Fast action on the Hill
Eight days after a chimp attacks a woman, the United States Government passes a bill in the House to legislate having primates as pets. It raises three questions: What about dogs who attack? What about the Constitution? And what about using the time to read through the stimulus bills instead?How many people die of chimp attacks each year? How many are injured? How many people even have chimps or know somebody who does? Now how many people die of dog attacks each year? How many are injured? How many people have dogs or know somebody who does?
According to the Humane Society, between 1999 and 2001, two dozen children under 12 died from dog attacks.
So I do not find at all compelling the unseemly haste by Congress to respond to this incident while ignoring the CPSIA and a million and one other issues that are more urgent Why did Congress focus on this law at this time? Not to save lives. It's about media attention and symbolic actions, it's about power and looking good.
Nationally, about 25 children die each year from drowning accidents in five gallon buckets. More are hospitalized because of injuries from near-drowning incidents in those same buckets. Are the buckets illegal? Not yet, although I am sure some consumer advocacy group is looking for the opportunity to do just this.
Nationally, about 80 children drown in bathtubs, and many more are injured this way. Are bathtubs illegal? Not yet. Those who survive the bathtub accident are often brain injured as well.
So in spite of the fact that in 2004 just over 1 percent of young children had elevated lead levels in their blood, without benefit of the CPSIA, Congress acted in haste to pass a feel good, look good law, and they aren't interested in carefully thinking it through to make it right.
It's like the sweater laws in Economics in One Easy Lesson. Congress passes laws based only on what they see, and they fail to consider the things that they do not see- currently thriving micro-businesses, families stretching their dollars by shopping at thrift stores, or buying used books at library booksales, or the hundreds and hundreds of children's book titles that haven't been reprinted, or more. They don't consider the things their bills will do to those people and businesses who aren't on their radar- they don't foresee consequences such as the destruction of the entire children's motor bike industry and all its kindred, the removal of ball-point pens from elementary schools and the job losses which will follow when the industry loses half its market, the children wearing last year's coats because their families cannot find coats at the thrift shop. They cannot quantify and measure the results of removing unique, handcrafted, artisan toys and clothing from the market, nor can they calculate the damage done when children cannot have any books but new books, and cultural items such as Irish step dancing costumes, Native American clothing, and baptismal necklaces are banned from the market place.
Nobody can know how many lives may be shortened by the stress and heart-ache of seeing a business built from the ground up wiped out by the ill thought out stroke of a pen. Nobody can know how many children will have to miss doctor appointments or forego medications because their parents no longer have health insurance or can no longer afford office visits. Nobody can know how many children might have actually been exposed to unsafe lead levels in children's jewelry because of the CPSIA:
Lead in children’s products that can cause injury has been banned since approximately 1970. In February 2005, after recalling a number of items of children’s jewelry that presented such a hazard, the Commission issued a policy statement that set forth the criteria for evaluating the hazards associated with such jewelry. Subsequently, in January 2007, the Commission commenced a rulemaking proceeding to formally define children’s jewelry as a banned hazardous substance. In March 2008, five months before the passage of the CPSIA, the manufacturer paid a $1,000,000 civil penalty to resolve the Commission’s allegations that it violated the law [cit]. As far as can be determined, the January 2007 rulemaking proceeding has been tabled in light of the CPSIA which mandates specific levels of lead in children’s jewelry. It is clear, however, that the CPSIA was not necessary to regulate leaden children’s jewelry and in fact the rulemaking might have been completed already had Congress not intervened. As a result, it can be argued that the CPSIA actually delayed implementation of rules on leaden jewelry.
The thing is, nobody can possibly come up with all the missed opportunities, unintended consequences, and unforeseen results of making a law based only on what the lawmakers see. The harm done by this law is incalculable.
----------
Updated to add this link to another hilarious Dr. Seuss style missive, this time a well deserved, and spot-on chastisement of Snopes, which I will never trust again. Here's a taste:
"People BELIEVE what we say, yes they do!
Whatever we say they'll believe that it's true!
They won't check their own facts; they'll rely upon us --
We'll lull them to sleep and they won't make a fuss!
Those simpletons reading their emails and worrying,
believing in things without thinking, just hurrying,
won't bother to further look into the matters --
And here's a succinct summary of the whole CPSIA fiasco, particularly useful to those who have just heard of it and need to get up to speed quickly (link fixed).
Make those phone calls today! Congress needs to hear from us. Pin It
