has details. Rob Wilson has created a fledgling Facebook event page and a new domain with email: hearings - at - cpsiahearings - dot - com.
Amy Ridenour declares Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) the "winner" of the Outrage of the Day because he refuses to hold hearings on the CPSIA.
Ms. Ridenour puts the law in perspective when she states Congress adopted the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 in part because it (Congress) has no idea what it is doing. She continues by saying "that's what happens when lawmakers vote on bills no one has read, coming from an ideological bias that the bigger governement grows, the better we'll be. However, she continues, "that's no excuse for not revisiting the issue now that the truth is kicking many people in the teeth."
When, and if, anyone contacts Rep. Waxman, he tells the person that he'll get to it later. Why is Waxman waiting? He wants a new chairman to be appointed, now by President Obama, who will be on Waxman's side and keep the CPSIA in effect, destroying children and small businesses in the process.
Please find ways to support the fight against the CPSIA. Children need books, those published now and those before 1985. Children need bikes (who has heard of a child becoming deathly ill by eating the tires or other parts of a bike -- well, guess eating anything like that would make them sick, IF they could manage to ingest such parts).
IF you can, join the protest in Washington D.C. If you can't, send more messages to members of Congress, the President, anyone in power.
The war still rages, and we could lose more rights if we don't win.
.
I've heard about the CPSIA "people's hearing" in Washington D.C. from CPSIA-Central, and now by Walter Olson in Overlawyered. Everyone needs to read the complete blog entry, but here's the first paragraph from that post:
Coming up April 1, but not a joke: Since Henry Waxman and other CPSIA defenders on Capitol Hill are still stonewalling demands for hearings on the law’s catastrophic effects, some citizen-activists are preparing an alternative event for the nation’s capital in which persons from many affected constituencies will have a chance to tell their stories; there may also be “rally” activities, as well as events in other states for those who find it more convenient to protest there. Rick Woldenberg has details. Rob Wilson has created a fledgling Facebook event page and a new domain with email: hearings - at - cpsiahearings - dot - com.
Amy Ridenour declares Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) the "winner" of the Outrage of the Day because he refuses to hold hearings on the CPSIA.
Ms. Ridenour puts the law in perspective when she states Congress adopted the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 in part because it (Congress) has no idea what it is doing. She continues by saying "that's what happens when lawmakers vote on bills no one has read, coming from an ideological bias that the bigger governement grows, the better we'll be. However, she continues, "that's no excuse for not revisiting the issue now that the truth is kicking many people in the teeth."
When, and if, anyone contacts Rep. Waxman, he tells the person that he'll get to it later. Why is Waxman waiting? He wants a new chairman to be appointed, now by President Obama, who will be on Waxman's side and keep the CPSIA in effect, destroying children and small businesses in the process.
Please find ways to support the fight against the CPSIA. Children need books, those published now and those before 1985. Children need bikes (who has heard of a child becoming deathly ill by eating the tires or other parts of a bike -- well, guess eating anything like that would make them sick, IF they could manage to ingest such parts).
IF you can, join the protest in Washington D.C. If you can't, send more messages to members of Congress, the President, anyone in power.
The war still rages, and we could lose more rights if we don't win.
.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
CPSIA update, sort of
I started a group on CPSIA - Central about the effect of the CPSIA on books, producers, sellers, users, schools, and libraries. Interest was greater than I expected, and today on Overlawyered, Walter Olson embedded a link to the OPSIA - Central group. "There’s also a page at cpsia-central (the Ning group) on books and libraries."
I'm not engaged in the trenches of this war any more because I've had to cut back on at least some of the stress in my life (my doctors -- primary and cardiologist -- insist I need to), but I still read and keep track of the battles being waged. The problem still exists and isn't improving. In fact, the scheduled hearing with small business owners to address the impact on them was canceled and is not going to be rescheduled.
The war against the CPSIA needs some media coverage from major newspapers, magazines, radio, and/or television stations. However, what little has been printed in most small papers downplays the seriousness of the problem. Why is the media essentially helping Waxman and company to cover up the damage this law has caused already and will continue to cause?
Books are being destroyed. Small toy businesses are closing their doors. Suppliers of home schooling material can't stay in business.
