But approved by a democratic senate, to which he still belongs. He did not sign the bill into law but how did he vote as a Senator??
You brought him into this wncs. It is yet another example of reactionary legislation that has run rampant in the last decade. On Jan 9, 7:31 am, wncs <[email protected]> wrote: > Please note that this law was signed BEFORE Obama takes office. > > On Jan 9, 8:20 am, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > From: Travis > > Subject: Is Feb. 10 financial doomsday for thousands? > > Date: Thursday, January 8, 2009, > > > http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=85542 > > > *YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK > > *Is Feb. 10 financial doomsday for thousands? > > New law could force companies into ruin > > ------------------------------ > > Posted: January 08, 2009 > > 12:13 am Eastern > > > By Chelsea Schilling > > (c) 2009 WorldNetDaily > > > Jacobsen Books in Clinton, Wis. A new government regulation scheduled to > > take effect next month has thousands of retailers, thrift stores and small > > businesses<http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=85542#>worried > > they will be forced to permanently close their doors – and destroy > > their merchandise. > > The law is expected to have such a devastating impact that Feb. 10 is now > > unofficially known as "National Bankruptcy > > Day<http://nationalbankruptcyday.com/>." > > > Congress passed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of > > 2008<http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.pdf>, > > or HR 4040, a retroactive rule mandating that all items sold for use by > > children under 12 must be tested by an independent party for lead and > > phthalates, which are chemicals used to make plastics more pliable. > > All untested items, regardless of lead content, are to be declared "banned > > hazardous products.'' The CPSC has already determined the law applies to > > every children's item on shelves, not just to items made beginning Feb. 10. > > The regulations could force thousands of businesses – especially smaller > > ones that cannot afford the cost of lead testing – to throw away truckloads > > of children's clothing, books, toys, furniture and other children's items > > and even force them to close their doors. > > *Will Obama bring the end of prosperity? Get the book that shows how higher > > taxes will doom the economy – if we let it > > happen.*<http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=2511> > > *Children's books* > > Valerie Jacobsen and her husband, Paul, support their family of 13 by > > selling literature at Jacobsen Books in Clinton, Wis. Her family has > > contracts with local libraries to buy and sell overstocked books – an > > arrangement that draws income for both parties. > > However, Jacobsen told WND that lead testing is estimated to cost $100 to > > $400 for each of her used children's books because she does not buy in bulk, > > and each batch of merchandise is required to be tested. > > "There's a big difference between me and Wal-Mart or Toys 'R' Us," she said. > > "They'll have a batch of 50,000. Everything I have is a batch of one because > > I don't know its history. I'm looking at a testing cost of about $1.2 > > million. I would normally sell my full inventory of all children's products > > for probably $15,000. So, it's effectively a ban." > > > Valerie Jacobsen > > The Consumer Product Safety Commission states that lead testing requirements > > apply to children's books, cassettes and CDs, printed game boards, posters > > and other printed goods used for children's education. While it does claim > > some printing inks will be exempt, paper, cardboard, bindings, glues, > > laminates and other inks are still subject to regulation and require > > testing. > > Jacobsen said that unless the new law is repealed or substantially modified, > > it could devastate her family business. > > "I don't want to stop selling children's books on Feb. 9," she said. "I need > > that income. We provide a lot of reading for a lot of little kids. I went > > into this business because I thought that books were good for children's > > mental development. That opinion hasn't changed. And the government's ruling > > is essentially saying they're hazardous for children's mental development > > because they might contain lead. We just have no evidence that they do." > > *Children's second-hand clothing* > > Jacobsen said she often shops at second-hand stores for her 11 children > > because she can buy quality clothing at low prices. > > "Over the years I have always tried to make the most of our money, so we'll > > go to Goodwill," she said. "To be honest, I'd rather go to Goodwill and get > > a brand-name item that's hardly been worn and pay $3.99 for it than to go to > > Wal-Mart and pay $13.99 for something that in six weeks from now is not > > going to worth anything." > > But now some thrift and consignment stores are in a panic over the new > > regulation because it extends to children's clothing, shoes and other items > > as well. > > Cindy Retmier owns a consignment store called Jordan's Closet in El Dorado > > Hills, Calif. She told KXTV News 10 that the law could close her business. > > "[W]e've