[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
KEEPING KIDS AND CONSUMERS SAFE FROM DANGEROUS PRODUCTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSUMER PROTECTION AND COMMERCE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 13, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-46
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
energycommerce.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
40-595 PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
Chairman
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois GREG WALDEN, Oregon
ANNA G. ESHOO, California Ranking Member
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York FRED UPTON, Michigan
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
DORIS O. MATSUI, California CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
KATHY CASTOR, Florida BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland PETE OLSON, Texas
JERRY McNERNEY, California DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia
PETER WELCH, Vermont ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
PAUL TONKO, New York GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York, Vice BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
Chair BILLY LONG, Missouri
DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon BILL FLORES, Texas
JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana
Massachusetts MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
TONY CARDENAS, California RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
RAUL RUIZ, California TIM WALBERG, Michigan
SCOTT H. PETERS, California EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia
LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
DARREN SOTO, Florida
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona
------
Professional Staff
JEFFREY C. CARROLL, Staff Director
TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Deputy Staff Director
MIKE BLOOMQUIST, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
Chairwoman
KATHY CASTOR, Florida CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas Ranking Member
ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois FRED UPTON, Michigan
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
TONY CARDENAS, California, Vice BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
Chair LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
DARREN SOTO, Florida EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
DORIS O. MATSUI, California GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio)
JERRY McNERNEY, California
DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex
officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hon. Jan Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Illinois, opening statement................................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 2
Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Washington, opening statement..................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
State of New Jersey, opening statement......................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Oregon, opening statement...................................... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Witnesses
William Wallace, Manager, Home and Safety Policy, Consumer
Reports........................................................ 12
Prepared statement........................................... 14
Additional material submitted for the record \1\
Crystal Ellis, Founding Member, Parents Against Tip-Overs........ 31
Prepared statement........................................... 33
Christopher Parsons, President, Minnesota Professional Fire
Fighters....................................................... 40
Prepared statement........................................... 42
Answers to submitted questions............................... 134
Charles A. Samuels, Member, Mintz................................ 47
Prepared statement........................................... 49
Answers to submitted questions............................... 136
Submitted Material
H.R. ___, the Safe Sleep Act of 2019, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky 66
H.R. 1618, the Nicholas and Zachary Burt Carbon Monoxide
Poisoning Prevention Act of 2019, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky.. 68
H.R. 806, the Portable Fuel Container Safety Act of 2019,
submitted by Ms. Schakowsky.................................... 76
H.R. 2647, the Safer Occupancy Furniture Flammability Act
(SOFFA), submitted by Ms. Schakowsky........................... 83
H.R. 2211, the Stop Tip-overs of Unstable, Risky Dressers on
Youth (STURDY) Act, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky................ 89
H.R. ___, the Safe Cribs Act of 2019, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky 94
H.R. ___, the Focusing Attention on Safety Transparency and
Effective Recalls (FASTER) Act, submitted by Mrs. Rodgers...... 96
Statement of the Honorable Mike Thompson, a Representative in
Congress from the State of California, submitted by Ms.
Schakowsky..................................................... 101
Statement of Torine Creppy, President, Safe Kids Worldwide, June
13, 2019, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky.......................... 102
Letter of June 13, 2019, from Graham Owens, Director, Legal and
Regulatory Policy, National Association of Manufacturers, to
Ms. Schakowsky and Mrs. Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky... 108
----------
\1\ The information has been retained in committee files and also is
available at https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/
ByEvent.aspx?EventID=109635.
Letter of June 13, 2019, from Jennifer Loesch, Chief Executive
Officer, BreathableBaby, LLC, to Ms. Schakowsky and Mrs.
Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky........................... 110
Statement of American Home Furnishings Alliance, June 13, 2019,
submitted by Ms. Schakowsky.................................... 113
Article of May 30, 2019, ``Fisher-Price invented a popular baby
sleeper without medical safety tests and kept selling it, even
as babies died,'' by Todd C. Frankel, Washington Post,
submitted by Ms. Schakowsky.................................... 119
Letter of June 13, 2019, from Nancy Cowles, et al., Kids In
Danger and Consumer Federation of America, to Ms. Schakowsky
and Mrs. Rodgers, submitted by Ms. Schakowsky.................. 127
Letter of April 11, 2019, from Don Erickson, Chief Executive
Officer, Security Industry Association, to Ms. Kuster,
submitted by Ms. Kuster........................................ 131
Letter of March 20, 2019, from Safe Kids Worldwide to Ms. Kuster
and Mr. Carter, submitted by Ms. Kuster........................ 132
KEEPING KIDS AND CONSUMERS SAFE FROM DANGEROUS PRODUCTS
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 2019
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:29 a.m., in
the John D. Dingell Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building,
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Members present: Representatives Schakowsky, Kelly,
O'Halleran, Cardenas, Blunt Rochester, Soto, Matsui, McNerney,
Dingell, Pallone (ex officio), Rodgers (subcommittee ranking
member), Upton, Burgess, Latta, Guthrie, Bucshon, Hudson,
Carter, and Walden (ex officio).
