How CPSIA hits one small business owner
posted at 12:00 pm on August 22, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
After I wrote my post yesterday on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act and the not-so-subtle warning to private resellers at yard sales and church bazaars, I received an interesting e-mail from Suzi Lang, the owner of Star Bright Baby. Suzi hand-makes toys and teething rings for babies and toddlers, but her business is now in jeopardy, thanks to the badly-written CPSIA. Suzi explains in her e-mail:
Hi Ed-
Thanks for posting about the CPSIA. Garage Sale police aren’t the only insane parts of this law… I make and sell small stuffed teething giraffes for babies (or anyone else cutting a tooth). My giraffes are made from 100% cotton fabric, stuffing made from a synthetic fiber made from corn, and thread. That’s it. Nothing toxic about that, right? Well, according to the law, I have to lead test each batch of giraffes I make. I make them in batches of 10-12 because I’m a small time producer (and I get bored easily). That’s about $300-500 per batch. BUT I also have to test them for a plastic additive called Phthalates because the item is intended to go in a baby’s mouth. Never mind the fact that there is nothing plastic in any of the materials I use to make my giraffes. That’s about $800-1200 per batch. Now you’re talking a pretty expensive teething toy.
I testified before a subcommittee of the Small Business Committee in the house in May, and there have been some exceptions made to the law by the CPSC in how they’re going to enforce it, but the law also deputizes every single state Attorney General to go after offenders. By law I’m still not in compliance.
The sad thing is that this hits little old ladies that make blankies and lovies to give away to kids in the ER. And the little hats they knit for newborns in the hospital. It hits small potatoes businesses like mine who already make safe products. It’s sad, really. And the law does absolutely nothing to keep kids safer than they were under the original lead laws.
Oh, and the companies like Mattel who imported all the lead-tainted toys that started this fuss? They get to police themselves. Awesome, huh?
Thanks again for highlighting this stupid law on Hotair.
–Suzi Lang
Starbright Baby Teething Giraffes
www.starbrightbabyonline.com
The big manufacturers and importers get to police themselves. Suzi, on the other hand, has to pay a fortune to test her products even though she knows exactly what goes into them. Gee, I can feel my granddaughters getting safer already!
Suzi also sent me a link to her Congressional testimony from May:
Suzi also sent a copy of her opening statement; you can download it as a PDF here.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
We have far too much government.
Vashta.Nerada on August 22, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Apparently some didn’t realize what hopeandchange would really mean. More government, everywhere, all the time. Get used to it.
savvydude on August 22, 2009 at 12:06 PM
It’s time to fire the government. Not just Osama Obama, not just Congress, but all the twerps, time-servers, knaves and power-hungry cretins who are Hell-bent on saving us from ourselves.
The Constitution is damn near perfect. What we need are “public servants” who have read it, and can comprehend what it says.
If something is made from cotton, it is unlikely to have any lead in it. How hard is that to understand?
MrScribbler on August 22, 2009 at 12:06 PM
I saw this a couple of months ago— I thought it was a joke. Our government is criminally insane.
Hey check out this amazing new conservative talent. Short video called Silent No More. Deserving of our attention
deedtrader on August 22, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Is there any way she can sue in Federal court to repeal this law? There has to be someone out there who could be willing to be the David to this governmental Goliath.
newton on August 22, 2009 at 12:10 PM
We are talking about left wing fruitcakes, you know!
jimmy2shoes on August 22, 2009 at 12:10 PM
No better example than unintended consequences than this. Or, was it really unintended? That is THE question, and one we’re having to ask more and more, with every passing day. Will it ever end?
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Caveat Emptor is dead. We are now in the era of Caveat Vendor. Go and buy or invest with absolutely reckless abandon. If anything happens, the seller is at fault. We are all 2 year olds, now.
progressoverpeace on August 22, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Just wait until Mugabecare empowers the Obesity police to rummage through our fridges and the Trojan police to stand watch in our bedrooms.
