No more reselling kids clothes???

[dyna]

1 If lead was as big a problem as our government is tryin to lead us to believe it is there would be many many more ppl effected by lead poisoning!

2 Even our every day bread sack puts out enough lead to be harmful the lead is in the ink on lable an used because it makes package more attractive only way to get the pretty bright lable is to use ink with lead in it same as detergent lables etc all contain lead.

3. Why is only infants an childrens clothing being attacked? What is dif about their clothing verses adult? We all pick up our babies cuddle them soothe them many many times a day their faces are right up in the middle of our chest or on shoulder they suck or chew on our clothing WHY isn't adult clothing being attacked as well?

4. If we listened an avoided everything that is said to be harmful to us none of us would still be here.

 

[AuroraBeauty]

Interesting information.

 

[plummer925]

First of all - it's NOT a law yet

Second - NO where - other than a few news resources and boards like this - does this 'law' get talked about.

Third - a lot of you are blaming "Congress" - the CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION IS NOT CONGRESS!

I'm NOT pro-government at all, but PLEASE folks, GET THE FACTS STRAIT before getting in a panic.

Many of you are jumping on the "sell NOW" on ebay, etc. How do y'all think the great depression started? By PANIC.

Calm down a bit, find out the facts, THEN calmly work to resolve them.

Flame suit is on...I'm sure I'll need it.

 

[jodifla]

First of all - it's NOT a law yet

Second - NO where - other than a few news resources and boards like this - does this 'law' get talked about.

Third - a lot of you are blaming "Congress" - the CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION IS NOT CONGRESS!

I'm NOT pro-government at all, but PLEASE folks, GET THE FACTS STRAIT before getting in a panic.

Many of you are jumping on the "sell NOW" on ebay, etc. How do y'all think the great depression started? By PANIC.

Calm down a bit, find out the facts, THEN calmly work to resolve them.

Flame suit is on...I'm sure I'll need it.

The whole thing is odd. It's mainly fueled by message boards.

This is a big story...if it were true. The fact that nobody is really writing about it would lend credence to the fact that it ISN'T true.

Hard to believe it's flying under every new media organization's radar.

 

[DMRick]

It was an AP story in our local paper on Sunday. I've been reading bits and pieces for several months. It's one of those bills that starts out making sense, and then it just goes crazy. It's at the crazy stage now.

The whole thing is odd. It's mainly fueled by message boards.

This is a big story...if it were true. The fact that nobody is really writing about it would lend credence to the fact that it ISN'T true.

Hard to believe it's flying under every new media organization's radar.

 

[fakereadhed]

First of all - it's NOT a law yet

Second - NO where - other than a few news resources and boards like this - does this 'law' get talked about.

Third - a lot of you are blaming "Congress" - the CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION IS NOT CONGRESS!

No fire-retardant suit needed, but it is a law, that was passed by Congress. It goes into effect Feb. 10.

http://cbs11tv.com/politics/toymakers.toy.law.2.900667.html

 

[fakereadhed]

1 If lead was as big a problem as our government is tryin to lead us to believe it is there would be many many more ppl effected by lead poisoning!

Maybe they are. Attention problems can be a symptom of lead poisoning.

http://children.webmd.com/tc/lead-poisoning-symptoms

 

[ameraumi]

First of all - it's NOT a law yet No, but it will be come Feb 10th

Second - NO where - other than a few news resources and boards like this - does this 'law' get talked about. It has been on Fox News and some newpapers

Third - a lot of you are blaming "Congress" - the CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION IS NOT CONGRESS! Congress is the one that passed this into law. The CPSC is the one passing on the information. It was HB4040.

I'm NOT pro-government at all, but PLEASE folks, GET THE FACTS STRAIT before getting in a panic. We are trying to get the right information!

Many of you are jumping on the "sell NOW" on ebay, etc. How do y'all think the great depression started? By PANIC.

Calm down a bit, find out the facts, THEN calmly work to resolve them.