Also present: Representatives Kuster and Griffith.
Staff present: Alex Chasick, Counsel; Evan Gilbert, Deputy
Press Secretary; Lisa Goldman, Senior Counsel; Waverly Gordon,
Deputy Chief Counsel; Alex Hoehn-Saric, Chief Counsel,
Communications and Consumer Protection; Zach Kahan, Outreach
and Member Service Coordinator; Alivia Roberts, Press
Assistant; Chloe Rodriguez, Policy Analyst; Sydney Terry,
Policy Coordinator; Jordan Davis, Minority Senior Advisor;
Margaret Tucker Fogarty, Minority Legislative Clerk/Press
Assistant; Melissa Froelich, Minority Chief Counsel, Consumer
Protection and Commerce; Peter Kielty, Minority General
Counsel; and Bijan Koohmaraie, Minority Counsel, Consumer
Protection and Commerce.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAN SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Ms. Schakowsky. Good morning, everyone. The Subcommittee on
Consumer Protection and Commerce will now come to order.
We are going to hopefully move pretty quickly through
opening statements, because we are going to be called to the
floor before too long for a long series of votes, and I really
want to hear our witnesses.
You know, the American people are often skeptical of what
does government do for them. And I just feel so proud and so
lucky to be on this subcommittee, because the kinds of things
we are talking about today are about saving lives, and we are
actually going to make a difference in the lives of everyday
Americans.
I appreciate so much our witnesses for being here today.
We are going to consider seven bills that aim at protecting
consumers and, yes, saving lives. This subcommittee's vice
chair, for example, Tony Cardenas, introduced the Safe Sleep
Act of 2019, which would ban inclined sleep products.
You know, I wrote to the Chairman of the Consumer Product
Safety Commission, Chairman Buerkle, in April asking to recall
this Rock 'n Play, which, gratefully, she did. But there are
other inclined sleep products out there that are a risk, so I
am very grateful to Congressman Cardenas for introducing this
important legislation.
I want to thank Annie Kuster, who has waived onto the
subcommittee today. She and Buddy Carter, a member of this
subcommittee, have introduced the Nicholas and Zachary Burt
Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Act. Those are two brothers who died.
And we want to prevent that, and this would establish a CPSC
grant program for States to install carbon monoxide detectors
in childcare facilities, senior citizen centers, and homes for
low-income families or seniors.
Mike Thompson and David Joyce, who, though they don't serve
on this committee, have introduced an important bill that we
will be considering, the Portable Fuel Container Safety Act,
which would direct the Consumer Product Safety Commission to
establish a mandatory standard for flame-mitigation devices in
portable fuel containers.
Doris Matsui and Morgan Griffith introduced the Safer
Occupancy Furniture Flammability Act, otherwise known as SOFFA,
which would adopt the California standard for upholstered
furniture flammability.
I have introduced two bills. The first is the STURDY Act,
which would direct the CPSC to enact a mandatory standard to
prevent furniture tipovers.
Every hour of every day, common pieces of furniture, like
clothing storage units, dressers, and chests, tip and tilt and
fall. And, unfortunately, according to the CPSC, tipovers
inflict around three injuries per hour in the United States.
And we are going to hear worse today from Crystal, from Ms.
Ellis.
In 2020 alone, over 2 million units of children's products
faced recall, and nursery furniture was the leading category.
CPSC rulemaking cannot move fast enough. In the last 10
years, the CPSC finalized only one mandatory safety standard.
We certainly need to speed that up. And in the meantime, we
need to pass legislation.
The second bill that I have introduced this week, with my
friends from Chicago, Congresswoman Robin Kelly and Congressman
Bobby Rush, is the Safe Cribs Act, which would ban crib
bumpers. The American Academy of Pediatrics safe sleep
recommends that infants sleep on flat, firm surfaces and does
not recommend the use of crib bumpers. Families need that right
now.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Schakowsky follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jan Schakowsky
Good morning. I am humbled by chairing this subcommittee as
we discuss legislative solutions that can save lives.
This is a big deal. Protecting consumers is what drew me to
public life.
And today, we are considering 7 bills that aim to protect
consumers and save lives. I am the lead author of two of these
bills.
This subcommittee's vice chair, Tony Cardenas, introduced
the Safe Sleep Act of 2019, which would ban inclined sleep
products. I wrote Acting CPSC Chairwoman Buerkle in April,
asking her to recall the Rock 'n Play, which she did, but there
are other inclined sleepers that pose a risk. So I am grateful
to you, my friend, for introducing this important piece of
legislation. We must get these products off the market and save
babies' lives.