From Overlaywered: "Community Homestead is a center for developmentally disabled adults in rural Wisconsin that has sold residents’ handcraft toys." The community supports itself through the winter months by creating toys, and now the law will put countless independent businesses, particularly of hand crafted toys, out of business, including Community Homestead.
And the voice of reason continues to be gagged by the media and supporters of this poorly written and researched law.
Please keep fighting.
.
I'm not engaged in the trenches of this war any more because I've had to cut back on at least some of the stress in my life (my doctors -- primary and cardiologist -- insist I need to), but I still read and keep track of the battles being waged. The problem still exists and isn't improving. In fact, the scheduled hearing with small business owners to address the impact on them was canceled and is not going to be rescheduled.
The war against the CPSIA needs some media coverage from major newspapers, magazines, radio, and/or television stations. However, what little has been printed in most small papers downplays the seriousness of the problem. Why is the media essentially helping Waxman and company to cover up the damage this law has caused already and will continue to cause?
Books are being destroyed. Small toy businesses are closing their doors. Suppliers of home schooling material can't stay in business.
From Overlaywered: "Community Homestead is a center for developmentally disabled adults in rural Wisconsin that has sold residents’ handcraft toys." The community supports itself through the winter months by creating toys, and now the law will put countless independent businesses, particularly of hand crafted toys, out of business, including Community Homestead.
And the voice of reason continues to be gagged by the media and supporters of this poorly written and researched law.
Please keep fighting.
.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Will we lose a treasure of children's lit?
Overlayered had an interesting post yesterday, about the impact of the "clarification" from the CPSA about the impact of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) on the irreplaceable treasury of children's literture.
(Yes, the CPSIA is still alive and way too well, and only continued pressure will change anything since the House voted to keep the CPSIA as is.)
From Overlawyered: As readers are aware, the Consumer Product Safety Commission yesterday advised thrift stores and other resellers and distributors of used goods to discard (unless they wished to test for lead or take other typically unpractical steps such as contacting manufacturers) children’s books printed before 1985 and a very wide range of other children’s products, including apparel and playthings.
Already, thrift stores, resale stores, and used bookstores are destroying books printed before 1985: books which cannot be replaced because most no longer have needed plates to reprint, and which were out of print before the digital age.
Quoting from Overlawyered again: A “relabel everything as collectible” strategy is, however, of limited legal help to retailers, because the law provides that they are liable if they sell a product which will commonly be understood as destined for use by children, whether or not they label it as such.
So I ask, "Will we lose a treasure of children's literature? Will our children and their children and their children's children be the ones most harmed?"
Only we can change this terribly poorly crafted law -- by continuing to apply pressure on our Senators, Representatives, officials, and the CPSA. If we lessen our efforts, the law will take its toll on our nation in ways that can never be undone.
.
(Yes, the CPSIA is still alive and way too well, and only continued pressure will change anything since the House voted to keep the CPSIA as is.)
From Overlawyered: As readers are aware, the Consumer Product Safety Commission yesterday advised thrift stores and other resellers and distributors of used goods to discard (unless they wished to test for lead or take other typically unpractical steps such as contacting manufacturers) children’s books printed before 1985 and a very wide range of other children’s products, including apparel and playthings.
Already, thrift stores, resale stores, and used bookstores are destroying books printed before 1985: books which cannot be replaced because most no longer have needed plates to reprint, and which were out of print before the digital age.
Quoting from Overlawyered again: A “relabel everything as collectible” strategy is, however, of limited legal help to retailers, because the law provides that they are liable if they sell a product which will commonly be understood as destined for use by children, whether or not they label it as such.
So I ask, "Will we lose a treasure of children's literature? Will our children and their children and their children's children be the ones most harmed?"
Only we can change this terribly poorly crafted law -- by continuing to apply pressure on our Senators, Representatives, officials, and the CPSA. If we lessen our efforts, the law will take its toll on our nation in ways that can never be undone.
.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A place to voice our questions about CPSIA
NOTE: Check out District Dispatch, including the comments. The article brings current information, but it also highlights the fact that we're beginning to compartmentalize attacks into our own narrow interests. We need to press for repealing of the law, period.