Brits are living through this now
elduende on August 22, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Decades ago my father told me that every time the Congress makes a law its a joke, and every time they make a joke its a law. Still true today and not getting any better.
johnsteele on August 22, 2009 at 12:15 PM
We have come a long way from the days we played with a sample of mercury in elementary school.
fourdeucer on August 22, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Everything that comes from this government is destructive to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Everything.
trigon on August 22, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Do they test for steel that does not melt in jet fuel fire?
Wade on August 22, 2009 at 12:16 PM
No better example
thanof unintended consequences than this. Or, was it really unintended? That is THE question, and one we’re having to ask more and more, with every passing day. Will it ever end?TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 12:12 PM
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 12:16 PM
What makes you think this was unintended?
johnsteele on August 22, 2009 at 12:17 PM
If it’s any consolation to Suzi, I’m sure most legislators didn’t even read this act before passing it. I mean, that just takes too much time, and they’ve got special interests to come buy them lunch!
Nethicus on August 22, 2009 at 12:18 PM
That is pretty good. I especially liked the picture of Ogabe with the Hitler mustache and the caption “Get over it, it was ok for Bush”
conservnut on August 22, 2009 at 12:20 PM
That was my point, perhaps made too obliquely.
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Thanks for your advocacy on this issue. Your explanation of the negative impact on your small business was very powerful. Hope your business survives.
CPSIA seems to have far too many negative consequences for small businesses and therefore, American consumers. As a result, we will all have fewer choices at higher prices.
Loxodonta on August 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Smells to me of the Mattels of the world buying legislation to crush the little guy. Equal protection under the law….pshhhhh.
Patrick S on August 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM
I submit that every member of Congress be required to work for one year at minimum in a small business in their community. Then they’ll have a better perspective (or one at all) on the total crap that they call legislation.
redfoxbluestate on August 22, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Unintended my a$$, this is exactly what Barry and Company have in mind, remember they did the exact same thing with agricultural products passing a law that virtually makes it illegal to grow your own food. H.R.875 – Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009
doriangrey on August 22, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Just have the teething baby take an aspirin.
ThePrez on August 22, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Maybe Shakespeare was on to something………
Seven Percent Solution on August 22, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Tells you a lot huh? I used to think that bureaucracies were just inept at determining policy and enforcing it. I have slowly come to the realization that these people know exactly what they are doing and why. These rules have nothing to do with child or consumer safety. They have to do with shutting down small independent employers. In the socialist utopia everyone (except the ruling elite) must be the same, same healthcare, same employer, same housing, same income. We can’t have independent small business out there causing unregulated wealth and prosperity.
conservnut on August 22, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Corporations own the government. Get with the program.
The Calibur on August 22, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Thanks Dorian,
Add to my last post “same food”
conservnut on August 22, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Was Suzi’s testimony tested for lead before she gave it?
GarandFan on August 22, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Big business loves big regulation because they are the only ones in any position to adapt to it. It drives their smaller competitors out of business and they then pass the extra costs onto us consumers.
Laurence on August 22, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Let’s test members of Congress, most of whom I find to be toxic and bad for my health.
redfoxbluestate on August 22, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Sounds good, but I wouldn’t want 99.9% of them to come anywhere near my business. Can’t afford such ineptitude on such a direct basis.
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Yea, ole Dougie Adams had a similar idea… “a bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came.” All we need to do now is combine these ideas… ;) Hmmm, that is rather a comforting thought isnt it… ;p
doriangrey on August 22, 2009 at 12:31 PM
The only problem I see with her testimony is that it is common sense. In the age of Obama that must be racist in some manner.
aikidoka on August 22, 2009 at 12:33 PM
August is usually a pretty dull month. Perhaps a “2 week open season, with unlimited bag limit” would cull the herd.