Flame suit is on...I'm sure I'll need it.

You need to read some of the previous information posted.

 

[Princess April]

They couldn't win the war on drugs so they decided to try to declare war on used onsies.

I don't care who you are... that was FUNNY!

 

[NotUrsula]

I'm kind of with Jodi on this, in that I think that perhaps we might all be working ourselves into a panic over something that really isn't going to be a problem. (And yes, I've read the law, and I think that while it is certainly open to strict interpretation, it is also very possible that it won't be enforced at all at the resale level. Enforcement and creation of exceptions is left up to the CPSC; it won't take an act of Congress to make adjustments to this thing.)

I think that while expressing concern is a good idea, jumping to fatalistic worst-case conclusions is not. The law is aimed squarely at manufacturers and importers, and I'm willing to bet that that is where the enforcement dollars will really be spent.

I actually wrote to the Washington Post a little while ago to ask their Checkout feature folks to look into it and try to separate the hype from the reality. They do a lot of reporting on juvenile products consumer issues, so I'm sure that they have good contacts at the CPSC. I have heard that the CPSC *is* working with some mfrs. on the policy details right now, which might well eliminate this concern. There is provision in the law for the CPSC to be able to exempt entire classes of materials based on their inherent unlikelihood to contain enough lead to qualify; I'm thinking that the average cotton t-shirt is a good candidate for that kind of exemption, depending on where the fabric comes from.

I do think that you will see that initially agencies and resellers will refuse anything that looks like it might have pthalates in it: which means most plastic shoes and a lot of clothing items with large plastic applique trims (like those shirts that light up, for instance.)

We're dealing with this issue in the library world, too. Juvie books and children's media products are also covered by the law.

 

[court4short]

http://www.thesimpledollar.com/2009...down-era-consumer-protectionism-gone-too-far/

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-thrift2-2009jan02,0,2083247.story

http://www.fashion-incubator.com/archive/cpsia-what-must-be-tested/

I'm sure I could find plenty more if you're still convinced that no one is talking about this.

 

[jodifla]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/25/handcrafted-toy-makers-fear-new-lead-paint-law/

Rep. Bobby L. Rush, Illinois Democrat, lead sponsor of the legislation, says toy makers should not worry. Mr. Rush points out that the law already exempts products and materials that do not threaten public safety or health.

 

[kadesha]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/25/handcrafted-toy-makers-fear-new-lead-paint-law/

Rep. Bobby L. Rush, Illinois Democrat, lead sponsor of the legislation, says toy makers should not worry. Mr. Rush points out that the law already exempts products and materials that do not threaten public safety or health.

See, this is what is getting me! I'm so confused. This is a direct contradiction of something discussed earlier in the thread!!

 

[jodifla]

http://www.thesimpledollar.com/2009...down-era-consumer-protectionism-gone-too-far/

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-thrift2-2009jan02,0,2083247.story

http://www.fashion-incubator.com/archive/cpsia-what-must-be-tested/

I'm sure I could find plenty more if you're still convinced that no one is talking about this.

Of those, only LA is the media covering the consignment angle of it, besides the other news story I quoted where the spokewoman says consignment pieces and one of kind items aren't included.

It's still not hit the mainstream press yet in a big way.

 

[PoohHappens]

It has been on our local news today that Salvation Army will now have to test all childrens items, clothing, toys, baby etc before it can be sold. It is not the resposibility of the person who donates, but the SA. The issue is the cost and not all stores are profitable enough to afford this, and any item not tested will be thrown out. I have seen it twice today on the local news here in Indy. I am curious what this means for consignment shops.

 

[jodifla]

It has been on our local news today that Salvation Army will now have to test all childrens items, clothing, toys, baby etc before it can be sold. It is not the resposibility of the person who donates, but the SA. The issue is the cost and not all stores are profitable enough to afford this, and any item not tested will be thrown out. I have seen it twice today on the local news here in Indy. I am curious what this means for consignment shops.