I would like to ask for unanimous consent to insert for the
record this May 30th Washington Post article. (So ordered.)
Annie Kuster, who has waived onto this subcommittee today,
and Buddy Carter, a member of this subcommittee, introduced the
Nicholas and Zachary Burt Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Act. This
would establish a CPSC grant program for States to install
carbon monoxide detectors in childcare facilities, senior
centers, and homes for low-income families or seniors.
Mike Thompson and David Joyce, who do not serve on this
committee, introduced the Portable Fuel Safety Container Safety
Act, which would direct CPSC to establish a mandatory standard
for flame mitigation devices in portable fuel containers.
Doris Matsui and Morgan Griffith introduced the Safer
Occupancy Furniture Flammability Act, which would adopt the
California standard for upholstered furniture flammability.
Which brings me to the two pieces of legislation I have
introduced. The first is the STURDY Act, which would direct
CPSC to enact a mandatory standard to prevent furniture
tipovers.
Every hour, of every day, common pieces of furniture like
clothing storage units, dressers, and chests tip, tilt, and
fall. According to the CPSC, tipovers inflict around 3 injuries
per hour, and cause hundreds of avoidable child fatalities.
Product experts and parental groups agree: tipover injuries are
preventable, but current industry standards are not enough.
In 2018 alone, over 2 million units of children's products
faced recall, and nursery furniture was the leading category.
CPSC rulemaking cannot move fast enough. In the last 10 years,
the CPSC finalized only one mandatory safety standard.
The second bill, introduced earlier this week with my
friends from Chicago, Bobby Rush and Robin Kelly, is the Safe
Cribs Act, which would ban crib bumpers. The American Academy
of Pediatrics' (AAP) safe sleep recommendations call for
infants to sleep on a firm, flat surface and does not recommend
the use of crib bumpers due to risk of suffocation. CPSC, for
its part, has been working on safety standards for crib bumpers
since 2012, but it is not clear when, if ever, they will adopt
a standard. Families need this legislation!
Finally, Ranking Member Rodgers introduced the FASTER Act
to enable businesses to recall potentially hazardous products
via notification to the CPSC. I look forward to hearing more
about the bill.
I appreciate the witnesses testifying today on these
important bills and hope that we can move forward on a
bipartisan basis in the near future.
Ms. Schakowsky. So I am going to recognize our ranking
member, who has introduced an important piece of legislation,
the FASTER Act. I am sure she will talk about that.
And I recognize you for 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, A
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome, everyone, to the Consumer Protection and Commerce
Subcommittee hearing. Today marks our first legislative
hearing, and we are here to discuss important issues for
people's safety.
I want to thank Chair Schakowsky for her leadership to keep
the lines of communication open. We have talked a lot about the
importance of bipartisan work, which is why I was surprised by
the majority's action leading up to the hearing.
Regarding my bill, it was my understanding that to speed up
the Fast-Track process, recall process, that it would be
considered as a draft, discussion draft, as we continued our
negotiations.
However, this week our staff was informed that the E&C will
not consider staff drafts for legislative hearings. So I was a
bit bewildered when yesterday the Health Subcommittee did just
that with the No Surprise Act.
As all Members can appreciate, finding out hours before a
deadline that a bill needs to be introduced does not give us
the time to incorporate the feedback, find bipartisan
cosponsors, or do any of the proper work required to introduce
a bill.
All of that said, I did quickly introduce my bill before
today's hearing, and I am committed to finding a bipartisan
consensus to improve it.
I am glad the majority and I am grateful that the majority
is including it today for consideration. A bipartisan approach
moving forward not only gives our solutions their best chance
to become law, it also gives the public the best chance of
seeing results that keep them safe.
The CPSC's mission is to protect people against risk of
injuries and deaths associated with consumer products. And,
while we cannot protect everyone from every harm, it is our job
to address substantial hazards without creating too many
opportunities for dangerous work-arounds.
For example, one of the bills today deals with crib
bumpers, and it is critical that we examine what States have
done in this space. We don't want to create the risk of parents
putting blankets or pillows, which pose a suffocating danger,
back in the crib, because they can't access safe mesh bumpers.
Earlier this Congress, this subcommittee held an oversight
hearing with Acting Chair Buerkle and the four Commissioners of
the CPSC. Chair Buerkle is steadfast in her efforts to advance
the safety mission of the agency. And once again, I urge my
Senate colleagues to confirm her.
The CPSC, though small in size, has a broad jurisdiction
over more than 15,000 products that are used every day in our
homes, schools, businesses.
Recently we have heard concerns with the slow speed of the
existing Fast-Track Recall Program. In some cases, recalls are
taking several months. In fact, Mr. Samuels highlights examples
in his testimony that prove why we should speed things up,
examples like a 2-week approval process for recall press
releases, debating the exact phrases on social media posts, or
requiring toll-free numbers, which may have made sense in the
1990s when Fast-Track was created, but not anymore.