GarandFan on August 22, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Get used to stories like this under Democrat “leadership” because remember, they know what’s good for us…
Fuzzlenutter on August 22, 2009 at 12:34 PM
The Democratic Congress has no intention of changing this. Instead they just defend it. They won’t admit they made a mistake. Just like they’ll do to our health care and all industry (with the carbon bill).
theCork on August 22, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Obama teethed on Alinsky.
The rot is inevitable.
profitsbeard on August 22, 2009 at 12:37 PM
With a special bonus permit for politicians? Maybe like a bounty paid for their noses?? Well, one can dream cant they???
doriangrey on August 22, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Line up and get your liberal hats. One size fits all. (Shoehorn included)
whitetop on August 22, 2009 at 12:38 PM
I’m no Obama fan, but I think the legislation in question has its roots from an earlier time – and it was outrageous then as well.
Midas on August 22, 2009 at 12:38 PM
We ought to get the government to fix this.
/
perroviejo on August 22, 2009 at 12:38 PM
To Suzy Lang:
In all seriousness, I want you to write down your manufacturing and quality control procedures. Here, you will establish your batch size as “10,000 Units” or “80,000,000 Units”, or whatever your lifetime manufacturing capacity will be. You pay once per batch.
While this next bit of advice doesn’t relieve the problem, it certainly takes the sting out of it. Classify your testing costs as a “Cost of goods sold”. It comes right off the top of your revenue as a tax deduction.
BobMbx on August 22, 2009 at 12:40 PM
To reform the CIPSA, the bills have to go through House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The Chairman being this handsome devil.
aquaviva on August 22, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Couldn’t agree more, nothing this crowd does is unintended. What I’m speaking to is that legislation that sounds good — protecting kids — should be questioned from here on out. Probably could’ve made the point better.
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Ain’t gettin’ used to it. Gonna fight it tooth and nail at Tea Parties and Town Hall meetings and marches on Washington — union thugs or not. (Our beef is not just with Obamacare.) And if they don’t like it? Get used to it.
Christian Conservative on August 22, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Obama’s plan is pretty obvious, reward historically democrat party constituents (unions, government workers, etc) and punish republican constituents (small and medium business, etc).
Small businesses better hold onto their hats until 2012, because Obama is purposefully trying to destroy them.
Rebar on August 22, 2009 at 12:41 PM
The frightening thing is that a) your are probably correct and b) their probably really will be a time in the not so distance when people are lined up against a wall for this kind of $hit.
Because they will not stop until they have made America a socialist he11 hole and a full on bloody civil war will be the result when the majority of America pushes back against these nutroots far left liberal/socialists.
doriangrey on August 22, 2009 at 12:42 PM
estruction of small busines is essential to the Obama intent and is why we see the current confabulation of a new giant Gov’t/Labor/Cporporate entity.
This is explained in some detail here,
“….To foist such as massive global wealth rebalancing upon Americans (and hence pressure the rest of the west) Obama must first find a means to rein-in the chaotic dynamism of individual capitalism, ie; small businesses. Entrepreneurs who start up new enterprises, the dominant engine of our economic growth, are by nature an unruly lot. They are not normally disposed towards the centralized controls needed to enact such schemes. To thrust one-size-fits-all mandates upon them is akin to herding cats, because their interests are too varied to be addressed by blanket measures. No, to get a firm grasp of the economy, it requires a less fragmented model. A model where people are coalesced under massive umbrella bodies represented by figureheads who are then more easily managed, either by carrots or by sticks. It easier to juggle 3 baseballs than 10 BB’s, baseballs you can get a firm grip on, and continual monitoring of 10 items simultaneously is too unwieldy. Multi-national corporations and large trade unions fit this bill nicely.
