Kiosk
Discussion Forums - Children's Books
Topic: Please Read - CPSIA - Legislation BAD for Children's Books
| Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership. |
|
|||
|
If you haven't heard about the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), you need to. Basically, it regulates lead content in all products for children ages 0-12. Sounds good on the surface, but it's not. All means all - not just toys, but books, clothing, dirt bikes - ALL products. This went into effect February 10th. Since this is a book group I'll focus on how that. The book side of this is what really got me upset about it. The CPSC has determined that books printed pre-1985 are a possible "hazardous materials" because there could be lead in the ink, so book resellers are either throwing them away or if possible, storing them until the legislation is changed. For now libraries are considering themselves exempt, but I hate to think what will happen if the CPSC decides they aren't. No child has ever gotten lead poisoning from a book. Rush Limbaugh talked about this Tuesday (17th) on his show, and mentioned that he doesn't understand why there isn't an uproar over this. On the show he talks with someone that sells dirt bikes and what that has done to their company. Like with books, no one buys a dirt bike, takes it home, their child starts licking it, and gets lead poisoning. It just doesn't happen. Yes, there are some higher risk products that could definitely use some legislation, but this blanket legislation NEEDS to go away. It is affecting an already hurting economy in a very bad way, not to mention the history being lost banning the resell of books printed pre-1985. For more information, links to other sites, an interview with the former director of the CPSC about this (it's pathetic), got to my blog. http://stillswinging.blogspot.com/2009/02/cpsia-bad-to-worse.html Here are some other articles I haven't added to my blog yet: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north688.html http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0212wo.html E-mail your state legislators, call, whatever it takes - but this needs to change!!! Marni |
|||
 |
|
|||
|
Last Edited on: 2/20/09 10:32 PM ET - Total times edited: 1 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
No, Dawn, that doesn't change anything at all. I can't believe how many people are so easily brushing this off. ALL BOOKS FOR CHILDREN PRINTED PRE-1985 ARE CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. Lead in the ink or not, I have to wonder if you actually ate a whole book, if you would get lead poisoning. You mention the 1985 line as if it makes everything okay. Do you not realize how many great books were printed before then? How many stories that haven't been reprinted after that magic date? Check out just a few posts at the Common Room. It's sad when we have to start writing eulogies for books: http://heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com/2009/02/commissioner-moore-recommends.html http://heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com/2009/02/beautiful-cpsia-book-post.html All clothing isn't okay - if they have zippers, snaps, or buttons they could be a lead hazard. Thrift stores are throwing away clothes. The one year stay of testing doesn't mean a thing, even though they'd like you to think that. Here's the former director of the CPSC herself talking about this: http://www.wbaltv.com/video/18479590/index.html She says herself there is a stay of testing, BUT sellers are required to obey the law. So if not test, how do you know? Watch for yourself to believe it, she suggests resellers "look at it" (5:30) to determine if their products contain more than 600ppm lead. She also suggests calling the manufacturer about every product that comes into the thrift shop. Right. I received a letter back from one of my state representatives saying himself that he didn't know how far reaching this law was when it was passed. It was originally played out to save us from the lead-filled toys in China so legislators took it for that and passed it (heaven forbid they actually read what they are passing). He said he has been keeping up on it to see that it is changed, but the sponsors and the CPSC don't think it is necessary to change it. EXACTLY why we need to keep talking about it, and let our legislators know that this is unacceptable. Not knowing me, take this for what it's worth, but I've never been that interested in the political process before. This law woke me up to what is going on in our country, and I can't stop talking about this. The book issue alone justifies a change. When California was creating their lead laws a couple years ago they at least had to prove a risk. For instance, while swarovski crystal is high in lead they couldn't add it because the lead isn't in an accessible form. With this we have a blanket law with no regulation on what is actually a risk of being harmful or not. Marni |
|||
|
|
|||
|
I was talking with a friend about this a while back who linked me to a government post on this subject. The link took me to Gov. website and stated this law has been postponed until next year in order to work out the kinks...
|
|||
|