We have another place to voice our concerns about the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.
Stephen Macquignon posted on CPSIA-Central a link to “Ask a Question Regarding the New CPSC Reauthorization Legislation." He had submitted the question, "When's the law going to be repealed?"
My question was a bit more detailed, but it essentially asked the same thing. When will the CPSIA be stopped?
I think we should inundate that site with our concerns, questions, desires to see this law nullified, repealed, halted, stopped, and otherwise erased. Another law, one well researched and written, would better protect our children.
We need to stop the tragedy from happening, and we need to keep honest people from being law breakers because, as some folks keep telling me, "the law is unenforceable so don't worry about it." Personally, I try not to disobey the law even if I think no one will catch me. I prefer to be legal, as do most people and businesses.
Another blog that discusses the CPSIA problem in a more humorous manner, but no less true one, is Trockle. Personally, I'm a bit partial to the lovable little monster and his book, published by 4RV Publishing, written by Holly Jahangiri, and illustrated by Jordan M. Vinyard. I'd like to see him, uh, his book continue to be available for children. I'd also like to see the Trockle stuffed toy become a reality and not "thrown away" before produced because of a bad law.
Discussing the CPSIA and its impact with others is a good strategy. I attended a book festival this past Saturday. I was surprised how many authors had no knowledge of the law or its impacts. I spent 80% of my time talking about the CPSIA rather than books.
In fact, The Oklahoman photographer captured me with my mouth open telling someone about the law. However, not one word appears in that same paper about the serious impacts the CPSIA will have on stores, books, libraries, schools, small home businesses, or the price everyone will pay as costs of items increase.
.
We have another place to voice our concerns about the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.
Stephen Macquignon posted on CPSIA-Central a link to “Ask a Question Regarding the New CPSC Reauthorization Legislation." He had submitted the question, "When's the law going to be repealed?"
My question was a bit more detailed, but it essentially asked the same thing. When will the CPSIA be stopped?
I think we should inundate that site with our concerns, questions, desires to see this law nullified, repealed, halted, stopped, and otherwise erased. Another law, one well researched and written, would better protect our children.
We need to stop the tragedy from happening, and we need to keep honest people from being law breakers because, as some folks keep telling me, "the law is unenforceable so don't worry about it." Personally, I try not to disobey the law even if I think no one will catch me. I prefer to be legal, as do most people and businesses.
Another blog that discusses the CPSIA problem in a more humorous manner, but no less true one, is Trockle. Personally, I'm a bit partial to the lovable little monster and his book, published by 4RV Publishing, written by Holly Jahangiri, and illustrated by Jordan M. Vinyard. I'd like to see him, uh, his book continue to be available for children. I'd also like to see the Trockle stuffed toy become a reality and not "thrown away" before produced because of a bad law.
Discussing the CPSIA and its impact with others is a good strategy. I attended a book festival this past Saturday. I was surprised how many authors had no knowledge of the law or its impacts. I spent 80% of my time talking about the CPSIA rather than books.
In fact, The Oklahoman photographer captured me with my mouth open telling someone about the law. However, not one word appears in that same paper about the serious impacts the CPSIA will have on stores, books, libraries, schools, small home businesses, or the price everyone will pay as costs of items increase.
.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
No children's books? Let them read internet porn
On one hand, the government is doing its best, through the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, to remove books from the hands of children. After all, children might be hurt by books (never mind clothes, beds, chairs, etc.). On the other hand, the courts declare children can watch anything available on the internet, even porn. According to Fox New.com "The government lost its final attempt Wednesday to revive a federal law intended to protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet."
Huh? As Rena Jones stated on a private forum, "I'm sorry, but people are so mixed up these days. Protecting kids from lead is good. Making the law so it affects everything a child touches nearly illegal is bad. But now this?
"Sorry kids, but I'm gonna have to confiscate that classic copy of Winnie-The-Pooh. Why don't you go surf the Net for porn. Now, go on, have a good time."
Sorry -- some things just make me rage! Who are these people and who voted them into office?"
Good question, Rena. I wonder if anyone has a reasonable answer?
We must keep fighting stupid laws. Have you visited with your Congress members lately? Well, that's too long.