So in order for Obama to shift our economy from where the bulk of employment is found in small and medium sized firms, to large behemoths vulnerable to unions and with only a single CEO to deal with, he needs leverage. The tools he has found to accomplish this end are found in the onerous burdens of his Cap & Trade bill and his Mandated Healthcare plan. To comply with all the new regulations from the enhanced affirmative action guidelines, energy efficiency retooling, mandatory company supplied health coverage and whatever version of card check is eventually passed, these are margin killing impositions for a small to medium sized businesses. Someone with a payroll of 10-100 people cannot afford to hire a lobbyist to plead their case, and seek relief from detrimental policies.
Unions and Corporate giants already have armies of these who secure their exemptions before the laws are even being written. For instance, 85% of the revenues meant to be generated by H.R.2454 (American Clean Energy & Security Act of 2009) have already been negated by carbon tax credits awarded to the likes of G.E. and Excelon and others, but these burdens remain in place for more modest sized companies. The bigger firms unable to gain favorable “exemptions” through insider connections can at least afford to float these added costs over the course of the year and then turn in their carbon credits at tax time. Small to medium sized concerns not so much.
This is why we see this coziness with corporate titans like Intel and Goldman Sachs et al and this administration. Giants such as these and their kind stay close to the administration and are quite literally “in the room” to curry favor and allowances that Mom & Pop operations across the nation can never hope to get. These exceptions are granted to Mega-Corporations and justified under the convenient rubric of “systemic risk” to the national economy. And the preference shown for hot shot outfits over “Joe the Plumber” doesn’t stop there. Notice how the pin-striped mandarins of Mergers & Acquisitions and Collateralized Investment Vehicles, the guys who handle the “paper” for the large corporations got this “systemic risk” label, whereas the more mundane CIT Group who underwrote 70% of all small business loans in America did not.
The shotgun marriage of Big Government/Big Labor & Big Business, with Obama holding the 12 gauge, is ripped right from the pages of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. Once having achieved control over your employment, your access to medical care and your energy usage, and the elimination all other available options, the public will find themselves beholden to them for their subsistence or locked out of the monopolized system. With no other alternatives the average “Joe”, out of concern for his family and self preservation will have to go along…”
Full article here,
http://papundits.wordpress.com/2009/08/03/the-3rd-coast-and-the-3rd-world/
Archimedes on August 22, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Ed, I really don’t like this legislation, and certainly feel for this woman and others in a similar situation, but – with all due respect to both you and she – at $4500 gross revenue, and with the number of units she ‘manufactures’, “hobbyist” probably describes her better than “small business owner”.
I’m surprised there’s not an exclusion in the bill (maybe they could handle it that way) to allow folks at her level of production an exemption.
Midas on August 22, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Small businesses don’t mix with Socialism, they have to be eliminated. Everyone must be 100% dependent on the State. Self reliance, running your own business, growing your own food, all that is a no-no. Make it illegal or regulate it out of existence, whatever works.
infidel4life on August 22, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Sorry that should be “Destruction of small business…”
Archimedes on August 22, 2009 at 12:47 PM
There are a lot of old buildings in Washington, D.C. I think the entirety of Congress may have dementia from lead paint exposure.
MissBean on August 22, 2009 at 12:48 PM
How is it that a small business owner can discover this so called unintended consequence of their law,,, and yet this entire congress filled with lawyers and experts had not a clue???
Oh wait,,, I know,, it’s because they already knew this would happen. They do not give a royal rip that it is stupid. It’s not about the yard sales. It’s not about the thrift stores. It’s not about small business. It is about the power! It is all about power over every aspect of our lives.
JellyToast on August 22, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Big corps are always getting sweetheart deals with the govt. Small business is the true heart of conservatism – contrary to Big Media doctrine- and always ends up taking it in the shorts.
whitetop on August 22, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Thanks Amy Klobachar! (D-MN)
I wish we had more Dems like you in Congress, wouldn’t that be great?
You people sure know what you’re doing.
SalHansen on August 22, 2009 at 12:51 PM
I agree. And the exclusion I have in mind is the entire bill.
