Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act — Will It Cause More Harm Than Good?
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act… passed by Congress in 2008 in response to the many lead-related recalls of children’s products… is set to take effect on February 10, 2009.
This act mandates that all products intended for children 12 years old and younger must be tested at a CSPC-accredited lab for lead and phthalates (chemicals that make plastics more pliable), and any product that passes the test must display proof that it is “virtually free” of these contaminants. Untested products and products that do not pass the test cannot legally be sold after the February 10 date.
There is huge public outcry against this law because it appears to apply equally to multi-million dollar corporations… thrift and consignment shops… and home crafters. Estimates of what the testing will cost range from hundreds to thousands of dollars per product, creating concerns that although corporations may be able to afford the testing, smaller businesses, resale stores, and home crafters will not… and that many will be forced out of business by this new law.
The law is retroactive, and any untested products will be considered “hazardous” after February 10. Such products cannot be sold and by law are supposed to be destroyed. Anyone continuing to sell untested products after the February 10 deadline is theoretically subject to large fines and even possible jail time.
You can read the text of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act on the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s web site.
More articles about this law and public reaction:
- New rules for children’s clothes have stores in a fit; some thrift owners say the cost of toxics testing will doom their firms
- Some small toy makers not happy with new toy safety law
- New child product safety law turns millions of US homecrafters into criminals
- New law may hurt crafters at home
- Mom and pop toymakers fear new testing regulations will hurt business
- New law to put thousands out of work
- Millons of homecrafters face bankruptcy after Jan 20 from new law
So what are your thoughts about this law? Is it still a good idea, or will it cause more harm than good?
Written by Shirley | Filed Under Miscellaneous
Comments
Comment by Teresa:
This is so awful. I make knitted sweater and bootie sets and fancy knitted blankets and earn a small income from the sales. Does this new law mean I can’t sell them anymore? I know I couldn’t afford the testing. I’m going to write to my congressmen and complain. This is discouraging for small business people like me.
Comment by Mrs. Wycliffe:
I’m all for protecting children but I think aspects of this Law are ridiculous. I buy clothes at Goodwill and other thrift stores for my children and I can’t believe that I may not be able to continue to do this. I hope the law can be changed so it doesn’t affect people like Teresa and the other people out there who work so hard and earn so little making handy crafts. I’m especially worried about the used clothing restrictions. Thanks for sharing this information.
Comment by Bob:
To me this sounds like yet another case of the cure being worse than the disease. Sure, we need to protect the children from lead and other bad substances, but needing to do something doesn’t mean this is necessarily the best way to do it. Does anyone really think that the small businesses and the home crafters are the ones poisoning our children with lead? Then why are they the ones who are going to be penalized the most? And what was Congress thinking of putting these restrictions on small businesses in the middle of a recession?
Great article with good information.
Comment by Cristi:
My husband was wondering if you crafted something out of “tested” products would it then be exempt from re-testing after you make something out of already tested materials? If this truly affects re-sale shops and thrift stores then what is to be done with all of the used stuff? Landfill?
Comment by Jon in France:
It is interesting, though not comforting, to see that Europe does not have a monopoly on insane consumer laws.
Could I ask: who defines the “intended for children aged 13 and over” bit? Would it be possible to simply label things as being not-intended for children under this age?
Over here, a highly restrictive law which makes manufacturing toys for the under threes practically impossible is frequently simply sidestepped like this.
Comment by Meadowlark:
Typical Government program that will, in the end, hurt the small business-craftsperson and benefit the big conglomerates.
Sigh.
Comment by Virginia Kalbus in Wisconsin:
This is outrageous! I’m a freecycler; this would hurt giving anything away too! If you all need to get rid of items and quickly please consider http://www.freecycle.org we are a nonprofit organization based though Yahoo!, it is a great way to help the community and yourself!
For anyone to think we should have to test things ourselves is a outlandish idea, we should not have to, we as parents are responsible enough to think about many other issues our children have to deal with and then add this on sheesh what are they thinking!
Please leave a comment!