Ok... So, at least one of my Senators knows how to write a real letter!!

[Former_Member]

The response, as some of you know, from one of my Senators was (in my opinion) less than stellar. I wrote him again, but no response back. I wrote Bill Nelson, who usually writes me back immediately and was disappointed until now. Here's the letter I received:

****Thank you for contacting me regarding concerns about the implementation of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA).

As a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, the safety of consumer products -- especially those intended for infants and young children -- is one of my top priorities. Last year, I cosponsored the CPSIA because I believed the public had lost confidence in the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC's) ability to protect consumers. The legislation contained a number of provisions intended to restore that confidence, including new safety standards, a substantial increase in funding for the CPSC, and a new CPSC laboratory testing facility.

However, I also understand your concern that the CPSC’s implementation of this law may have unintended consequences that negatively affect small manufacturers, retailers, and consignment shops. The CPSIA was drafted in a manner that provides substantial flexibility for the CPSC to deal with the concerns of small business entities and manufacturers of products that are "inherently safe." On January 16, 2009, the chair of both the Senate Commerce Committee and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce sent a joint letter to CPSC Acting Chair Nancy Nord requesting that she use the existing authority in the CPSIA to issue guidance on: 1) the applicability of testing requirements to children’s books and certain children’s apparel; 2) consignment store resellers of children’s products; 3) component part testing; and 4) testing guidance to small business entities. The letter further calls on Acting Chair Nord to issue guidance on these issues as soon as possible.

I share the concerns of the committee leadership, and will continue to work with the CPSC to ensure that they implement the CPSIA according to congressional intent, and in a manner that does not unduly penalize small business entities. Should you have further concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.****

It honestly feels like he read my letter and does, truly, share the concerns I stated within it. It's interesting, at least, to read why one of the co-sponsors of the bill drafted something that was ridiculously vague... it seems like it backfired on them.

Anyway, at least someone in Washington is paying attention and is worried about the potential cost enough to not send a form letter.

Jen

[Former_Member]

Wow..you got a *real* letter! WTG:)

Glad someone is paying attention!

[Former_Member]

The CPSIA was drafted in a manner that provides substantial flexibility for the CPSC to deal with the concerns of small business entities and manufacturers of products that are "inherently safe."
-----
This is the exact opposite of what Nancy Nord has been saying all along.


On January 16, 2009, the chair of both the Senate Commerce Committee and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce sent a joint letter to CPSC Acting Chair Nancy Nord requesting that she use the existing authority in the CPSIA to issue guidance on: 1) the applicability of testing requirements to children’s books and certain children’s apparel; 2) consignment store resellers of children’s products; 3) component part testing; and 4) testing guidance to small business entities. The letter further calls on Acting Chair Nord to issue guidance on these issues as soon as possible.
----------
Something we already knew....sorry but this just sounds like more passing the buck, CPSC and Congress are both saying the other is responsible for this mess. What part of "all children's products" does Congress not understand?? The fact is, Nord's hands are tied, that's why we're all telling Congress to do something!

Sorry, it's just frustrating how Congress is pushing this off on CPSC when they're doing their best to deal with this mess....

[Former_Member]

Ruth -- I was under the understanding that the CPSC had a panel to interpret how to implement the CPSIA... am I wrong?

The problem with provoking Congress is they act like molasses on a cold day. Any sort of relief from them will take months because of different motions, the infighting between factions (people like Pelosi who think it's hunky-dory and those that want change), and the potential to be voted down.

If the CPSC can define exemptions -- natural fibers, fabric, directions for component testing, etc -- it would solve most of our problems.

I thought that was the CPSC's job...

Is that wrong?

Jen

[RebekahsBowtique]

The CPSIA was drafted in a manner that provides substantial flexibility for the CPSC to deal with the concerns of small business entities and manufacturers of products that are "inherently safe."

_________________________________________________

This is not true by what I heard on the meeting for apparel stated by Nancy Nord. She said she had hardly any flexibility and that was one of the problems. It was within the first few minutes of the apparel video on the CPSC website...sigh!

[FayeMaloneDesigns]

The committee is a committee of 2. The lawmakers wouldn't seat the 3rd member that Bush nominated for partisan reasons. So they are already short 1 member and have been for some time. The new legislation calls for 5 members I think, and will be put in place by the controlling party, (Reid, and Pelosi) so that right there is a really scary thought.

[Former_Member]

I hear ya Faye, there was a thing on the news recently (about the DTV switchover, I think?) that said Pres. Obama wanted the switch put off for four or five months but Pelosi convinced the other members of Congress to vote against it and it was shot down. Seems like she's been strongarming them about CPSIA too.

The thing that gets me is, she's a GRANDMOTHER! Doesn't she care what this legislation is going to do to not only the country's children but her own family???

[Former_Member]

Obama gets to nominate the new committee members though, right? Sounds to me like he's thinking more reasonably than Pelosi and some others...didn't he specifically mention small businesses in his Inauguration Address? Not in so many words but I think he did talk about entrepreneurs as the people that built the country and make it run.

[Former_Member]

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.
--------
There's the passage I was thinking of....doesn't exactly talk about small business, but the phrase "the makers of things...obscure in their labor" might apply to us.

[bdoll]

"The fact is, Nord's hands are tied, that's why we're all telling Congress to do something!"

i don't think this is the case. the regulatory agency determines how and to whom the law will be implemented and what exemptions, if any, it will have. according to congressman bobby rush's office they have written to the cpsc about including exemptions and using component testing so that is consistent with this letter.