Mattel polices itself. Yup. And this is what is described as “narrowly defined benefits vs. widely dispersed costs”. Mattel, et al , can afford to send it’s lobbyists to Washington to pass bills that, in effect, freeze out small competitors by substantially increasing their cost of doing business- while for a Mattel, it only adds pennies or fraction of a penny per unit.
This is why Big Business is not the “conservative” group that the illierati called voters seem to think they are. When they team up with Big Government (aka the secret Pharma meetings with COC [Community Organized in Chief]) this is what happens.
However, as Big Government can pass laws on a whim, Big Business eventually finds itself in the cross hairs.
Amendment X on August 22, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Hugh Hewitt did an extensive coverage on this pile of crap on one of his shows a while back. He said then that it would be a terrible burden on small businesses. Again, welcome to the nanny state that knows nothing about capitalism except that it is “evil”.
retiredeagle on August 22, 2009 at 12:55 PM
You could probably have a local printer do up a batch of lab report forms on carbon paper with a “CYA Labs” letterhead for less money than actually testing your products.
Chris_Balsz on August 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM
We’re still a little behind the EU in this respect, who, 15 years or so ago was regulating the shape of bananas. Ah well, give it time, I’m sure Obama will get around to protecting us from misshapen fruit eventually.
Sharke on August 22, 2009 at 1:07 PM
Suzi Lang here… Thanks so much to Ed for highlighting this insane law.
I wanted to clarify some things in the comments. It doesn’t matter if I make $4500 in sales a year, or give everything I make away for free. Under the CPSIA *anything* for kids under 12 has to be tested. Not just things that are sold. My grandma knits hats for newborns and donates them to the local hospital. Under this law, she has to lead test them and she has to label them with a tracking label. There are no exclusions for “hobbyists” or even little old ladies who donate out of the goodness of their hearts.
Also, every time I switch fabrics (which is about every 10-12 giraffes I make) I have to retest. Why? Solely because the fabric isn’t the same. If I run out of thread in the middle of a batch and switch to a new spool, I have to test that batch two times because there is one element different in the product. Nevermind that it is the exact same thread brand and color, or always cotton fabric with just a different print on it… And my product is actually quite simple compared to folks to blend many different fabrics or have different threads.
There are exceptions being made right now by the CPSC for natural fibers like I use to make my giraffes, but they’re not actually written in the law, and this needs to change.
For more info on this issue, the Handmade Toy Alliance is a great resource. If you care at all about buying the little ones in your lives things that aren’t massed produced in China and made of plastic, please write your representatives about this issue.
Thanks again to Ed for featuring my struggle with this law!
Starfox5253 on August 22, 2009 at 1:10 PM
This reminds me of something I’ve been noodling on–a work in progress:
The soul of representation is being in spirit with the people of a district and understanding their common needs. A legislature isolated from the effects of its laws–because members do not make their living off the same economy as their districts–and removed from living amongst those of the district by the demands of year-round legislative sessions requiring their presence in the central capital, will eventually lose the understanding of what the people need and what the effect of the central government is upon them.
A policy to prevent this disconnect between rulers and ruled is to prevent the distinction of rulers and ruled to start with . Representatives should be of the people, not just before they are elected, but after also. To help accomplish this, the legislature should be a part-time affair, meeting annually for a few months only, and paying a part-time salary only. Then, forced to make their living upon the economy they would regulate, they will be in greater harmony with their district.
It will also have the beneficial effect of reducing the tyrannical mischief a central government can get into, as a part-time legislature, unable to pay attention to any but the most essential matters, due to the constraints of time, will have to limit itself to that which is truly needed and not create laws solely to position one faction or the other more favorably for the next election. It will also prevent the legislature trying to present itself as a Executive Branch alternative, but allow that branch to execute the laws that have been passed with only minimal interference.
In sum, there is more a need for full-time staffers in the central capital than there is need for full-time representatives.