been passing kids clothing down for centuries," she said. "Now all > > of sudden you can't do it because there might be too much lead in one item > > out of a thousand? I mean it's ridiculous they've taken it to the extent > > they've taken it right now." > > > Goodwill > > She estimates testing for each of her clothing articles to run between $300 > > and $1,500. The Consumer Product Safety Commission said it may consider > > exempting clothing and toys made from natural materials such as wool or > > wood, but paint and dyes on the products are still required to be tested. > > "We only sell stuff for an average of $10 so, of course that doesn't make > > sense," Ritmier said. > > Even Goodwill Industries told the station it may be forced to stop selling > > clothing and other children's items if testing is too expensive. The move > > could affect consumers who donate items for tax write-offs if the stores are > > not able to sell them. > > "A huge hit for us and a huge hit for consumers that are trying to save a > > dollar in this economy," Goodwill's Mark Klingler told KXTV. "We'll have to > > analyze it. It may involve not selling if we can't realistically test > > everything." > > Likewise, Shauna Sloan, founder of the Salt Lake City-based Kid to Kid > > Franchise, which sells used children's clothing in 75 stores across the > > country, told the Los Angeles Times his business could end. > > "We will have to lock our doors and file for bankruptcy," he said. > > *Small toy businesses* > > All children's toys and furniture also fall under strict requirements for > > independent lead and phthalate testing. Some small toy businesses say lead > > testing alone costs more than $4,000 per item – a price some say only large > > companies like Mattel and Fisher Price can afford to pay. > > "The only people who can do that now are the ones who actually put this > > scare into effect and actually caused the problem," Amy Evan's, owner of > > Baby's Boutique in Chico, Calif., told CBS' KHSL. > > *Home-based and small businesses* > > Shelsie Hall told KXTV she makes > > hair<http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=85542#>bows > > and jewelry for children and sells them online to support her family. > > Now her small > > business<http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=85542#>is > > threatened by the measure because those products must be tested. > > "[M]y items sell for $4 to $10 and I make a lot of different things. So I > > couldn't just test one; I would have to test every item," she said. > > One blogger who identifies herself as "Tina" has a home-based business > > making and selling cloth diapers online. She said a U.S. lab quoted a price > > of $75 to test each component of her diapers. > > "I have at least two different fabrics, thread, snaps and elastic in a > > diaper," she wrote. "$375 to test each different combination of > > fabrics/snaps/thread/size combinations? That is insane." > > She continued, "I am but one of many micro-manufacturers who will be forced > > to give up the American dream of owning my own business because of this > > legislation." > > Tina said retailers purchase inventory with loans secured by the value of > > that inventory. > > "What happens to these lenders and retailers when the value of that > > inventory goes to zero?" she asked. "It is conceivable, at least to me, that > > retailers will be the next group in front of Congress asking for a bailout." > > > The act's broad wording could extend to children's items sold on eBay, > > Craig's List, Amazon. Critics also say landfills will be hit hard if stores, > > distributors and families simply throw their untested items away rather than > > face prosecution. And new clothing, toys, furniture and books at large > > retailers could become more expensive to cover third-party testing costs. > > *Tentative exemptions* > > While the Consumer Product Safety Commission administers the law, it may > > only be changed by Congress. Some exemptions approved Tuesday by the > > commission's two members, but not formally adopted, include the following: > > > - Items with lead parts that a child cannot access; > > - Clothing, toys and other goods made of natural materials such as cotton > > and wood; and > > - Electronics that are impossible to make without lead. > > > But the tentative exemptions do little to reassure most businesses and > > families who will be affected by the law. Final rules are not scheduled for > > approval until after Feb. 10, when the rules take effect. > > *Taking action* > > Rep. Bobby Rush <http://www.house.gov/rush/zipauth.shtml>, D-Il., sponsored > > the measure along with 106 co-sponsors. In the House of Representatives, 424 > > members voted for the act, nine voted "present" and a single member voted > > against it > > <http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/bills/h_r_4040/>– > > Rep. > > Ron Paul <http://www.house.gov/paul/contact.shtml>, R-Texas. > > In the Senate, the totals were 89 for, eight "present" and three > > against<http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/2/votes/193/>– > > Sens. Tom > > Coburn<http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCo...>, > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