4RV Publishing won't add porn to the book list for children's books, we promise. Ish.
Another blog that has interesting and timely information: The Common Room.
.
Huh? As Rena Jones stated on a private forum, "I'm sorry, but people are so mixed up these days. Protecting kids from lead is good. Making the law so it affects everything a child touches nearly illegal is bad. But now this?
"Sorry kids, but I'm gonna have to confiscate that classic copy of Winnie-The-Pooh. Why don't you go surf the Net for porn. Now, go on, have a good time."
Sorry -- some things just make me rage! Who are these people and who voted them into office?"
Good question, Rena. I wonder if anyone has a reasonable answer?
We must keep fighting stupid laws. Have you visited with your Congress members lately? Well, that's too long.
4RV Publishing won't add porn to the book list for children's books, we promise. Ish.
Another blog that has interesting and timely information: The Common Room.
.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Burn the house to avoid a cockroach equals CPSIA
Whizbang had an interesting post "Who would want to poison our children?" posted January 19. The entry begins with
A good rule of thumb is that when everyone in Washington agrees on something it's either inane or you better hide your wallet. Of course, there's nothing that will rally together Congress faster than a law written "for the children". So it should come as no surprise that the innocuously named Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) proposed following the lead-paint-in-childrens'-toys-from-China scare last year received almost unanimous support. It passed by a vote of 89-3 in the Senate and 424-1 in the House.
What should also come as no surprise are the unintended consequences CPSIA will have on everyone from toy manufacturers to public libraries.
The post continues with Yet another classic case of razing the house because someone saw a cockroach. The blame here is obviously bi-partisan, and this abomination was signed into law by President Bush. Clearly, no politician (other than Ron Paul) will stand up when they might be shouted down as wanting to poison the children. But either large numbers of Congress-critters supported this law without fully reading and understanding its impact or their intention all along was to saddle makers of kid's goods with an exasperating suite of regulations that will yield no significant improvement on children's health.
Commentary from Forbes, "Scrap the Consumer Product Improvement Act" (by Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and the author of The Rule of Lawyers and other books. He edits Overlawyered.com), is quoted in the above post. One section of the commentary by Olson needs to be emphasized:
As CPSIA opponents mobilize, the phrase "unintended consequences" is often heard. Part of the irony, after all, is that the Hasbros and Targets, with their standardization and economies of scale, can afford to adapt to such rules as part of their business plan, while the sorts of enterprises that initially looked to benefit most from the Chinese toy scare--local, organic and so forth--are also the ones who find it hardest to comply.
But the failure here runs deeper. This was not some enactment slipped through in the dead of night: It was one of the most highly publicized pieces of legislation to pass Congress last year.
And yet now it appears precious few lawmakers took the time to check what was in the bill, while precious few in the press (which ran countless let's-pass-a-law articles) cared to raise even the most basic questions about what the law was going to require.
Yes, something's being exposed as systematically defective here. But it's not the contents of our kids' toy chests. It's the way we make public policy.
Hopefully, someone will do something before our house is burned to the ground.
.
A good rule of thumb is that when everyone in Washington agrees on something it's either inane or you better hide your wallet. Of course, there's nothing that will rally together Congress faster than a law written "for the children". So it should come as no surprise that the innocuously named Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) proposed following the lead-paint-in-childrens'-toys-from-China scare last year received almost unanimous support. It passed by a vote of 89-3 in the Senate and 424-1 in the House.
What should also come as no surprise are the unintended consequences CPSIA will have on everyone from toy manufacturers to public libraries.
The post continues with Yet another classic case of razing the house because someone saw a cockroach. The blame here is obviously bi-partisan, and this abomination was signed into law by President Bush. Clearly, no politician (other than Ron Paul) will stand up when they might be shouted down as wanting to poison the children. But either large numbers of Congress-critters supported this law without fully reading and understanding its impact or their intention all along was to saddle makers of kid's goods with an exasperating suite of regulations that will yield no significant improvement on children's health.