Horatius on August 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Two things:
1. Thrift stores and small business owners will just stop carrying and making the products in question (e.g. Promoting chaos- government causes problems in order to have the population ask the government for solutions to their problems. Government solutions = control.)
2. This is just another way for the government to infill its tax collectors into more areas of our lives. Can you not imagine how this type of program would brief in the backrooms of Congress:
Crony #1: “Hey guys, just think of all the potential revenues to be gained by taxing every item at yard sales.”
Crony #2: “But Crony #1, the people won’t go for that.”
Crony #1: “Sure they will. Just say it’s to protect them from something dangerous.”
Crony #2″ “Brilliant. We’ll get the ‘presstitutes’ to spread the word for us.”
Send_Me on August 22, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Wasn’t that the original intention for the house.
conservnut on August 22, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Oh, and on the practical level related to Ms. Lang’s problem:
There are three debates needed here–the need for the testing, whether or not exceptions should be made, and how small businesses can survive in such a regulatory environment.
If we assume that testing is necessary, and that exceptions perhaps unwise, then the logical place to put the certification burden is upon the raw material supplier, not the small manufacturer. A fairly simple process should be possible for certification in that if the raw materials that make up a manufacture do not have an MSDS associated with an item that is prohibited, then the raw materials are safe and the manufacture itself is also safe and does not need testing. Fruits of the unpoisonous tree, as it were.
And once again, representatives who were as close to the spirits of small business people as they are to the spirits of the activist would have been able to forsee this and solve the problem in the original legislation.
Horatius on August 22, 2009 at 1:20 PM
If we did nothing to reduce the current tax load for 6 or 8 years and fired every useless POS in government the deficit would be a bad memory, then taxes could drop drastically and we’d have one rocking economy.
That would take stripping literally millions of lines of regulatory code (and deciding what should actually stay in the code) without a heavy handed socialist pack of fools drooling over power and money.
We do need a revolution in this country. We can either make it a peaceful one where we fix all this crap using democracy, or we can wait till it explodes and the only people left alive are people that believe socialist crap being heaped on us for 30 or more years isn’t the way to go.
Take your pick America.
Spiritk9 on August 22, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Thanks, Suzi, for fighting these people and for basic common sense.
Just curious, though… How on earth can they know when you do something so simple as changing spools or other raw materials. I mean are they camped out there?
Keep up the fight and know you’re not alone.
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 1:24 PM
She needs change. She needs hope.
Mojave Mark on August 22, 2009 at 1:29 PM
TXUS:
They can’t possibly know about the thread, but really I want to operate within the law. Sure, I could go around it with things like that, and I’d probably never get caught. I could not test at all and just take my chances. I’m a small time producer and they’d probably never come after me. Probably…
But honestly, I don’t want to be in business if I have to operate illegally or sneak around. I know my product is safe, and I want the law to change to reflect common sense in testing.
Lead in toys can be a problem. Who started this? The companies that imported lead-tainted toys in 2007 from China. Not the stay at home mom making a few stuffed animals from items readily available at any local fabric shop. I think the law should reflect that reality.
The exemptions that came out by the CPSC are keeping me in business, but they could also be overturned simply because a new person comes into power over there. The LAW is what needs to change.
Horatius:
As for getting source suppliers to test everything… my giraffes have to be tested for a plastic additive Phthalate because they go into the mouths of babies. The fabric is 100% cotton though, so no fabric supplier in their right mind would eat the expense of testing for this substance that is so obviously not in their product. Also, the phthalate testing is specific to items intended to go in babies mouths, so that only hits a very tiny segment of all the uses people have for cotton fabric. The law needs to be changed to say that *plastic* items need to be tested for phthalates, not everything that goes in a baby’s mouth no matter what it is made of.
Starfox5253 on August 22, 2009 at 1:35 PM
This is a common method for government to support cartels and large businesses at the expense of smaller businesses.
Same kind of thing happened during the Great Depression.
