ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Enviroblog is a project of EWG Action Fund.
FEED

An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.
TIPS
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblg.
BLOGROLL
STAY CONNECTED
Get our monthly eNewsletter, action alerts, & environmental tips. [Privacy policy, About EWG]
Eco-nomics, the new kind of economics
Please don't disrupt my endocrines!
FEATURED
Please don't disrupt my endocrines!
Consumers to FDA: Be there or be square
Lead: Celebrate its ban, but don't cross it off your list
7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs
Ask EWG
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
SEARCH
« Envirohealth News: Cancer risk from cell phones? | Main | SMM: Greensumption and the Triple Crisis »
Three ways Congress can give the CPSC teeth
Look up “toothless tiger” in the dictionary, and you’ll see a picture of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Or at least that’s the impression given by the media and many of those following the Mattel toy recalls. The government agency, which is tasked with protecting consumers from more than 15,000 products on the market, is understaffed and underfunded, but the toothless tiger metaphor gets employed so often because the CPSC has very little legal or prosecutorial power. China, for example, promised the agency’s chairwoman Nancy Nord that it would stop using lead paint on products destined for the U.S. The Chairwoman said, more or less, “I’ve heard that one before.”
Nord was called before a Senate subcommittee this week because the CPSC was accused of being “too lax” on imports, but the real culprit here is Congress. They apparently didn’t know how bad things are at the CPSC, but they’re the ones who can fix it. Now that they’ve got their chance, what should they do?
They proposed a long list of legislative changes that go much further — including increased fines for selling or failing to report dangerous goods, and a prohibition, backed by possible criminal prosecution, against retailers selling recalled products.