» Home

  » News

  » Topics

  » Commentary

  » Links

  » Why?

  » Made in the USA

  » 
Supporters


  Visit the store -
  support the cause!

 

Just say no to "Made IN China":
Commentary and Opinion Pieces


You are here ~~> Commentary Index ~~> Commentary Page 2
<<It is an essential part of the agency’s mission, because premarket testing is not required for consumer products in the United States.>> HUH?? Excuse me, I thought this was REQUIRED!

<<Critics say the Stand ’n Seal case demonstrates how the Consumer Product Safety Commission is too overwhelmed with reports of injuries and with new hazards to comprehensively investigate or follow up on many complaints.>>  Let's see... could it be they are understaffed, under-budgeted and maybe need some help to protect us?  Continue reading below...

'Stand 'n Seal' is a product offering “a revolutionary fast way” to seal grout around tiles and, its label boasted, any extra spray would “evaporate harmlessly.”  Dr. Fiedel, a 63-year-old physician, ended up being rushed to the hospital, where he would spend four days in intensive care, gasping for air, his lungs chemically inflamed after using the product and became the latest victim of a product whose dangers had become known months earlier to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  Two consumers died, and at least 80 people had been sickened by using it.

But even then, with the threat well-documented, the manufacturer, retailer and the commission had failed to remove the hazard from the shelves.

Nancy A. Nord, the commission’s acting chairwoman, said the agency was proud of its record of moving rapidly and forcefully to pull hazardous products off the market.  “The point is to get the recall out there, to get the consumer informed of what’s happening and then try to get the product out of consumers’ hands,” Ms. Nord said in testimony to a House panel in September. “I think a recall process works very well.”  (NOTE: read below at the bottom of this page for the effectiveness of the recall process).

But the Stand ’n Seal case is a powerful illustration of the commission’s failure.

The product’s maker, BRTT, appeared at times to be more concerned with protecting its bottom line than with taking steps to ensure that the hazard was removed. That meant that hazardous cans of Stand ’n Seal remained on the shelves for more than a year after the 2005 recall.   And the product that BRTT initially rushed to put in its place — and which Dr. Friedel and others bought — contained the same chemical that had apparently caused injuries in the first place, the company and Home Depot now acknowledge.
<excerpted - read the entire article HERE at the New York Times>

"Bigger Budget? No, Responds Safety Agency" - read the entire article HERE at the New York Times

 

Despite Ms. Nord's objections, Congress increased the commission's budget by 30% before adjoining for the year thankfully! (Source)

"Bigger Budget? No, Responds Safety Agency" is an article written by Stephen Labaton and published in the October 30, 2007 edition of the New York Times.  In it, Nancy Nord (acting chairwoman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission) has asked Congress to reject legislation that would double the agency's budget, increase their authority and sharply increase its dwindling staff.

HUH??

<<Ms. Nord’s opposition to important elements of the legislation is consistent with the broadly deregulatory approach of the Bush administration over the last seven years. In a variety of areas, from antitrust to trucking and worker safety, officials appointed by President Bush have sought to reduce the role of regulation and government in the marketplace.>>

The legislation would have doubled the agency's budget over the next seven years to $141 million as well as raise the staffing levels by about 20% (staff numbers about 420, about half it was in the 1980s with only one full-time employee to test toys). Fifteen inspectors are assigned to police all imports of consumer products under the agency's supervision -- and not all products are under the agency's supervision that we consume - but with $614 billion in 2006, that makes each inspector responsible for inspecting $41 billion per year.

Let's figure this out now, and put it into numbers we can relate to.

  • $614 billion split by 15 inspectors equals $41 billion per year each
  • Let's say each imported 'widget' has an imported value of $.50
  • That's 82 million widgets
  • Even if the inspections were made by one widget per every 1,000, that's still 82,000 inspections
  • 2,000 working hours per year (excluding the 80 hours per year for a vacation), that means each inspector has to inspect and approve about 41 shipments of 1,000 widgets every hour.... exactly how is this possible for any human to do?

Exactly who's side is she on?  Big business or the consumers?

In her letter, Ms. Nord criticized the provision to ban lead from all toys, saying it was not practical.  This is despite the fact China is the manufacturer of almost 80% of the U.S. imported toys - birth defects in China have increased by nearly 40 percent since 2001, now affecting nearly one in every 10 Chinese households. 

<<Consumer advocates also said they were stunned by the letter. “It was remarkable to send a letter like that to a committee, when you’re in dire straits and you need increased funding and you’ve acknowledged that,” said Ellen Bloom, director of federal policy at Consumers Union.>>

I'm beyond stunned.... 

<article excerpted - read it in its entirety HERE>

 
  • WATER-PROOFING PRODUCTS STILL ON THE MARKET - December 27, 2007 - The Consumer Product Safety Commission is unnecessarily leaving the American public at risk through its failure to properly investigate a long-running series of lung injuries tied to widely available waterproofing sprays, public health officials from several states say.  (Source)
  • WHERE ARE THESE RECALLED ITEMS?  Most of the unsafe toys and other products, it turns out, may still be in the hands of consumers.  American companies face strict federal regulations for disposing of recalled toys, but they are only responsible for the toys that show up. The other products left out there — and in many cases, that is more than 80 percent — fall out of their purview, a crack in the recall system that consumer advocates say leaves a giant question mark over the trail of recalled toys.  (Source)
  • HOW EFFECTIVE ARE RECALLS? It has long been the case that product recalls generate dismal results. In the past, recalls have brought back 18 percent of products, on average, but low-priced toys and trinkets are returned at even lower rates — often less than 5 percent. Research firms found that some toys recalled this summer have appeared this fall on auction Web sites like eBay and other sites that sell products in bulk to businesses, including Made-in-China.com. Aubrey Liu, who works in Made-in-China’s Web operations department, said in an e-mail message that it was difficult for her department to pick out recalled products on her site because the Consumer Product Safety Commission does not include the names of manufacturers in recall notices.  (Source)
  • There is no federal law or regulation against reselling recalled toys - a loophole that some legislators are trying to close.  (Source)
   

 


I said that for China the first imperative was ‘survival’, but I must immediately add that by ‘survival’ I do not merely mean to eke a living by disgraceful means...
~~~ Lu Xun, Modern China’s greatest writer


"No."
~~~ Rosa Parks, December 1, 1955

This site is © Copyright PDL 2008, All Rights Reserved
Steve's free web templates