Sackett on August 22, 2009 at 1:37 PM
It was a Democratic Congress that did this. A Democratic Congress that created a bill which seems deliberately designed to put handcraft shops out of business. It eliminates all competition to the huge toy companies that manufacture in China. They make such large batches that this is a minor expense. I wonder which Congress-whores took lobbyist money to destroy American handcrafted toy manufacturing in favor of Chinese manufacturing?
theCork on August 22, 2009 at 1:39 PM
The tentacles of fascism are extending into America, but try and mention the odor to anyone and you’ll get labeled a right wing extremist.
Do any of you leftists understand how your State worship is killing us?
Saltysam on August 22, 2009 at 1:45 PM
I bet a lot of people are hoping for change now.
uber on August 22, 2009 at 1:46 PM
So basically, it would be illegal for anyone to give a child a gift of any kind unless it had been tested.
A dad makes a gift for his son, a mother makes sweater for her daughter, a sister makes a gift for her little brother??
All of this could be considered illegal activity by the
federal government????
Is it possible that a snow fort in your back yard made in the middle of winter would need testing?? A tree house made from scrap wood?? If I colored a picture with crayons on a piece of paper and gave it to my son,, could that be illegal???
JellyToast on August 22, 2009 at 1:47 PM
I don’t make crafts to sell, but I have made scarves and hats (and the occasional baby blanket) to donate (I try to find shelters that cater to young children and their families). I usually work all spring and summer, in order to have them ready by the fall – but I’m having trouble finding places willing to take in my work thanks to this crap. Ugh.
This reminds me of a section of Liberal Fascism – how the big companies all go along with regulations, because it squeezes the little guys out of business. It’s simply wrong for the government to interfere in this sort of thing… it’s not their job to promote one business over another.
Anna on August 22, 2009 at 1:47 PM
…when Mussolini was admired and copied.
Saltysam on August 22, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Liberals care about babies now? It just goes to show, there’s a very fine line between sucking their brains out of their skulls with vacuums and worrying about what they put in their mouths.
Sharke on August 22, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Suzi,
Living within the law is a real challenge when those making the laws could themselves care less what the Constitution and laws say. But what you’re doing in following an unjust law while questioning it in all the ways one can is what the founders intended and what good people in our country are doing everyday.
Good luck, and keep us posted.
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 1:54 PM
I submit we surround the capital, drag them all out and never let them set foot in the place again. Then pass a law that all former members of congress must relinquish all income earned( I use the word earned here a bit sarcastically)while in office and are heretofore disallowed to work in any occupation other than used car sales, public bathroom cleaning or ditch digging.
JellyToast on August 22, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Liberals care about babies now? It just goes to show, there’s a very fine line between sucking their brains out of their skulls with vacuums and worrying about what they put in their mouths.
Sharke on August 22, 2009 at 1:50 PM
TXUS on August 22, 2009 at 1:58 PM
redfoxbluestate: back in the seventies or early eighties (memory is a bit fuzzy on exactly when) there actually was a democrat senator who every summer would take a blue collar job like trash collector and have himself and family live on only the wages he earned as a blue collar / minimum wage earner. I remember seeing that on 60 Minutes way back when 60 minutes wasn’t just a political propaganda tool.
I really wish that tradition had carried on in other Congress Critters,
Duncan Khuver on August 22, 2009 at 2:01 PM
Anyone working in government should have to test their pap for toxicity before they peddle it on the rest of us. On their own dime, according to the standards of WE, THE PEOPLE.
justincase on August 22, 2009 at 2:05 PM
…only at the assistant level and no higher.
Saltysam on August 22, 2009 at 2:08 PM
Made from cotton?!! Everyone knows that cotton is RACIST!!!!! I hope they put this slaveholder out of business!! /sarc
billy4046 on August 22, 2009 at 2:14 PM
How about making the producers of yarn, thread, fabric and dyes certify that their produces are free of those things. Then when someone makes something, as long as all the raw materials were certified free of them, the maker is covered.