Commentary from Forbes, "Scrap the Consumer Product Improvement Act" (by Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and the author of The Rule of Lawyers and other books. He edits Overlawyered.com), is quoted in the above post. One section of the commentary by Olson needs to be emphasized:
As CPSIA opponents mobilize, the phrase "unintended consequences" is often heard. Part of the irony, after all, is that the Hasbros and Targets, with their standardization and economies of scale, can afford to adapt to such rules as part of their business plan, while the sorts of enterprises that initially looked to benefit most from the Chinese toy scare--local, organic and so forth--are also the ones who find it hardest to comply.
But the failure here runs deeper. This was not some enactment slipped through in the dead of night: It was one of the most highly publicized pieces of legislation to pass Congress last year.
And yet now it appears precious few lawmakers took the time to check what was in the bill, while precious few in the press (which ran countless let's-pass-a-law articles) cared to raise even the most basic questions about what the law was going to require.
Yes, something's being exposed as systematically defective here. But it's not the contents of our kids' toy chests. It's the way we make public policy.
Hopefully, someone will do something before our house is burned to the ground.
.
Friday, January 16, 2009
A site full of help and ideas to fight the CPSIA
For those readers who want to keep up to date on the progress of the fight against the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 and discover other ways of joining the fight, join CPSIA - Central.
If you join, be sure to add me as a friend.
Most states have groups. I'm a member of the Oklahoma group. I'm also a member of the NY Toy Show group. I can't be in New York, but maybe I can do something as many people attending are protesting this terrible law.
I haven't had a chance to completely tour the site, but I will tomorrow afternoon.
4RV Publishing faces a black future, as do our authors and illustrators of children's and middle grade books.
I never thought I would become a political activist, but here I am.
.
If you join, be sure to add me as a friend.
Most states have groups. I'm a member of the Oklahoma group. I'm also a member of the NY Toy Show group. I can't be in New York, but maybe I can do something as many people attending are protesting this terrible law.
I haven't had a chance to completely tour the site, but I will tomorrow afternoon.
4RV Publishing faces a black future, as do our authors and illustrators of children's and middle grade books.
I never thought I would become a political activist, but here I am.
.
Keeping track of the CPSIA
Below are links to some of my posts concerning the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008. Yes, we need to be sure that lead isn't in products for our children, but this law is poorly written and impacts products that do not have lead. We must keep pressuring our law makers to halt this law as it is written. The problems will affect us all and still not address the original cause of toys with lead which were imported.
More Confusion about the CPSIA
Committee with with ability to call for hearings on CPSIA
Links to use to combat CPSIA
More on the CPSIA - hurting the helpless
CPSIA effect on authors
Time is running out. The law goes into effect February 10, 2009.
.
More Confusion about the CPSIA
Committee with with ability to call for hearings on CPSIA
Links to use to combat CPSIA
More on the CPSIA - hurting the helpless
CPSIA effect on authors
Time is running out. The law goes into effect February 10, 2009.
.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Committee with ability to call for CPSIA hearings
The following information is taken from ETSY. I thought the addresses included needed to be posted. I already wrote letters to the chairman of the committee and of the subcommittee and to the main leaders of both.
IF we write enough letters, so that these men know the problem affects many, many people, they may take action.
The new chairman of the Committe of Energy and Commerce has the ability to call for hearings on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 and advance critical legislation to resolve some of the issues. The best way to convince him of the need for a hearing to amend the CPSIA is to WRITE LETTERS to the four Energy and Commerce Committee leaders explaining our concerns and issues with the law as it is written and how it will affect us. Even if you have written to these people before, I urge you to send another letter.
Here are the names and addresses of the four Committee leaders:
The Hon. Henry A. Waxman
Chairman Committee on Energy and Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Hon. Joe Barton
Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce
2322-A Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Hon. Bobby Rush
Chairman Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade
and Consumer Protection
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Hon. Ed Whitfield
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade
and Consumer Protection
2322-A Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Call to Action: Write a letter to each man, explaining the problems of this law as you know them and how people, small businesses, etc. will be impacted. I wrote that books contain little to no lead anyway, and to have publishers pay for testing to prove themselves innocent would put many small companies out of business (and not only publishers)including 4RV Publishing; the cost of books would rise, meaning that fewer children would have books; and more economic disasters will be result -- in a time of economic problems. I also gave the impact on me personally.
