New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CPSIA Law

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 

The general gist of this law is that after feb 10th all materials used in children's toys, clothes, ANYTHING must be tested at 200-500 a pop for toxins. Any item that is not compliant with testing, whether it was produced prior to the date of effect of this law is suppose to go into land fills.

 

I really think we should have better safety laws, however the way this law is written is going to put small businesses, work at home businesses and thrift stores like good will out of business from fees or they just have to not sell ANY children items. Businesses like Kids to Kids have already released statements that on the 10th they will be closing their doors and are presumed to be filing for bankruptsy. Stores across etsy and hyenacart are selling off stock and clearancing out items because they can not afford to be compliant with this law.

 

This law was rushed through the government and because of that is seriously flawed in a way that will be further crippling an economy that is already in crisis. I totally agree that there should be better safety laws for children, but I also believe that the state of the economy is very important to my child's well being as well, and I worry about what happens when a law like this puts thousands out of work when jobs are already too hard to find.

 

I can only imagin how expensive this is going to make childrens items. It's also going to make buying childrens items from thrifts stores almost impossible for quite some time and think of all the items that are going to be wasted now. On top of that by grinding all those wonderful child related wah and small businesses to a hault it is harming local purchasing and benefiting those big companies who produce and trade internationally that will now have less made in the usa competition.

 

This is a post from mommyfairyqueen on cafemom, she is also a member of huddler under the same name and avatar, but this has some good links in it for what you can do and infomation.

 

mommyfairyqueen

by mommyfairyqueen on Jan. 5, 2009 at 1:58 PM

I have 3 resources for everyone...

the first is The Handmade Toy Alliance (this link actually goes to their "how you can help" page on which you can sign an online petition and obtain a "sample letter" to send to your senators and representitaves.  I personally have done these things though my letter included points on resale, environmental responsibility and social responsibility (as this will affect the Fair Trade market).  From this page they provide links to the senators and representitaves web pages on which you can send e-mails as well.

The second link is to the US CPSC (Consumer Products Safety Commision) on this site you can find info on these required tests and some of what their responses are.  Under their "What's Hot" has some info and if you go to the "What's Popular" link, under Lead, you will find things from their employees roundtable siminars.  There is also a link to contact them as well.

I have a friend that is a corporate lawyer who while he doesn't know a lot about the current CPSIA, he is willing to answer and interpret any terms you don't understand about the law itself, just pm me and I will ask his thoughts and insight on this.

This is the link to the actual CPSIA law if you are wanting to sit and try to read it (62 pages of lots of leagal stuff)
 

 


Edited by kaymmiv - Mon, 5 Jan 2009 20:54:01 UTC
post #2 of 14

I know!  I posted a wiki about this not too long ago.  It's good and bad all at the same time!

 

greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/toy-safety-legislation-good-intentions-lead-to-catastrophic-results-for-the-natural-toy-industry

post #3 of 14
Thread Starter 

I totally agree. The idea is great, the actual law is horrible :(

 

but here's a step in the right direction

 

Regulators rethink rules on testing children's clothing and toys for lead

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lead7-2009jan07,0,6917858.story

 

The Consumer Product Safety Commission gives a preliminary OK to exempt some items from testing after complaints of hardship to thrift stores and sellers of handmade toys.
By Alana Semuels
January 7, 2009
The Consumer Product Safety Commission has given preliminary approval to changes in new lead-testing rules after complaints that the measures could have forced thrift stores and sellers of handmade toys to dispose of merchandise or even go out of business.

If formally adopted, the changes approved on a first vote Tuesday would grant exemptions to last year's Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which seeks to ensure that products for children do not contain dangerous amounts of lead.
As currently written, the act would require all products aimed at children 12 and under to be tested for lead and phthalates starting Feb. 10. Phthalates are chemicals used to make plastics more pliable.

Large manufacturers and retailers say the cost of testing will not be a burden. But small businesses such as handmade-toy shops and thrift stores say the requirement would force them to spend tens of thousands of dollars to test products such as clothing, in which the threat of lead is almost nonexistent. Many thrift stores said they would be forced to stop selling children's clothing or close altogether.

The commission's two members (a third seat is vacant) voted tentatively to exempt:

 
* 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.

The commission also tentatively approved a rule that clarifies how it determines exclusions from the law.

The vote opens up a 30-day public comment period that will begin when notice of the rules are printed in the Federal Register. Interested parties can find out how to submit comments by signing up to receive e-mail from the CPSC at www.cpsc.gov .

No final rules will be approved until after Feb. 10, when the testing rules go into effect.

That means retailers and manufacturers who sell untested children's merchandise would technically be in violation of the new law starting Feb. 10. Whether federal regulators will enforce the rules -- which might entail inspections at thousands of secondhand stores and toy shops across the country -- is another question.

"The CPSC is an agency with limited resources and tremendous responsibility to protect the safety of families," said Scott Wolfson, a CPSC spokesman. "Our focus will be on those areas we can have the biggest impact and address the most dangerous products."
 
post #4 of 14

I think we certainly need regulation on products that our children have contact with, but this law will be to the detriment of small business owners. I am not clear on how handmade clothing (is: cloth diapers and such) can be a threat to children when they are made from materials that have never contained lead.

post #5 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Chapman:

I think we certainly need regulation on products that our children have contact with, but this law will be to the detriment of small business owners. I am not clear on how handmade clothing (is: cloth diapers and such) can be a threat to children when they are made from materials that have never contained lead.

That's why they are exempting them from the testing process.  They don't see clothes as a threat so they won't be testing them at all.

post #6 of 14

This comes from a post on Eco Child's Play:

 

Taking effect on February 10, 2009, the CPSIA will require all products for children under 12 be tested for lead, including books.  That means in order for a library to admit children under 12, they must test all of their children’s books or ban children from the library.

 

What library is going to be able to afford testing all their children's books?


Edited by stins - Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:11:20 GMT
post #7 of 14

Yeah seriously, libraries are already laying off librarians. I don't see how they can possibly afford tons of lead testing.

post #8 of 14

Lead in books?  Really?  Why would anyone put lead into a book...what purpose would it possibly serve?....Or would it be lead in the ink that the books are printed with?  I guess that could make sense.

 

It almost seems overwhelming...the amount of changes that we are going to start seeing once this thing takes effect.

post #9 of 14

It is NOT true as stated above that clothing is exempt yet.  Cotton, Wool, Pearls and natural RAW materials have been considered for exemption.  But if the fabric is dyed or printed at ALL it no longer qualifies for exemption.  How many people really want their kids to have only white, unembellished clothing?  Its not realistic. 


A LOT still needs to be done to change this.

There is even a class action lawsuit forming to try and prevent enforcement of the law until it can be changed.

http://reformcpsia.org/2009/01/class-action-lawsuit/#usermessagea

post #10 of 14

My question is, what about ebay?  I like to buy old-fashioned toys on ebay that aren't around much anymore.  Will individual sellers no longer be allowed to sell them?

post #11 of 14

I think only time will tell how much of an impact the new law will have for various companies & forms of retail.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by loren:

My question is, what about ebay?  I like to buy old-fashioned toys on ebay that aren't around much anymore.  Will individual sellers no longer be allowed to sell them?

 

post #12 of 14

Just got word through the Organic Trade Association listserv of this announcement.

 

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09115.html

 

They have put a "stay" on testing requirements for most garments, toys and small business type products until 2/10/10.  They sound like they'll be continuing to look at revising requirements through that time.  Who knows, by then Congress could actually have time to revote and change the law.

Yay!

post #13 of 14

I'm curious about how far this goes.  I heard that a Suzuki atv dealer had to put 200 products off the market because they are dirt bikes and atvs for children.  My personal concern is for the Zappy 3, which we sell.  It isn't specifically targeted for children, but what if someone wants to buy it for their child??

post #14 of 14
I'd like to keep this thread active so that we don't forget about the importance of amending the CPSIA.

Carter Wood recently wrote in The Washington Times:
Quote:

It's a safe bet that no member of Congress has ever given a speech proudly endorsing a bill to close mom-and-pop businesses, hurt low-income shoppers, cause libraries to discard children's books and ban products ranging from dirt bikes to ballpoint pens.


Last year, Congress overwhelmingly passed a law that did all these things - forcing small businesses to close and punishing manufacturers, retailers and consumers. Yet the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) became law with few warnings - and no congressional floor speeches - about the serious economic harm it would cause.

It is so important to get the lead out of toys. It is also imperative to have access to natural toys made by small companies. CPSIA would make natural toy and kids' clothing companies all but disappear.

We need to stay on top of this legislation.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Babies & Kids