My StumbleUpon Page
Publisher's Weekly is concerned about the impact this bill will have on the publishing industry- pass that link on to those of your friends who would like to dismiss concerns as uninformed hysteria (the uninformed part is particularly rich, given the position of ignorance from which these people are themselves arguing):
The CPSIA dictates that each children’s book SKU, shipped to retailers, catalogues and e-commerce sites as of February 10, must have been tested by a third-party lab to ensure that lead levels are below 600 parts per million. (Acceptable levels drop to 300 ppm in August and 100 ppm in 2011.) Some books also must be tested for phthalates, an acid used to soften plastic. The importer or domestic manufacturer must provide a Certificate of Conformity (usually posted on the Internet), and the product must be labeled appropriately. Older products on shelf must fall within acceptable safety standards but do not need to be accompanied by a Certificate, according to recent comments by the Consumer Products Safety Commission.
The Association of American Publishers, BMI and several other industry trade groups are trying to convince the CPSC to exempt traditional (ink-on-paper and ink-on-board) formats. Books historically have been unregulated, meaning that publishers alert the CPSC when they discover an item that poses a risk. Of just a dozen book-related reports in 20 years, only one has had to do with lead (a spiral binding) and the rest with choking hazards due to toys attached to books, according to Allan Adler, AAP’s v-p for legal and government affairs. “So we were rather shocked to find out that now we’re going to be possibly broadly testing books for unacceptable levels of lead,” he said.
It wasn't until November that they found out books would be included in these new regulations. They have been seeking clarification from the agency, but, like everybody else, they have found CPSC pronouncements and clarifications less than clear:
The CPSC has been issuing information about specific issues on a daily basis, leading to an ever-changing scenario, but much of it is contradictory and difficult to interpret.
Far from viewing the warnings about the effect this will have in the publishing industry as mere fearmongering,
Most of the major publishing houses have legal staff working on the issue fulltime, have done or are doing the required testing and labeling (as best as they can, given the uncertainty and cost) and are ready to provide the paperwork. Many smaller publishers, however, may not be ready in time.
This was a bullet aimed at safety issues, but Congress did not take careful note of where it was firing or aiming, and now that bullet has ricocheted wildly, and a number of small businesses, cottage industriesngr, publishers, and charity organizations are now directly in its path.
Many of our readers may be familiar with the delightful Chinaberry books. They're concerned as well:
Another potential ramification of the Act on retailers is the fact that they may not be able to offer as many choices to their customers, particularly in the short term. The summer 2009 edition of the Chinaberry catalogue, which features a 50/50 split of books and non-books, goes to press in late March. If the company doesn’t hear from vendors by the end of January, it plans to remove products and delete pages. “We can’t count on anything since we work so far ahead of time,” said Chinaberry founder Ann Ruethling.
According to the article, other publishers are reducing their booklists so that they are only testing the more popular items. Booklovers everywhere feel this as they would a kick in the gut.
Allan Adler, VP for legal and government affairs at the Association of American Publishers also looked at the 'clarification' for resale shops and sees it as unclarified as I do. He:
believes the clarification is contradictory to the Act and would not necessarily protect resellers from liability.
(the Smartmama also sees that clarification as I did, see her January 10th article both for her take on that, and a very helpful list of those things she finds typically have lead)
Well intended, perhaps, but also over-zealous, and possibly unnecessary:
Most publishers who produce book-plus or value-added books already test them. “The Act will not materially affect our practices with respect to book-plus lines, such as Klutz and Chicken Socks, or our books with value-added components, as these have been in compliance with the most stringent safety testing standards for years,” said Meryl Wolfe, Scholastic’s director of manufacturing.
“We’ve always complied with the voluntary standard, which is now mandated,” said Michael Levins, CEO of Innovative Kids. “It’s always been a big budget item for us.”
Publishers who sell to the leading mass merchandisers such as Target and Costco, already submit to their testing procedures, which are all unique and can be beyond the CPSIA’s requirements. “There’s no standard,” said Randy McDonald, v-p at Paradise Press. “That’s the biggest challenge. It’s almost a fulltime job for someone to keep up with all that. And nothing we’ve tested has been even close to being a problem.”
There is evidence that the toy industry itself was working on improving its record. While it's popular to hate greedy Big Business, and that isn't always merely a stereotype, very few businesspeople are so greedy and evil they don't even care whether or not children die from their products, and I am pretty sure that none of them actively want children to die from their products. That would explain why, even without the law, toy recalls went from 128 in 2007 to 74 in 2008. Recalls of toys with lead went from 97 in 2007 to 45 in 2008, and CPSC Chairwoman Nancy Nord said that the CPSC was investing more time and manpower into look for violations and yet finding fewer of them. That information from this story.
So why was there lead in toys in the first place? This 2007 article raises some interesting points. They note that by September of 2007, there had been a number of Mattel recalls (three within six weeks), and 17 other toy recalls on the basis of lead in paint levels being too high- all of them from China.
Mainly, lead is included in paint because leadbased paint is about 1/3 cheaper. It's also easier to use on some surfaces, and the colors are richer.
On the books, China’s paint standards are stricter than those in the United States, requiring that paint intended for household or consumer-product use contain no more than 90 parts of lead per million. By comparison, American regulations allow up to 600 parts per million.
[...]
But enforcement of the regulations in China is lax.
“The standard doesn’t matter,” said Scott Clark, a professor of environmental health at the University of Cincinnati. “Remember, in the Soviet Union during the cold war, they had very high standards on the books, but they never enforced them. It was just for show.”
Dr. Clark and a team of investigators sampled paint supplies in Shanghai and other parts of China in recent years, and in some 26 percent of the cases, they said, the paint met neither American nor Chinese standards.
