Hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection Subcommittee - Child/Consumer Product Safety Panel II

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. DEGETTE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess to some people, it's all flyover country out there. (Laughter.) We don't think so.

I want to thank Congresswoman Schakowsky for asking the question about the 6 (years old) versus 12 years old because in Congresswoman DeLauro's and my bill -- H.R. 3691 -- we do have the age 12 and exactly for the reasons you said, Dr. Best. We think that it should be a -- all of the definitions should apply up to age 12, and I'll probably be doing some kind of amendment or working with the chairman on the Manager's Amendment to increase that age in our committee mark.

I also wanted to ask you, Dr. Best, about another issue that Congresswoman DeLauro and I raised in our bill, which is what the lead standard should be per million. In your prepared testimony, you recommended a lead standard of 40 parts per million for all children's products, which is what is in our bill. H.R. 4040 has a standard of 90 (parts per million) or 100 parts per million and I'm wondering if you can explain to us why 40 parts per million would be preferable.

MS. BEST: We spent a lot of time thinking about this because it's an obviously complex issue and we understand that every time we ratchet down the limit, it costs money for manufacturers and for the testers and for all involved. But what we decided was that the reference level should be what is trace in our environment. We can't get below trace in any of our products. And so to look for trace levels, we had to go to the scientific literature and you had to look not at the United States on the East Coast because we've actually contaminated our soil so much that it's higher than what we would consider trace.

So we found an article that looked at the soil on the top of one of the mountains in Vermont, and they actually -- this scientist looked at the levels in the air and in the layer of material that's right at the top of the dirt -- you know, with the little pine cone needles and little --

REP. DEGETTE: (Cross talk.) We have those in Colorado, too. (Laughter.)

MS. BEST: -- and then into the lower and lower levels, and then actually -- and the amount of lead that ended up in the waters -- in the water table. And the -- we -- that's one of the ways we arrived at the 40, is that that was one of the lowest levels that this scientist found.

REP. DEGETTE: So that determination was actually based on a scientific examination.

MS. BEST: It was, it was.

REP. DEGETTE: Mr. Korn, I wanted to ask you -- in your prepared testimony, you had said that you support increasing the Consumer Product Safety Commission's budget. This, of course, has been an issue for debate in the press and other places with the commissioners of the CPSC about what kind of increase in the budget could be effectively used. And I'm wondering if -- is there a particular level of funding that you think would be necessary -- putting aside what's in H.R. 4040 or any other legislation -- just in general, how much would we be able to increase their budget so that they could actually use that money effectively?

MR. KORN: Well, we're particularly hypnotized and pleased that it's just more money. This has been an agency that's not had the appropriate funding for so long, so seeing $10 million -- $15 million increments in a year's time is something that we think is a very good way. Do I have the expertise as to tell you whether or not $20 million is enough to improve that lab? I don't. To hear that the chairman has -- say that they -- that one of the options is to level the lab completely and start fresh raised with me the possibility that 20 million (dollars) may not be enough.

REP. DEGETTE: Well, and in fact -- in fact -- and I think Ms. Weintraub pointed this out, too -- when the Consumer Product Safety Commission started out in the '70s, the budget was $34.7 million. So it you took that, just for -- adjusting for inflation, it would be $140 million now.

MR. KORN: Which is where your bill gets to eventually --

REP. DEGETTE: Eventually it does.

MR. KORN: -- yeah.

REP. DEGETTE: Ms. Weintraub, what do you think? Would that be sufficient to do the things the Consumer Product Safety Commission needs to do?

MS. WEINTRAUB: We've been using that as a benchmark. Based upon our conversations with experts, we believe that -- you know, money can't be thrown at the commission. We need smart growth and we believe that about 15-percent increments, which is what this bill actually authorizes, is a smart way to go. This bill stops at three years. We would recommend going to five or seven years and ultimately at least getting to 140 million (dollars), which would put them on par with where they were at their very first authorization.

REP. DEGETTE: And then I would think that what you'd have to do once you got on par is take a look, because the markets have changed so much -- we have so many imports coming in from around the world -- and say, "Is that budget going to be sufficient with the reorganization over three or five years to account for the current markets?"

MS. WEINTRAUB: I would agree. I also agree with Mr. Korn. We're coming from a starving mentality, so the idea of 140 million (dollars) is just pretty incredible. But yes, I agree that we constantly have to be doing assessments, looking at all of the responsibilities that the commission has, especially with the changing marketplace and the increased complexity of products and determine if indeed that's adequate.

REP. DEGETTE: Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source