The Fast-Track Recall Program is intended to protect people
by encouraging companies to come forward with dangerous
products so they can work with an agency. But like many things
in Washington, DC, Fast-Track is now slow because of an
outdated bureaucracy. It is a program from 1995 that isn't
functioning today. As a result, some companies have bypassed it
completely, leaving the CPSC out of the process. So it is time
for an update.
And it is important to maintain the connections between the
CPSC and good actors in industry, especially when it means
removing hazardous products from our homes to keep our kids out
of harm's way.
That is why I have introduced the Focusing Attention on
Safety Transparency and Effective Recalls, or the FASTER Act,
H.R. 3169. My solution will make Fast-Track work in the 21st
century by giving consumers notice more quickly when a company
submits a specific recall plan and by learning from the
company-initiated recall processes at NHTSA and the FDA. It
allows a business to notify the Commission of a recall and
directs the agency to promptly issue a notice. No more press
release delays, no more hangups over toll-free numbers.
For parents who own dangerous baby cribs and rockers, for
households with appliances that are a fire risk, for our
children with toys that are a choking hazard, these
bureaucratic delays cannot happen.
The FASTER Act will get these products out of our homes and
off the shelves as quickly as possible, and will still give the
Commission the flexibility it needs to ensure a company remedy
is right and, if necessary, to initiate its own recall, and
make sure that when something goes wrong, there is a process in
place for that recall to happen. And I hope that we can work in
a bipartisan way to find a solution.
There are many other important issues, such as the portable
fuel container safety standard. I had the chance to sit down
with Ms. Ellis on the issue of the tipovers.
I appreciate everyone being here today, all of the
witnesses, and look forward to your testimony and working
through all of these issues.
And I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Welcome to the Consumer Protection and Commerce
Subcommittee hearing. Today marks our first legislative
hearing, and we're here to discuss important issues for
people's safety.
I want to thank Chair Schakowsky for her leadership to keep
the lines of communication open.
We have talked a lot about the importance of bipartisan
work--which is why I was surprised by the majority's actions
leading up to this hearing.
It was my understanding that my bill--to speed up the fast
track recall process--was to be considered as a discussion
draft as we continue our negotiations.
However, this week our staff was informed that E&C will not
consider staff drafts for legislative hearings.
So, I was bewildered when yesterday the Health Subcommittee
did just that with the No Surprise Act.
As all Members can appreciate, finding out hours before a
deadline that a bill needs to be introduced does not give us
time to incorporate feedback, find bipartisan cosponsors, or do
any of the proper work required to introduce a bill.
All that said, I did quickly introduce my bill before
today's hearing and I'm committed to finding bipartisan
consensus to improve it.
I am glad the majority is including it for consideration
today.
A bipartisan approach moving forward not only gives our
solutions their best chance to become law, but also gives the
public the best chance of seeing results that keep them safe.
The CPSC's mission is to protect people against risks of
injuries and deaths associated with consumer products.
While we cannot protect everyone from every harm, it's our
job to addresssubstantial hazards without creating too many
opportunities for dangerous work-arounds.
For example, one of the bills today deals with crib
bumpers.
It's critical we examine what States have done in this
space so we don't create the risk of parents putting blankets
or pillows--which pose a suffocating danger--back in the crib
because they can't access safe mesh bumpers.
Earlier this Congress, this subcommittee held an oversight
hearing with Acting Chair Buerkle and the four Commissioners of
the CPSC.
Chair Buerkle is steadfast in her efforts to advance the
safety mission of the agency, and I once again urge my Senate
colleagues to confirm her.
The CPSC, though small in size, has broad jurisdiction over
more than 15,000 products that are used every day in our homes,
schools, and businesses.
Recently we've heard concerns with the slow speed of the
existing Fast-Track Recall Program.
In some cases, recalls are taking several months.
In fact, Mr. Samuels highlights examples in his testimony
that prove why we should speed things up.
Examples like a 2-week approval process for recall press
releases debating the exact phrases of social media posts and
requiring toll-free numbers, which may have made sense in the
'90s when Fast-Track was created--but not anymore.
The Fast-Track Recall Program is intended to protect people
by encouragingcompanies to come forward with dangerous products
so they can work with theagency.
But like many things in Washington, DC, Fast-Track is now
slow because of an outdated bureaucracy.
It's a program from 1995 that isn't functioning today.
As a result, some companies have bypassed it completely,
leaving the CPSC out of the process.
So, it's time for an update.
It's important to maintain the connections between the CPSC
and good actors in industry especially when it means removing
hazardous products from our homes to keep our kids out of
harm's way.
That is why I've introduced the Focusing Attention on
Safety Transparency and Effective Recalls or the FASTER Act,
H.R. 3169.