No store will be able to test every individual item....

 

[NotUrsula]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/25/handcrafted-toy-makers-fear-new-lead-paint-law/

Rep. Bobby L. Rush, Illinois Democrat, lead sponsor of the legislation, says toy makers should not worry. Mr. Rush points out that the law already exempts products and materials that do not threaten public safety or health.

Um, that quote makes no sense, really. No reputable toy mfr. starts out to deliberately threaten public safety or health, but they will still be subject to making sure that their products meet the new standards. Mr. Rush can't have been thinking. It is the cost of the required testing that the small hobby mfrs. are worried about.

The burr in the bonnet of these craft folks is the requirement for unit testing, rather than component testing. If small hobby mfrs. could simply rely on their raw materials suppliers to certify that the fabric or thread or zipper or ribbon or barrette clip, etc. contains no lead and no pthalates, then they could simply certify that the product was manufactured from materials that are certified lead/pthalate-free. However, the way the law is written currently makes it mandatory to test the finished product after it is manufactured, so certifying that the parts meet standards does not help.

(I understand why they did this, though -- it's the Aqua-Dots clause. The ingredients called for by the design all met safety standards, but the factory in China substituted for an ingredient at the last minute without telling the company that they were manufacturing the stuff for. Therefore the prototype and the initial samples met standards, but the identical-looking mass-produced product did not. I think that this issue is really limited to chemical issues on finished products, though; especially paints and plastics, and it isn't as important for supplies that are being used to mechanically assemble something. If I buy a lot of 300 yds of ribbon that is all in the same dye lot number and have a piece of it tested, then every yard of it is going to be equal for the purpose of testing. If one yd. passes, then it all would.)

 

[jodifla]

Um, that quote makes no sense, really. No reputable toy mfr. starts out to deliberately threaten public safety or health, but they will still be subject to making sure that their products meet the new standards. Mr. Rush can't have been thinking. It is the cost of the required testing that the small hobby mfrs. are worried about.

The burr in the bonnet of these craft folks is the requirement for unit testing, rather than component testing. If small hobby mfrs. could simply rely on their raw materials suppliers to certify that the fabric or thread or zipper or ribbon or barrette clip, etc. contains no lead and no pthalates, then they could simply certify that the product was manufactured from materials that are certified lead/pthalate-free. However, the way the law is written currently makes it mandatory to test the finished product after it is manufactured, so certifying that the parts meet standards does not help.

(I understand why they did this, though -- it's the Aqua-Dots clause. The ingredients called for by the design all met safety standards, but the factory in China substituted for an ingredient at the last minute without telling the company that they were manufacturing the stuff for. Therefore the prototype and the initial samples met standards, but the identical-looking mass-produced product did not. I think that this issue is really limited to chemical issues on finished products, though; especially paints and plastics, and it isn't as important for supplies that are being used to mechanically assemble something. If I buy a lot of 300 yds of ribbon that is all in the same dye lot number and have a piece of it tested, then every yard of it is going to be equal for the purpose of testing. If one yd. passes, then it all would.)

Yeah, the quote does make you shake your head. But to me, it does show the mind-set: They aren't trying to bankrupt the small toymaker industry, or cause Salvation Army and Goodwill to close or shut down eBayers.

They were reacting to the lead toy scare. And they have probably created a bill with a lot of problems in it that are going to have to be fixed, or at least clarified through the CPSC.

 

[Disneylush]

I was on the news about this tonight

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S731609.shtml?cat=206


It was all because of this thread! I read this last night... told my DH about it and he said BS!!!
He said if you think it is true email the news channel and have them investigate. Well they investigated and put me in a panic that this is going to be much bigger then I thought. .... You can't sell. you can't trade it. You can't even give it away!

 

[las3888]

I haven't had time to read this whole thread so sorry if it's gone off to another tangent, but back to the OT, I find this absolutely absurd. GOVERNMENT IS OUT OF CONTROL. Period.