But yeah, we have way too much government. Not a single human being has ever been harmed by phthalates. Yup, it is possible to detect them in a person’s system at parts per billion levels but it has never been shown that they are harmful in any way to anyone. It is more bogus “urban legend science. Just like the whole plastic grocery bag issue.
It is all about “emotionalizing” issues.
crosspatch on August 22, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Oops, meant to include a link about the plastic grocery bag issue from back in 2008. Here it is.
crosspatch on August 22, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Only when we make it end.
chemman on August 22, 2009 at 2:36 PM
But it’s for the babies and children. You just don’t get it. /s
C.S. Lewis said that the worst form of tyranny would be that peddled by the do-gooders.
chemman on August 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM
True, because they always argue ‘from the high moral ground’.
GarandFan on August 22, 2009 at 2:54 PM
In the late, great Robert A. Heinlein’s ‘Timeline series’, he often talks about “1965, The Year They Hanged All the Lawyers”, when the profession was outlawed.
Couldn’t agree more.
mrt721 on August 22, 2009 at 2:56 PM
If her products are not sold across state lines or use material from other states, her state reps should tell the Feds to go to Hell. Right now States Rights is the best tool to try and curtail their power. The conservative members of congress should stand up and walk out before participating in the process to pass these idiotic laws. If they don’t they are part of the problem.
hillbilly on August 22, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Government regulating cloth baby toys. That’s pretty much the very definition of a “nanny state”. Good lord.
CP on August 22, 2009 at 3:06 PM
I have a niece who knits baby hats, mittons and scarves for service projects… won’t that be a hoot if someone points out to Obama that a youth project that teaches kids a skill and gets them involved in helping the community has to be canceled because hospitals etc won’t accept the items?
journeyintothewhirlwind on August 22, 2009 at 3:11 PM
The one thing about Big Government, especially the kind being promulgated these days, is that it is destroying the spirit of entrepreneurism that at one time was flourishing in this country. Instead of encouraging the establishment of new businesses and ideas, the current attitude in Washington is driving it all into the ground, not to mention driving it all overseas.
It just angers the tar out of me!
pilamaye on August 22, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Obama, to Suzi: Look Suzi. It’s not about you. It’s about ME! Always ME!!! Now if you can’t pay up like the big boys, to get around the rules, than tough noogies for you.
This man is a dreg on society. Community extortionist is more like it!
capejasmine on August 22, 2009 at 4:06 PM
It’s not unintended. They don’t like small business people. They don’t want people to be able to take care of themselves. It displeases them that people might be able to make and sell goods for a profit.
They want only big businesses to be able to be in business, because they can work hand-in-hand with them.
Independent entrepreneurs are the last thing they want to encourage.
Alana on August 22, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Actually the copy of the law and its FAQ our store received stated that any toy or part of a toy that may go into a child’s mouth must be tested. Not just those made for that purpose.
“Congress stated that the interim ban on DINP, DIDP, and DnOP applies only to children’s toys that can be placed in a child’s mouth. It provided the following definition of when a toy can be placed in a child’s mouth. “A toy can be placed in a child’s mouth if any part of the toy can actually be brought to the mouth and kept in the mouth by a child so that it can be sucked and chewed. If the toy can only be licked, it is not able to be placed in the mouth. By definition, if a toy or part of a toy in one dimension is smaller than 5 centimeters, it can be placed in the mouth.” Thus, any toy in a baby’s hand that can make it into the baby’s mouth to be sucked on, or chewed, is subject to the interim ban.”
http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/faq/108faq.html#products
Deanna on August 22, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Paging Captain John Parker
Paging Captain John Parker
Please report to the Lexington Green
Your time has come
bill30097 on August 22, 2009 at 4:30 PM
It’s interesting how quickly after the fall of communism, we and the Russians could have essentially the same form of government — national socialism….
notropis on August 22, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »