Don’t MAKE me write another letter…
March 21, 2009 by admin
Filed under CPSIA News
March 21, 2009
The Honorable John D. Dingell, Chairman Emeritus
2328 Rayburn House Office Building
House Committee on Energy and Commerce
Washington, DC 20515Dear Chairman Dingell:
I was heartened to read the CPSC and Acting Chairman Nord’s 3/20/09 response to your inquiry of 3/05/09, as their recommendations would at least begin some relief for businesses crushed by the CPSIA, and allow for common sense application.
However, after reading Commissioner Moore’s response to your letter, I am further outraged by the dysfunction and apparent political games and finger pointing that continue to stymie progress toward a reasonable solution to the serious problems this bill has spawned. I take personal offense to his characterization of the business community, as I believe we have shown great cooperation in supporting safety standards, and have made every attempt to comply with this law even when it is nearly impossible. Because my home-based crafting business simply could not comply with expensive testing requirements, I have closed. If that’s not acting in good faith, I don’t know what is. We’re moms and dads, not some evil empire of business tycoons, and we should not be used as pawns in this charade.
While it may be in the best interest of one political party or another to wait for new appointees who may be more agreeable to their point of view, or for Congress to wait for the CPSC to act, or for the CPSC to wait for Congress to act, waiting certainly is NOT in the best interest of taxpayers, citizens, children or small business people living under the oppression of this law today. Every day this drags on, businesses in limbo are pushed to the brink of collapse due to lost profits, impaired productivity, obsolete merchandise, and the cost of compliance.
The time to slow down was during the drafting and implementation of this bill. Now that this law is wreaking havoc on our precarious economy, immediate action is required. I am asking you to be the voice of reason and force an end to the political posturing by urgently pushing through sensible reform legislation.
Sincerely,
Jen DeGrace
Jen Lynn Designs
I must admit I appropriated the use of underlining from Chairman Nord’s staff response. Pur-IT-tee effective, heh? It occurs to me that I never posted my official response to Rep. Dingell’s request for CPSIA information, which was delivered along with the others collected by Rick Woldenberg. For good measure, I’ll post that response here as well:
March 11, 2009
The Honorable John D. Dingell
2328 Rayburn House Office Building
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515Dear Representative Dingell:
I have lamented, to the President and publicly, my Democratic party’s lack of leadership to reform the CPSIA, so I’m wholeheartedly grateful to you for taking this on and hope other Democrats will follow your lead. While your letter of March 5, 2009 requests feedback from the CPSC regarding the problems with the CPSIA, I would humbly like to take this opportunity to respond to some of the questions you raised from my perspective, as both a mother and small home-based business owner.
I wish I had quantitative data regarding the negative impact on small manufacturers, as I believe it is staggering, and only beginning to come to light. What I do have is anecdotal. I have closed my online hair accessory boutique, Jen Lynn Designs. While I have every reason to believe my products are compliant, I can’t afford the required testing to prove it. Because the CPSIA specifically expands enforcement to State Attorneys General, apparently not bound by the CPSC’s enforcement stay, I chose not to expose my family to potential liability, and therefore closed. Along with my business, I have lost my disposable income, and ability to stimulate my local economy by spending it. My local consignment shop, Second Time Around, has stopped accepting and selling ALL children’s products, formerly the largest portion of their 26-yr old family business.
Please consider the following reforms:
- Allow component testing, which would enable me to purchase compliant ribbon, compliant hair clips, compliant glue and compliant wire and assemble them into an obviously compliant hair bow, in order to sell them lawfully.
- Repeal retroactivity. Implementing new regulations and imposing them retroactively not only has closed down thousands of thrift, consignment and resale shops, cost businesses untold billions in non-salable inventory, and stopped me from selling my own kids’ outgrown clothing (which typically funds the purchase of their next year’s wardrobe) it will be the sole reason for tons and tons of perfectly viable goods overloading our landfills. In my view, that alone is nothing short of immoral.
- Consider the actual science-based and real-world threat posed by products (i.e. infuse some common sense into this law). My children (ages 5 and 7) are encouraged to read books, no matter when they were printed, and they have not licked a page since they were babies. (I can’t even believe this has to be said.) Books, other than those specifically designed for toddlers, should be exempt. Lead in forms that do not leach into the body or pose a proven threat should be exempt. How is it that I can drink out of a crystal glass, but a crystal embellishment on a T-shirt is harmful? And if furniture and wall art in kids’ bedrooms pose a threat to their health, how is it that the same items in the rest of their home are not subject to regulation? My kids spend many more waking hours in our family room – presumably touching things – than they do in their bedrooms.
- Allow manageable labeling for micro-businesses. Labeling has not been widely discussed, as that portion of the law doesn’t take affect until August of this year, but it has the potential to cripple micro-businesses like mine every bit as much as testing requirements do. Requiring detailed (batch, run and lot) information on permanent product labels isn’t practicable for businesses like mine where a batch often consists of one or two products. Some hair accessories are simply too small to host a label with such information, and purchasing and applying the labels is potentially more expensive than the product’s revenue can support.
- Implement appropriate regulations for appropriate age ranges. Special attention should certainly be paid to the contents of products teething babies and toddlers are given. However, beyond toddlerhood, children are generally not putting everything they touch into their mouth. Moreover, older children have access to nearly the entire contents of their homes, scho
ols and yards. To presume a child aged 4-12 is more endangered by products that are marketed to them than those intended for their parents is to completely disregard the facts surrounding the only recent lead-related child death I have heard cited, as well as common sense. For example, banning pens “intended for children” simply means kids will use their parents’ pens.I appreciate and share your concern for public safety, and as a parent, I want access to safe products and playthings for my kids. I also welcome improved efforts to make sure homes are free of lead in water and paint – the most common source of dangerous lead exposure. I would love greater access to sleepwear for kids that are not treated with toxic fire retardant chemicals (snug -fitting PJs are often just plain tight and uncomfortable). And I support educational outreach for parents regarding the environmental, choking and poisoning hazards that their kids will inevitably come into contact with, regardless of regulation, as this is after all, part of living in an unpredictable world.
Thank you for your help in establishing safety improvements that positively impact public health, rather than those provisions within the CPSIA which negatively impact the economy (and the kids whose parents have lost their livelihoods) while doing nothing to improve public safety.
Sincerely,
Jen DeGrace
www.JenLynnDesigns.com