My solution will make Fast-Track work in the 21st century
by giving consumers notice more quickly when a company submits
a specific recall plan to the CPSC and by learning from the
company-initiated recall processes at NHTSA and the FDA.
It allows a business to notify the Commission of a recall
and directs the agency to promptly issue a notice.
No more press release delays, and no more hangups over
toll-free numbers.
For parents who own dangerous baby cribs and rockers for
households with appliances that are a fire risk and for our
children with toys that are a choking hazard, these
bureaucratic delays cannot happen.
The FASTER Act will get these products out of our homes and
off the shelves as quickly as possible and it will still give
the Commission the flexibility it needs to ensure a company
remedy is right and--if necessary--initiate its own recall.
It makes sure that when something goes wrong there's a
process in place for recalls to happen and for them to happen
fast.
I hope we can work in a bipartisan way on this solution
that can save lives as well as the many other important issues
we will discuss today, such as H.R. 806, the Portable Fuel
Container Safety Act.
I thank our witnesses for being here today and look forward
to your testimony.
Ms. Schakowsky. The gentlelady yields back.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Pallone, chairman of the full
committee, for 5 minutes for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Two months ago, this subcommittee discussed whether the
Consumer Product Safety Commission is fulfilling its mission of
protecting consumers. When CPSC is at its best, it is working
proactively to eliminate hazards and adopt strong safety
standards, but as we heard from many of our witnesses, and even
some Commissioners, CPSC has not been at its best lately.
To put it simply, we are here today to discuss important
consumer protection legislation that is necessary because CPSC
has not done its job. CPSC has let industry set its own rules,
and the results have been predictably disastrous.
Fisher-Price designed, marketed, and sold the Rock 'n Play
Sleeper, a product whose intended use went against the advice
of pediatricians. It received an exemption from CPSC's
mandatory safety standards and helped write the voluntary
standard that it followed instead. A decade later, Fisher-Price
admitted that it was aware of at least 32 infants who had died
in the product and agreed to recall all 4.17 million Rock 'n
Play Sleepers. A similar product from Kids II was recalled as
well after at least five deaths were reported.
CPSC knew about the dangers and incidents well before the
recall, but didn't take action. These recalls were announced
shortly after this subcommittee scheduled an oversight hearing
of CPSC, and after CPSC inadvertently provided Consumer Reports
with details of the infant deaths in these products, which it
had previously refused to disclose.
So it should not take a congressional hearing or an
accidental disclosure of information to get a deadly product
off the shelves. This is CPSC's job and should be their top
priority.
We are also here today because, even when CPSC wants to
act, its process for issuing standards is so tedious that years
and years will go by before any standards are in place. Kids
and consumers simply cannot afford to wait that long. A
bipartisan majority of the Commission agrees that a mandatory
standard for furniture tipover is necessary, but getting the
rule in place would take years due to CPSC's complex rulemaking
procedures.
Nearly every safety rule CPSC has issued over the last
decade for other products used a streamlined process that
Congress authorized under the bipartisan Consumer Product
Safety Improvement Act. So today we are considering bills that
would direct CPSC to follow a similar process to address
hazards from furniture tipover and portable fuel containers.
Product safety is not a partisan issue, and I am pleased to
see that a number of these bills are supported by both
Democrats and Republicans. Passing these bills will get safety
standards in place faster and save lives. I look forward to
working with my colleagues to quickly move them forward.
But Congress should not have to pass a law telling CPSC to
address every dangerous product that is on the market. If
CPSC's authority doesn't allow it to respond quickly and
completely to new hazards, we should consider revising that
authority.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.
Two months ago, this subcommittee discussed whether the
Consumer Product Safety Commission is fulfilling its mission of
protecting consumers. When CPSC is at its best, it is working
proactively to eliminate hazards and adopt strong safety
standards. But as we heard from many of our witnesses, and even
some Commissioners, CPSC has not been at its best lately.
To put it simply: We are here today to discuss important
consumer protection legislation that is necessary because CPSC
has not done its job. CPSC has let industry set its own rules,
and the results have been predictably disastrous. Fisher-Price
designed, marketed, and sold the Rock 'n Play Sleeper, a
product whose intended use went against the advice of
pediatricians. It received an exemption from CPSC's mandatory
safety standards and helped write the voluntary standard that
it followed instead. A decade later, Fisher-Price admitted that
it was aware of at least 32 infants who had died in the product
and agreed to recall all 4.7 million Rock 'n Play Sleepers. A
similar product from Kids II was recalled as well, after at
least five deaths were reported.
CPSC knew about the dangers and incidents well before the
recall but didn't take action. These recalls were announced
shortly after this subcommittee scheduled an oversight hearing
of CPSC, and after CPSC inadvertently provided Consumer Reports
with details of the infant deaths in these products, which it
had previously refused to disclose. It should not take a
congressional hearing or an accidental disclosure of
information to get deadly products off the shelves. This is
CPSC's job and should be their top priority.