They also tested goods from India, Malaysia, and Singapore, and found only Singapore to consistently meet the standards. So if your goal is to keep high levels of lead paint away from your children, keep that in mind.
In that article, several Chinese businesspeople were interviewed, and they all said lead paint is cheaper, and many countries, particularly in the Middle East, have no limits on lead paint use. They said sometimes companies ask for products that cannot be made as cheaply as they want without using the lead-based paint, but that when this happens, they tell the company if they want that price, they have to accept lead-based paint. Which makes it seem even more reasonable to me that if you wish to encourage businesses not to use lead-based paint, you don't buy toys from the countries that have a 26 percent non-compliance rate, and if you have a choice between a cheap toy from China and a toy that costs more from Singapore, you choose the Singapore toy if you care about lead.
Chen Tao, sales manager at the Chenghai Guangxin Plastic Toys Factory, also in Shantou, said his plant did not use lead paint at all. But he added that Chinese regulators were essentially absent.
“There is a national standard on the lead level in toys,” he said. “But no one really enforces it. Factories can pick whatever paint they want.”
Another problem is the abundant supply of industrial paint in China, used on buildings, bridges and cars as well as sidewalks and other outdoor surfaces.
Several paint companies said the government had no formal standard on lead in industrial paint.
As a result, a lot of cheap industrial paint may be finding its way into toy factories and even households.
While the United States still allows paint with higher levels of lead to be used outdoors and in many industrial settings, paint with high lead content is slowly being phased out of even industrial use, experts say, partly because it can pose dangers to work crews who apply or remove it.
Lead in jewelry is also a growing problem, so much so that at this point I would consider any made in China children's jewelry you have on hand as suspect. From the 2007 article:
Last year, there were about a dozen recalls in the United States of Chinese-made jewelry because of excessive lead levels. In the first eight months of this year — possibly because of heightened regulatory scrutiny— there were 22 lead-related recalls of children’s jewelry, 21 of them of products made in China.
Of roughly 39 lead-related recalls this year, 38 were of Chinese-made goods, according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
.
According to a Canadian study, which is not named in the article, the majority of American toy recalls over-all are due to design flaws in the toy itself. However, the recalls based on unsafe chemicals largely come from China, and:
Many Chinese business executives in turn complain about the enormous pressures that Western companies place on suppliers to continually lower costs, which they say inevitably leads desperate or greedy businesspeople to cheat in a country with poor regulation.
And if this is the case, then it would make sense not to reward those businesses by buying their products.
Instead, Congress preferred to pass a large, overreaching bill that will have ripple effects beyond belief, changing the way the publishing industry operates, altering cottage industries, destroying small home businesses, and wiping out inventory, punishing businesses that have no record of child endangerment.
In response, The Kushner Law Firm is working on filing a Class Action Lawsuit. Click on the link to read their take on this bill and how it will harm small businesses without helping children. Here is press release:
Please read the following press release. If you are an interested party directly affected by the CPSIA that will take effect as of February 10th, I urge you to join us in this class action lawsuit.
Contact me or the contacts listed below for additional information.
Warmest Regards,
Dawn Michelle LaPolla
Baby Sprout Naturals
dlapolla [!at] gmail.com
ReformCPSIA.org
Reform Petition
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Moms ban together to save their businesses.
==============================
Moms ban together to save their businesses. Rachele Dressler-Sweetser is a mother of 3 and owns Monkey Baby, a creative children's clothing line. This business is not only her additional "baby" but her main source of income. She created Monkey Baby out of necessity. As a single mother she was faced with the issue of a sick child with medical needs that could not be left alone. She combined her creative sewing skills and marketing knowledge to create a fun and successful children's clothing line. Waking up to a new year she is faced with her legs being knocked out from under her with this quiet law going into effect with huge consequences.
Dressler-Sweetser says "I have built this business out of love for my children and my God-given talents. It is my dream, livelihood and my future. I can't sit still. I understand the need to keep our children safe but this law is too broad. It is not in anyone's interest as it is currently written." Dressler-Sweetser has contacted the Kushner Law Firm to begin the process of a Class Action Suit to prevent the law's enforcement of the February 10, 2009 deadline. She is actively contacting businesses owners that this law will effect to ban with her in preventing its enforcement on February 10, 2009.
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) is requiring lead testing on all products (including apparel and components of apparel which knowingly have little or no lead such as ribbon, tulle, thread, elastic etc.) designed for children under the age of 12. "This new Act is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague, and disregards the significant and disastrous impact on small and medium businesses as Section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires" says Michael Kushner, of The Kushner Law Firm.
Immediate action is required in order to save many businesses and to keep costs from skyrocketing for children's toys, accessories and clothing.
Contact:
Rachele Dressler-Sweetser
http://www.monkeybabyclothes.com/
949.916.9288 ph.
949.916.9087 fx.
Attorney:
Michael Kushner
The Kushner Law Firm
949.421.3030 ph.
949.421.3031 fx.
http://www.kushnerlawfirm.com/
And here's a killer- what the actual costs and procedures for this testing would be for one small business.
Other resources:
Vote to have this issue presented to President-Elect Obama.
A little shrill in tone, but they still have a better handle on exactly what this bill does than Congress.
Handmade Toy Alliance
Here is a downloadable and printable pdf brochure showing some of the unique toys and clothing that is now at risk thanks to this bill, as well as a nice collection of links to action, to inform yourself (or your Congresscritters), and explanations of the bill.
See here for contact information for the Commission.
Public comment on materials that should be excempt is open till 2-4-09 (30 days after the meeting). The email address is on page 2 of the document.
Here's a way to contact your representatives.
Politicians
More Politicians
Give them a phone call. Time is running short.
Central clearing house for all things CPSIA related.
Another one.
