The Go-To People for CPSIA coverage including a kind reference to yours truly, and more Go-To People. A very sweet thank-you note to those go-to people.
The motorbike industry, wiped out for lack of Congressional foresight:
“It's a law that passed without anybody realizing the ramifications to everybody involved,” said Jim Tabor of Willow's Motorsports in Cheshire, who has an equal number of OHVs from Honda, Kawasaki, Polaris and Yamaha put away.
Ralph DeLuco of Canton Cycles in Winsted wondered, “Is a toddler going to chew on a fender?” Maybe, if the fender is stripped from the bike, placed in his crib and smeared with hot fudge.
Why the Mommy-Blog Dismissive title?
Rick Woldenberg reports:
For the moment, however, I would like to comment on how we are being portrayed by the Powers That Be. I can confirm that you (and I, apparently) are “Mommy Bloggers” in the parlance of the PTBs and that we are “misleading” the public in our writings in our blogs. Yes, you are just “Mommies”, not serious people, intelligent people, business people. We are (apparently) a marginal group of trivial people, not quite smart enough to handle a law as brilliant as the CPSIA and certainly no match for the Brains at the consumer groups or in Congress. We’re just a bunch of Mommies, whiling away the hours with newfangled blogs, unable to control ourselves at the keyboard. And, boy, do we love to talk online. You get the picture.
When you don't have an argument based on actual facts, of course, it's always easier to resort to name-calling and marginalizing the opposition.
Compounding the problem in the view of the PTBs, we are apparently guilty of “misleading” our readers. I get the impression that it is because we all appear to be “hysterical” and “panicked”. [The proffered solution to our “emotional moments” is just to TRUST the CPSC and Congress. They know what’s best for us,, don't worry. I guess they must be the “Dads”. There, there, Mommies., Congress will protect you!] The beautiful part of this slam on our intelligence and integrity is that the accusation comes from Congress and from the consumer groups.[...]
In the case of the consumer groups, it is clear that they are making considerable errors themselves (misleading accusations of travel abuse by Nancy Nord, distortions of actual testing costs, mischaracterization of the actual workings of the law and so on) but, hey, let’s not be too picky here because, DARNIT, they’re just looking after our own best interests!
We hear this accusation in one form or other all the time, and it's generally the Consumer 'advocacy' groups explaining to the public or Congress on our behalf just what sort of poor, pitied, confused, bemused, and baffled idiots we are. But if you'll notice, they never, ever, bother to offer anything substantive. It should be the work of a few seconds to actually document the misinformation and offer specifical, factual, counterpoints. But they don't, for obvious reasons.
Lora notes in the comments:
Really, the statement is quite interesting if you think about it.
It is similar to saying, "No one has complained about the smell except that nose."
Saying that mothers are outraged over a law intended to "protect children" speaks volumes.
After all, who would know better about foul aromas than one who possesses a nose?
We "mommy bloggers" smell and tell.
It is time for Congress to use its ears and listen.
Jewelry makers probably going out of business:
The CPSC last month issued a stay to delay testing requirements for one year, but children’s jewelry products were explicitly excluded from the stay. As of Feb. 10, the law made it illegal to sell jewelry for children less than 13 years old if it contains more than 600 ppm of lead, which is a certainty if the piece includes lead-rich rhinestones.
The law has “definitely hurt our business,” Barber said. “We’ve gotten stuck with inventory we can’t sell because of the lack of a crystal exemption, all because the government did not do its work properly.”
Barber said he has been following this issue for at least five years, since California adopted a strict law banning lead in children’s products. The California law became the model for the federal version, and Barber noted that California included an exclusion for rhinestones and crystals. California, he said, “took the time and did it right.”Green says that he could live with going out of business if he were a lousy businessman or as a result of the weak economy. “But to lose my business because of an ill-conceived federal regulation that is completely divorced from reality, that’s really going to hurt,” said Green. He, too, is seriously mulling the idea of using plastic rhinestones, but he also has inventory with rhinestones that he cannot sell, worth thousands of dollars. Sales, he said, “are dangerously low.”
Silly Mommy Man. He should just listen to his betters and ignore the reality crashing down around his ears. The paternalistic do-gooders say so. Pin It
