Unintended Consequences Of Trying To Do Good

Today's National Review On Line has an article today on the recently passed Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA).  This law was passed as a result of the problems which resulted in the toy recalls of 2007 and 2008.  According to the article:

"This legislation grew out of the hysteria that surrounded the toy recalls of 2007-08, though the fact of the recalls themselves demonstrates that no new law was necessary. "We recalled those products because they violated the existing law," says Nancy Nord, acting chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)."

There are three main problems with the law: 

1.  The specifies a lead content for an item and regardless of whether of not that makes the product unsafe, declares the product unsafe.  For example, the article states:

"printer's ink used to contain trace amounts of lead. Librarians are faced with a choice between cost-prohibitive testing and disposal of their pre-1985 inventory of children's books. Thus, we get stories like this one in the Nebraska City News-Press: "Librarian quarantines books.""

2.  The law of retroactive--all products manufactured for children twelve and under are included, regardless of when they were manufactured.  Secondhand stores and thrift shops that can't afford to test every item that comes in are forced to throw out perfectly good items.  For example, something as simple and safe as a zipper on a child's jacket could contain more than the permitted level of lead.

3.  The law went into effect on February 10,  It did not allow enough time for stores and manufacturers to know what the rules were and how to comply with them.

I have heard stories that stores that sell dirt bikes will be put out of business because of this law because of the lead paint used on the bikes.  We could debate the safety of dirt bikes for a long time, but I suspect that we would not be debating the dangers of a child eating the paint! 

The intentions of this law were good, but it will do some serious damage to our already struggling economy and really wasn't needed.  The previous law caused to recall and solved the problem.  This law simply confuses people and needlessly hurts thrift shops and second hand shops that are very valuable in a tight economy.