If anyone does write these men, would you let me know, please? Also, spread the word and the addresses. The more letters, the more likely we will be heard.
.
IF we write enough letters, so that these men know the problem affects many, many people, they may take action.
The new chairman of the Committe of Energy and Commerce has the ability to call for hearings on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 and advance critical legislation to resolve some of the issues. The best way to convince him of the need for a hearing to amend the CPSIA is to WRITE LETTERS to the four Energy and Commerce Committee leaders explaining our concerns and issues with the law as it is written and how it will affect us. Even if you have written to these people before, I urge you to send another letter.
Here are the names and addresses of the four Committee leaders:
The Hon. Henry A. Waxman
Chairman Committee on Energy and Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Hon. Joe Barton
Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce
2322-A Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Hon. Bobby Rush
Chairman Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade
and Consumer Protection
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Hon. Ed Whitfield
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade
and Consumer Protection
2322-A Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Call to Action: Write a letter to each man, explaining the problems of this law as you know them and how people, small businesses, etc. will be impacted. I wrote that books contain little to no lead anyway, and to have publishers pay for testing to prove themselves innocent would put many small companies out of business (and not only publishers)including 4RV Publishing; the cost of books would rise, meaning that fewer children would have books; and more economic disasters will be result -- in a time of economic problems. I also gave the impact on me personally.
If anyone does write these men, would you let me know, please? Also, spread the word and the addresses. The more letters, the more likely we will be heard.
.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
More on the CPSIA - hurting the helpless
People who are the least likely to survive any more economic disaster are going to be hurt by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.
Resale shops will have to test all the items they carry, and the expense will put them out of business; their stock will be destroyed. Charity organizations that provide clothing, and even books, to people in need, will have to test all items or dispose of them(and not give away, but throw away).
Those already struggling to survive will be harmed the most: people relying on resale shops, small business owners (including 4RV Publishing), people needing aid from charities, schools and libraries (all books will have to be tested or destroyed).
People who handcraft one of a kind items will be required to test each item, causing them to go out of business, and if they don't test each item in their inventory, the inventory must be destroyed.
I wish I had kept all the URLs about this topic that I've read the past two days, but I didn't.
Holly Jahangiri, on Do I Have to Spell It Out, posted the following:
For additional information, search for "CPSIA" and "books". Here's a good post that goes into some detail:
http://bookshopblog.com/2009/01/04/book-burning-on-feb-10th-2009-due-to-cpsia/#comment-2557
Here's a copy of the letter sent out by Amazon.com:
http://issues-in-publishing.blogspot.com/2008/11/cpsia-sneaking-up-on-us.html
The law has already passed and goes into effect NEXT MONTH, so this is urgent.
Yes, CPSIA is a bad law which will do more harm than good. Lawmakers are the only ones who benefit because they can state they did something: too bad what they did is lacking in brain cells. Children, in the long run, are harmed, not helped.
.
Resale shops will have to test all the items they carry, and the expense will put them out of business; their stock will be destroyed. Charity organizations that provide clothing, and even books, to people in need, will have to test all items or dispose of them(and not give away, but throw away).
Those already struggling to survive will be harmed the most: people relying on resale shops, small business owners (including 4RV Publishing), people needing aid from charities, schools and libraries (all books will have to be tested or destroyed).
People who handcraft one of a kind items will be required to test each item, causing them to go out of business, and if they don't test each item in their inventory, the inventory must be destroyed.
I wish I had kept all the URLs about this topic that I've read the past two days, but I didn't.
Holly Jahangiri, on Do I Have to Spell It Out, posted the following:
For additional information, search for "CPSIA" and "books". Here's a good post that goes into some detail:
http://bookshopblog.com/2009/01/04/book-burning-on-feb-10th-2009-due-to-cpsia/#comment-2557
Here's a copy of the letter sent out by Amazon.com:
http://issues-in-publishing.blogspot.com/2008/11/cpsia-sneaking-up-on-us.html
The law has already passed and goes into effect NEXT MONTH, so this is urgent.
Yes, CPSIA is a bad law which will do more harm than good. Lawmakers are the only ones who benefit because they can state they did something: too bad what they did is lacking in brain cells. Children, in the long run, are harmed, not helped.