We are also here today because, even when CPSC wants to
act, its process for issuing standards is so tedious that years
and years will go by before any standards are in place. Kids
and consumers simply cannot afford to wait that long. A
bipartisan majority of the Commission agrees that a mandatory
standard for furniture tipover is necessary, but getting a rule
in place would take years due to CPSC's complex rulemaking
procedures. Nearly every safety rule CPSC has issued over the
last decade instead used a streamlined process that Congress
authorized under the bipartisan Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act.
Today, we are considering bills that would direct CPSC to
follow a similar process to address hazards from furniture
tipover and portable fuel containers. Product safety is not a
partisan issue and I am pleased to see that a number of these
bills are supported by both Democrats and Republicans. Passing
these bills will get safety standards in place faster and save
lives. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly
move them forward.
But Congress should not have to pass a law telling CPSC to
address every dangerous product that is on the market. If
CPSC's authority doesn't allow it to respond quickly and
completely to new hazards, we should consider revising that
authority.
I now would like to yield a minute to Rep. Cardenas.
I now would like to yield a minute to Rep. Kuster.
Thank you, and I yield back my time.
Mr. Pallone. I have a couple minutes left. I would like to
yield one to Mr. Cardenas, and then the second one to
Representative Kuster. So we will start with yielding to Mr.
Cardenas for 1 minute. Oh, he is here.
Mr. Cardenas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I would like to thank Chairwoman Schakowsky for
bringing this important hearing to order.
This week, I introduced H.R. 3172, the Safe Sleep For
Babies Act, which bans the sale of inclined sleep products such
as the Fisher-Price Rock 'n Play. I introduced this bill
because babies have been dying unnecessarily since 2009. They
have been dying because companies decided making money was more
important than putting infants' lives in danger and because the
regulatory agency charged with protecting Americans decided to
be puppets for industry and stood by as more precious lives
were lost.
Was the Consumer Product Safety Commission waiting for a
higher body count before deciding to take action? I don't know.
There is plenty of blame to go around, but one major failing I
see is that of the CPSC. And even with two recent recalls,
these products made by other companies are still available on
the market.
As a grandparent, it is just appalling. I think that we
should be putting children's lives before profits, and we have
a lot of work to do.
And with the limited time, I would just like to say thank
you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And I yield back.
Mr. Pallone. And I yield now to Ms. Kuster.
Ms. Kuster. Thank you, Chairman Pallone and Chairwoman
Schakowsky, for convening this important hearing today.
As a mother of two boys, I know there is nothing more
important than keeping our children and loved ones safe. From a
young age, we tell children to be careful crossing the street,
to always wear seatbelts, and to handle sharp objects with
care.
Yet there are some threats that our loved ones cannot see.
One of the most dangerous is carbon monoxide, which is the
leading cause of accidental poisonous deaths in the United
States.
So I appreciate today's hearing discussing my bill, H.R.
1618, the Zachary and Nicholas Burt Carbon Monoxide Poisoning
Prevention Act, which I introduced with my Republican colleague
Representative Buddy Carter. This legislation incentivizes
States to pass laws requiring carbon monoxide alarms in
schools, homes, and commercial lodgings, and creates a grant
program to install carbon monoxide alarms in low-income and
elderly housing. It will save lives, and to that end, I seek
unanimous consent to enter into the record letters of support
for the Carbon Monoxide Prevention Act from the Security
Industry Association and Safe Kids Worldwide.
And I yield back my time.
Ms. Schakowsky. Without objection, we will put that
information into the record.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Ms. Kuster. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Schakowsky. And now I would like to recognize the
ranking member, Mr. Walden, for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Mr. Walden. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to say good
morning to you and everyone on the committee and to our
witnesses today. We appreciate and will benefit from your
testimony as we discuss these bills in the first legislative
hearing of the year for this sub.
This hearing is important for a couple of reasons: first, I
think the opportunity to discuss the bills under consideration
and the policies to improve the safety of products and keep
kids and consumers safe--this is a goal we all share; and
second, the opportunity to talk directly to the public about
the risks and how they can make sure that they are taking steps
to protect themselves and their families.
I am grateful that Representative Rodgers has introduced
your bill, Cathy, because, as we will hear again today, the
Fast-Track Recall Program for good actors who just want to get
information to their customers faster has slowed down a lot in
recent years. We really do need to find a solution here, and I
think we can and will. I understand there is a lot of
bipartisan support for this proposal, and I look forward to
hearing from our witnesses about it.
In April, we heard directly from the CPSC Commissioners and
a number of interested parties about ongoing product-specific
issues at the agency, as well as ways in which we can improve
some of the agency processes. We have heard from many
stakeholders about concerns of the existing Fast-Track Recall
Program at the agency.
