Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act--Conference Report
Floor Speech
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY MODERNIZATION ACT--CONFERENCE REPORT -- (Senate - July 31, 2008)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. BOXER. Mr. President, in a Senate where recently it has been so hard to get things done, Democrats and Republicans have come together in a bipartisan manner to produce a strong conference report that is a victory for children and families.
I have a message for American parents everywhere who are concerned about the safety of their children's toys, ``We have heard your concerns, and today, Congress has acted.''
The Senate is about to approve landmark consumer legislation to protect our kids from dangerous children's products and hazardous substances.
I want to thank Chairman Inouye, Vice Chairman Stevens, Senator Pryor and their staffs for all of their hard work and dedication to this important bill.
As both a parent and a grandparent, I have been incredibly distressed by the seemingly endless stream of reports about defective and dangerous children's toys and products.
Consumers Union dubbed 2007 ``The Year of the Recall'' after 45 million toys and other children's products were recalled. Recalls jumped 22 percent for the 9-month period that ended June 30 of this year.
Clearly, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has not been able to keep pace with the growing market of consumer products many of which are now manufactured abroad.
For too long we have asked this agency, which has a staff of approximately 400 charged with overseeing the safety of 15,000 consumer products, to do too much with grossly inadequate resources and enforcement tools.
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 addresses those resource problems and finally brings the CPSC's enforcement powers in line with those of other Federal agencies charged with protecting the public.
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 includes a strong ban on lead and phthalates, requires testing of all children's products that must meet mandatory toy standards, and for the first time, includes a public, searchable national database on the CPSC website of all consumer complaints filed with the CPSC so consumers can be better informed about dangerous products.
The bill also strengthens the Consumer Product Safety Commission's authority to recall products, increases enforcement authority for Attorneys General, includes stronger civil and criminal penalties for violators, bans industry sponsored travel, and provides whistleblower protections for employees of manufacturers, private labelers, retailers, and distributors.
I want to thank the conferees for including two provisions I authored in committee.
The Labeling Requirement for Advertising Toys and Games requires products sold over the Internet or in catalogues to list any cautionary statements, such as choking warnings, in their advertisements.
These labels would normally be visible when the products are purchased in the store but oftentimes are not visible to the consumer when sold over the Internet or in catalogues.
My second provision requires manufacturers of durable infant or toddler's products to provide consumers with postage-paid registration forms with each product so consumers can be better informed if the product they bought is eventually recalled.
This provision was based on a bill by Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky called the Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act.
Danny Keysar was a 16-month-old child who died when his Playskool Travel-Lite portable crib collapsed--5 years after the CPSC had ordered it off the shelves because it was dangerous. Danny was tragically the fifth victim to die due to the faulty design of this crib and a sixth child died 3 months later.
From 1990 to 1997 more than 1.5 million portable cribs with a similar dangerous design were manufactured. A total of 17 children have been killed by these types of cribs.
Neither Danny's parents nor a caregiver at the daycare where the accident occurred were aware of the recall. State inspectors who had visited the daycare a week before were not aware of the crib's recall.
Our provision will provide parents with a method for receiving these vital recall updates that could save their child's life.
I was also pleased to work closely with Senator Klobuchar, Representative Waxman, and other conferees to get a strong ban on lead in toys and other children's products to protect our kids from dangerous lead contamination.
I also want to thank Chairman Inouye and Senator Pryor for their leadership and support on this issue.
We all know that lead poisons the brain and nervous system, can decrease IQs, and cause behavioral problems, and that it is especially dangerous to children.
Let me tell you about Colton Burkhart, a 4-year-old boy from Oregon on a family camping trip who became violently ill from lead poisoning after he swallowed a medallion from a necklace bought in a 25-cent toy vending machine. The medallion turned out to be 39 percent lead, which had elevated his blood lead level to a potentially fatal level of 123 micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood, more than 12 times the CDC's lead poisoning level of concern.
Jarnell Brown, another 4-year-old boy was brought to the hospital emergency department in Minneapolis, Minnesota complaining of vomiting. Believing that the child had a stomach virus, he was released. The next day, Jarnell was rushed to the hospital after having suffered a seizure and respiratory arrest. Jarnell later died. An autopsy revealed that he died of acute lead poisoning from a heart-shaped charm from a bracelet that his mother had gotten free with her Reebok sneakers. The charm was found to contain 99.1 percent lead. Reebok recalled 300,000 bracelets worldwide as a result.
The many recalls of lead toys and products over the past year have highlighted the need for action.
This legislation puts into place a ban on lead in children's products that gets increasingly stringent over 3 years, and that will help ensure that we protect our kids today and in future generations from the scourge of lead poisoning.
In addition, Senator Feinstein, Representative Waxman and I successfully fought, shoulder-to-shoulder, for a ban on dangerous phthalates in many children's products.
Studies show that phthalates are endocrine disruptors linked to reproductive abnormalities in male babies and many experts believe that the accumulation of exposures to multiple phthalates presents a risk to developing fetuses and young children.
Phthalates have been banned from many children's products in the European Union since 1999, and at least nine other countries have followed suit in an effort to better protect children from harmful health effects of these chemicals.
My home State of California was the first in the Nation to prohibit phthalates in many toys and child care products, and Washington State and Vermont have taken similar actions.
In addition, major retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target, and Toys ``R'' Us have already begun to take phthalate-containing children's products off their shelves.
China, which manufactures 85 percent of the world's toys, reportedly has created a separate manufacturing line for products intended for export to nations that ban phthalates.
This legislation will permanently ban three of the most dangerous phthalates, DEHP, DBP, and BBP from all children's toys and child care articles.
In addition, it imposes an interim ban on three other dangerous phthalates, DINP, DIDP, and DnOP, in children's toys that can be put in the mouth, and in childcare articles. That ban can only be altered after a detailed scientific review.
Of course, nothing in this bill undercuts the Commission's authority to go beyond the specific products listed in this section's ban, or the specific phthalates listed in the ban, in any additional action the Commission takes under its regulatory authorities.
States such as California that have been leaders in protecting children by restricting toxic phthalate alternatives, are protected.
I also want to thank the conferees for working with Congressman Waxman and myself to protect State warning laws related to consumer products, such as California's Proposition 65.
We are so pleased to see the final conference report clarifies that State and local toy and children's product requirements in effect before the date of enactment of this legislation are not preempted.
This bill is so important to the health and safety of our children and families. I want to again thank my colleagues on both the House and Senate side for all of their efforts on this legislation.
We can't risk one more child's injury or tragic death due to faulty toys or children's products. I am glad to hear that the President has agreed to sign this legislation.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
PREEMPTION
Mrs. BOXER. I rise to discuss with Senator PRYOR, the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Insurance, and Automotive Safety, and lead sponsor of the Senate legislation, the preemptive effect of certain provisions in H.R. 4040.
I am pleased that the bill protects State warning laws related to consumer products or substances, such as California's Proposition 65. The conference report clarifies that any such warning laws in effect as of August 31, 2003, are not preempted by this act or the Federal Hazardous Substances Act. This important clarification effectively harmonizes the four statutes that are enforced by the Commission. Other laws enforced by CPSC, including the Consumer Product Safety Act, clearly do not preempt or affect State warning requirements like Proposition 65. The Federal Hazardous Substances Act, however, is arguably ambiguous as to its effect on State warning requirements. I am pleased that we have eliminated this ambiguity with this conference report and harmonized all of the Commission's statutes on this point.
I yield to Senator PRYOR, and ask: Is it also your understanding that nothing in this legislation or any of the laws enforced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission will preempt or affect Proposition 65 in any way?
Mr. PRYOR. Yes, that is my understanding.
Mrs. BOXER. My second inquiry relates to the bill's provisions on phthalates. I am pleased that the language preserves the ability of States to regulate phthalates in product classes that are not regulated under this legislation, as well as States' ability to regulate alternatives to phthalates, such as other chemical plasticizers that might be used as substitutes to the phthalates that will be removed from toys under this law. I yield to Senator PRYOR and ask, is it your understanding this law does not preempt or affect States' authority to regulate any alternatives to phthalates that are not specifically regulated by the Commission in a consumer product safety standard?
Mr. PRYOR. Yes, that is my understanding.
Mrs. BOXER. I also ask the distinguished floor manager Senator PRYOR to confirm my understanding that the third-party testing provisions of the conference report have no preemptive effect on State or local testing related requirements. Is my understanding correct?
Mr. PRYOR. Yes, the bill leaves such authority to impose testing requirements in place without preemption.
Mrs. BOXER. Finally, I wanted to confirm my understanding that the conference report makes it clear in section 106(h)(2) that State or local toy and children's product requirements in effect prior to enactment of this bill are not preempted by this legislation or by the Consumer Product Safety Act. Is my understanding correct?
Mr. PRYOR. My colleague is correct. The legislation does not preempt or otherwise affect State or political subdivision requirements applicable to a toy or other children's product that is designed to deal with the same risk of injury as the consumer product safety standard, if such State or political subdivision has filed such requirement with the Commission within 90 days after the date of enactment of this act.
Source