.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Big Trouble on the Publishing Front
Ever hear of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008? If not, you need to read it and understand that, as of next month, the world of publishing, especially children's books will change. It also means that anything in your home that children touch can be illegal.
Here is what Amazon.com sent 4RV Publishing:
The U.S. House and Senate have passed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (the 'Act'), and on August 14, 2008, President Bush signed the Act into law.
We expect that all Amazon.com vendors will ensure that their products are compliant with the Act in accordance with all applicable effective dates. Specific provisions of the Act discussed in this letter are for ease of reference only. Specific provisions of the Act discussed in this letter are for ease of reference only. Further information on the Act is available on the Consumer Product Safety Commission ('CPSC') website at www.cpsc.gov.
********************************
Product Content Limits
********************************
The Act prescribes strict limits on the content of certain materials in products intended for children, including lead and phthalates. In particular:
* Effective February 10, 2009, the Act prohibits the sale of children's toys and child care articles with concentrations of more than 0.1 percent of di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), diisodecyl phthalate, (DIDP), or di-n-octyl phthalate (DnOP).
* The Act mandates a phased-in ban on lead in substrate for all children's products, requiring that lead levels be reduced to a maximum of 600 parts per million by February 10, 2009; 300 parts per million by August 14, 2009; and 100 parts per million by August 14, 2011. Electronic devices and inaccessible component parts will be subject to rules to be issued by August 14, 2009.
* The Act also reduces permissible lead in paint content from 0.06 percent to 0.009 percent (effective August 14, 2009), which may be lowered further by administrative action.
********************************
What you need to do
********************************
We expect that vendors will familiarize themselves with the effective dates of each applicable limit. In order to minimize the difficulty of tracking multiple versions of the same product through the supply chain, it is highly advisable for manufacturers to promptly eliminate or phase-out product offerings which do not or will not comply with the most restrictive limits described above, well before such limits take effect.
Follow the instructions located in this file, download and complete the spreadsheet and return it to us as an attachment to a Contact Us form, using Issue: Item Detail Page; Subissue: Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
If all of your products are compliant with the lead and phthalate limits according to the table below, submit a Contact Us, using the instructions above, with the following statement 'We, [Vendor Name], certify that all of our products are compliant with the lead and phthalate limits effective as of August 14, 2011 as defined by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.'
If some of your products are not compliant by any of the dates below, you must complete the spreadsheet located in the Resource Center of Vendor Central, as stated above. Only one spreadsheet needs to be completed.
As of each date set forth in Column III of the table below, each vendor must confirm and report to Amazon.com that all of your children's products (i) in Amazon.com's inventory, as reported to you in Vendor Central as of such date, and (ii) in transit or shipped to Amazon.com on or after such date, will comply with applicable limits set forth in Column I.
********************************
Specific Guidelines:
********************************
Limit Phthalate ban:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 10-Feb-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 30-Nov-08; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 15-Jan-09
Lead 600 ppm:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 10-Feb-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 30-Nov-08; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 15-Jan-09
Limit Lead 300 ppm:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 14-Aug-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 14-Apr-09; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 1-Jul-09
Limit Lead paint 0.009:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 14-Aug-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 14-Apr-09; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 1-Jul-09
Limit Lead 100 ppm:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 14-Aug-11; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 14-Feb-11; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 1-Jul-11
Please put your vendor name in the subject field of the email when you respond in any case.
Any children's products which are not so confirmed are subject to removal from the Amazon.com catalog, and Amazon.com will be entitled to return to you for a full refund (including shipping costs) any non-compliant products which remain in our inventory as of the dates in Column IV above.
In order to minimize difficulties in inventory compliance tracking, any products which are altered to comply with a limit described in the Act must have a distinct SKU number from previous versions. These changes must be reported to Amazon.com along with a return authorization for any Amazon.com inventory of previous versions.
The Act provides that the CPSC may issue regulations providing for further limitations on the content of children's products. Vendors are responsible for tracking and complying with any regulations issued by the CPSC.
We are confident that you share our commitment to ensure the full compliance with the Act of all of your products sold on Amazon.com.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Best Regards,
Amazon.com
Next post: What does this mean to small publishers and others (even authors) who sell children's books?