It exists, too, as the title of this hearing suggests--to
keep kids and consumers safe, that is the goal--by removing
potentially hazardous products from the marketplace as quickly
and efficiently as possible. And it does not apply to just one
or two products. It applies to all 15,000 product categories in
the CPSC's jurisdiction.
So, as I mentioned earlier, the Fast-Track program has
slowed greatly for unnecessary layers of bureaucracy that, in
the examples we will hear today, do not add substantially to
the benefit of consumers and further delay for weeks, if not
months, when consumers are told about potentially dangerous
products. If a company wants to recall a product, shouldn't we
be encouraging them to work with the CPSC and not go around the
agency?
So I think the answer is clearly yes. This is why I
appreciate the work of Mrs. Rodgers, that she has put into the
FASTER Act, to solicit comments and ideas on how to improve
this previously award-winning recall program.
This bill creates a process that removes the unnecessary
red tape slowing down recalls today. It mirrors programs that
are already working at the FDA and at the NHTSA.
As I indicated earlier, we are committed to working on the
bill with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and I
think we can find a bipartisan solution to this critical issue.
So I want to applaud Mrs. Rodgers for her thoughtful
approach and for helping to advance safety. I urge my
colleagues on the committee to support H.R. 3169 as we move
forward.
One last point I would like to make is to take this
opportunity to reiterate my strong support for Acting Chair
Buerkle to be confirmed by the Senate as chair for her new term
at the CPSC. She is well positioned to lead this critical
agency and has demonstrated her commitment to protect consumers
throughout her career of public service. So I am hopeful that
our Senate colleagues, who I am sure are dialed in to our
hearing today and hanging on every one of our words, will act
so we can get a chair there and confirmed.
And with that, Madam Chair, thanks for your leadership on
all of these consumer product safety issues over the years. I
know it is a great passion of yours, and you have saved lives
as a result of your work, and we want to be partners moving
forward.
So, with that, unless anyone else wants the remainder of my
time, I would be happy to yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Greg Walden
Good morning and welcome to the first Consumer Protection
and Commerce Subcommittee legislative hearing of the year.
Today, we will discuss several bills--all with the same
objective: improving consumer safety.
This hearing is important for two reasons:
First, the opportunity to discuss the bills under
consideration and policies to improve the safety of products
and keep kids and consumers safe.
And, second, the opportunity to talk directly to the public
about risks and how they can make sure they are taking steps to
protect themselves and their families.
I am grateful that Rep. Rodgers introduced the bill,
because as we will hear again today, the Fast-Track Recall
Program--for good actors who just want to get information to
their customers faster--has slowed down a lot in recent years
and we should find a solution. I understand there is a lot of
bipartisan support for this proposal and I look forward to
hearing from the witnesses.
In April, we heard directly from the CPSC Commissioners and
a number of interested parties about ongoing product-specific
issues at the agency as well as ways in which we can improve
some of the agency processes.
We have heard from many stakeholders about concerns with
the existing Fast-Track Recall Program at the agency. It exists
to--as the title of this hearing suggests--to keep kids and
consumers safe--by removing potentially hazardous products from
the marketplace as quickly and efficiently as possible. And it
does not apply to just one or two products--it applies to all
15,000 product categories in the CPSC's jurisdiction.
As I mentioned earlier, the Fast-Track program has slowed
greatly from unnecessary layers of bureaucracy that, in the
examples we will hear today, do not add substantially to
benefit consumers, and delay for weeks if not months, when
consumers are told about potentially dangerous products.
If a company wants to recall a product, shouldn't we be
encouraging them to work with the CPSC and not go around the
agency? I think the answer is clearly, yes. This is why I
appreciate the work Rep. Rodgers has put into the FASTER Act to
solicit comments and ideas on how to improve this previously
award-winning recall program.
This bill creates a process that removes the unnecessary
red tape slowing down recalls today, and mirrors programs that
are already working at the FDA and NHTSA. As I indicated
earlier, we are committed to working on the bill with our
colleagues across the aisle to hopefully find a good bipartisan
solution to this critical issue.
I want to applaud Ms. Rodgers for this thoughtful approach
and for helping advance safety and I urge all of my colleagues
on this committee to support H.R. 3169 as we move forward.
One last point, I would like to take this opportunity to
reiterate my strong support for Acting Chair Buerkle to be
confirmed by the Senate as chair and for her new term at the
CPSC. She is well positioned to lead this critical safety
agency and has demonstrated her commitment to protect consumers
throughout her career of public service. I urge my Senate
colleagues to confirm her as soon as possible.
Thank you and I yield back.
Ms. Schakowsky. I thank the gentleman for your kind words,
and the gentleman yields back.
I would like to remind all Members that, pursuant to
committee rules, all Members' written opening statements shall
be made part of the record.
And now it is my honor to introduce the witnesses today,
starting right to left.
Let me introduce Mr. Will Wallace, the manager, home and
product policy, from Consumer Reports.
