Comments on: The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act Is A Ass

By: CPSIA Blog Day #1: Past CPSIA bloggers

CPSIA Blog Day #1: Past CPSIA bloggers — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:22:45 +0000

[...] Amy Alkon, Iain Murray at CEI “Open Market”, Jeff Nolan at Venture Chronicles, Patrick @ Popehat, Eve Tushnet (scroll a lot to Jan. 15), and leading education blogger Joanne [...]

By: January 17 roundup

January 17 roundup — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 22:39:42 +0000

[...] Tons and tons of favorable reaction to my Forbes piece on CPSIA: commenters there, Etsy thread, sampling of blogs: Polka Dot Patch, Heartkeeper’s Common Room, Baby Gardner’s (aw). Others who’ve gotten into the act: Iain Murray/Open Market, Jeff Nolan, Patrick @ Popehat (SSFC). [...]

By: Bob Also

Bob Also — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 05:16:16 +0000

Say goodbye to the entire Childrens section in my bookstore. 25% of my sales comes from there. Say goodbye to a large number of publishers who will have to accept billions in returned merchandise which cannot be sold for any amount of money. Which instead will require expensive removal as “potentially hazardous waste”.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:57:58 +0000

“Computer! Bring back Bob’s deleted comment!”

“Computer?”

By: Ken

Ken — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:50:10 +0000

Bob — I think it was Bob — I think I just accidentally deleted your post whilst trying to make a voice-recognition program work. My apologies! I’m seeing if I can retrieve it.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:42:00 +0000

There’s an obvious out; Section 101(b)(1) gives the Consumer Product Safety Commission the ability to exclude a specific product or material after notice & comment. And the Commission has already proposed (tentatively) exempting the following: Items with lead parts that a child cannot access; Clothing, toys and other goods made of natural materials such as cotton and wood; and Electronics that are impossible to make without lead.

(See proposed exemptions & article at http://consumerist.com/5126354/hooray-cpsc-agrees-to-exempt-some-natural-items-from-product-safety-act).

Your point remains valid, however, that it is ridiculous these exemptions were not originally written into the bill.

By: Ken

Ken — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:37:23 +0000

I think Congress' role in this is one of its accustomed willful ignorance. It's the same approach that allowed them to sign the gigantic and complicated PATRIOT Act without having read it or understood its provisions. Other forces are more malevolent. At Overlawyered, Walter Olson discussed the glee of the people who make money over this sort of thing -- testers and remediators. Walter linked Law and More, which quoted Sue Gunderson of a company called ClearCorps, which makes money off of public panic over lead: "Mmmmmm, do we want cheap, second-hand toys that could damage children?" Gunderson's financially and ideologically motivated contempt for Americans who handmake toys, clothes, and other kids' items, as well as consignment shops, secondhand stores, and a huge swath of the rest of the American economy, is contemptible. But her self-interest and self-importance of her ilk, along with Congressional ignorance and bureaucratic power-lust at the CPSIA, are what we face here.