.
Here is what Amazon.com sent 4RV Publishing:
The U.S. House and Senate have passed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (the 'Act'), and on August 14, 2008, President Bush signed the Act into law.
We expect that all Amazon.com vendors will ensure that their products are compliant with the Act in accordance with all applicable effective dates. Specific provisions of the Act discussed in this letter are for ease of reference only. Specific provisions of the Act discussed in this letter are for ease of reference only. Further information on the Act is available on the Consumer Product Safety Commission ('CPSC') website at www.cpsc.gov.
********************************
Product Content Limits
********************************
The Act prescribes strict limits on the content of certain materials in products intended for children, including lead and phthalates. In particular:
* Effective February 10, 2009, the Act prohibits the sale of children's toys and child care articles with concentrations of more than 0.1 percent of di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), diisodecyl phthalate, (DIDP), or di-n-octyl phthalate (DnOP).
* The Act mandates a phased-in ban on lead in substrate for all children's products, requiring that lead levels be reduced to a maximum of 600 parts per million by February 10, 2009; 300 parts per million by August 14, 2009; and 100 parts per million by August 14, 2011. Electronic devices and inaccessible component parts will be subject to rules to be issued by August 14, 2009.
* The Act also reduces permissible lead in paint content from 0.06 percent to 0.009 percent (effective August 14, 2009), which may be lowered further by administrative action.
********************************
What you need to do
********************************
We expect that vendors will familiarize themselves with the effective dates of each applicable limit. In order to minimize the difficulty of tracking multiple versions of the same product through the supply chain, it is highly advisable for manufacturers to promptly eliminate or phase-out product offerings which do not or will not comply with the most restrictive limits described above, well before such limits take effect.
Follow the instructions located in this file, download and complete the spreadsheet and return it to us as an attachment to a Contact Us form, using Issue: Item Detail Page; Subissue: Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
If all of your products are compliant with the lead and phthalate limits according to the table below, submit a Contact Us, using the instructions above, with the following statement 'We, [Vendor Name], certify that all of our products are compliant with the lead and phthalate limits effective as of August 14, 2011 as defined by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.'
If some of your products are not compliant by any of the dates below, you must complete the spreadsheet located in the Resource Center of Vendor Central, as stated above. Only one spreadsheet needs to be completed.
As of each date set forth in Column III of the table below, each vendor must confirm and report to Amazon.com that all of your children's products (i) in Amazon.com's inventory, as reported to you in Vendor Central as of such date, and (ii) in transit or shipped to Amazon.com on or after such date, will comply with applicable limits set forth in Column I.
********************************
Specific Guidelines:
********************************
Limit Phthalate ban:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 10-Feb-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 30-Nov-08; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 15-Jan-09
Lead 600 ppm:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 10-Feb-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 30-Nov-08; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 15-Jan-09
Limit Lead 300 ppm:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 14-Aug-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 14-Apr-09; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 1-Jul-09
Limit Lead paint 0.009:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 14-Aug-09; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 14-Apr-09; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 1-Jul-09
Limit Lead 100 ppm:
Effective Date of Limit per the Act 14-Aug-11; Products shipped to Amazon.com must comply by 14-Feb-11; Noncompliant products are subject to return to Vendor 1-Jul-11
Please put your vendor name in the subject field of the email when you respond in any case.
Any children's products which are not so confirmed are subject to removal from the Amazon.com catalog, and Amazon.com will be entitled to return to you for a full refund (including shipping costs) any non-compliant products which remain in our inventory as of the dates in Column IV above.
In order to minimize difficulties in inventory compliance tracking, any products which are altered to comply with a limit described in the Act must have a distinct SKU number from previous versions. These changes must be reported to Amazon.com along with a return authorization for any Amazon.com inventory of previous versions.
The Act provides that the CPSC may issue regulations providing for further limitations on the content of children's products. Vendors are responsible for tracking and complying with any regulations issued by the CPSC.
We are confident that you share our commitment to ensure the full compliance with the Act of all of your products sold on Amazon.com.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Best Regards,
Amazon.com
Next post: What does this mean to small publishers and others (even authors) who sell children's books?
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)