Ms. Crystal Ellis, founding member of Parents Against Tip-
Overs.
I especially want to thank you for being here today. It
would have been your son's seventh birthday, I understand,
today.
I want to thank Mr. Chris Parsons, president of the
Minnesota Professional Fire Fighters Association.
We thank you so much for traveling here.
Mr. Charles Samuels, who is a member of Mintz Law Firm.
Thank you for being here.
And we absolutely look forward to the testimony.
At this time, the Chair will now recognize each of the
witnesses for 5 minutes to provide their opening statements.
Before we begin, I just want to make sure I explain the
lighting system. Most of you probably understand. But in front
of you are a series of lights. The light will initially be
green at the start of your opening statement. The light will
turn yellow when you have 1 minute remaining. Please begin to
wrap up your testimony at that point. The light will turn red
when your time has expired. Particularly because of the press
of votes that are coming up, I hope you will abide by that.
And, again, if you don't mind, I am going to start right to
left.
Mr. Wallace, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF WILLIAM WALLACE, MANAGER, HOME AND SAFETY POLICY,
CONSUMER REPORTS; CRYSTAL ELLIS, FOUNDING MEMBER, PARENTS
AGAINST TIP-OVERS; CHRISTOPHER PARSONS, PRESIDENT, MINNESOTA
PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS; CHARLES A. SAMUELS, MEMBER, MINTZ
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM WALLACE
Mr. Wallace. Good morning, Chairwoman Schakowsky, Ranking
Member Rodgers, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for
the opportunity to be here on behalf of Consumer Reports, the
independent nonprofit member organization that works side by
side with consumers for truth, transparency, and fairness in
the marketplace.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission is a critical agency
with an indispensable public health and safety mission. It
plays a significant role in protecting U.S. consumers despite
lacking the appropriations, staff, and authorities it would
need to carry out all that it is capable of doing.
But we are here today because the CPSC and many
manufacturers have failed to protect our children and families.
They failed 2-year-old Camden Ellis of Snohomish, Washington,
2-year-old Conner DeLong of Lakeland, Florida, and in total at
least 206 children since the year 2000 who died under the
weight of a dresser or other clothing storage furniture,
despite manufacturers being able to build a more stable dresser
at the same price point.
As we document in detail in our written testimony, tipovers
are a hidden hazard. They send thousands of people to the
emergency room annually. Yet people often do not know the
danger, and dressers are particularly deadly.
CR's thorough 2-year investigation, including safety
research, testing, reporting, and a survey of consumers, has
found that industry's current voluntary stability standard is
inadequate to protect children, and a far stronger, mandatory
standard is both feasible and necessary.
The CPSC and industry failed 5-month-old Ezra Overton of
Arlington, Virginia, and in total at least 37 infants who died
in inclined sleepers like the Fisher-Price Rock 'n Play,
marketed as a safe solution for weary parents. That is a
product that never should have been on the market, but was,
because of an industry-driven carve-out from the CPSC's strong
bassinet standard.
The entire idea of an inclined sleeper conflicts with
American Academy of Pediatrics safe-sleep recommendations, and
the product category should be eliminated.
While we welcomed the recalls this spring that have
occurred, these particular recalls are not likely to be
especially effective at actually getting the products out of
homes.
The CPSC's steps to protect infants have repeatedly fallen
short. Only an erroneous data release to CR about which we
published stories revealing these deaths allowed the public to
know the breadth and severity of the danger.
And for too long, the Government and manufacturers have
failed the victims of crib bumpers, fires involving portable
fuel containers, carbon monoxide poisoning, and those who are
injured or killed by other kinds of consumer products.
We need a CPSC that puts the safety of the American public
first and is funded and empowered to do so. We need consumer
products companies with strong safety cultures that know that,
if they step out of line, they will have to face an active and
empowered agency.
But right now, we don't have either. That is why it is so
important for you to take the opportunity you have before you
to support the STURDY, Safe Sleep, Safe Cribs, Portable Fuel
Container Safety, and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Prevention
Acts, which will at least show that you put the safety of
American children and families first.
You also can reject the FASTER Act in its current form,
which would further disempower the CPSC and give recalling
companies more control over life-and-death decisions regarding
recall implementation.
As members continue to work on that legislation, in
particular, we would recommend speaking with those who have
significant experience from the consumer advocacy and consumer
safety side with respect to the recall implementation at the
FDA and at NHTSA. There are some significant concerns with how
that works.
Over the longer term, you have the opportunity to reshape
the CPSC, to eliminate provisions like Section 6(b), which
could easily have kept many of the inclined sleeper deaths
hidden if not for the CPSC's data release that occurred in
error, and to require much more proactive action, to put safety
first by CPSC leadership and companies alike.
Finally, while not on the agenda for today, we urge you to
support efforts to strengthen the appropriations and staff that
the CPSC receives.
Your children and families, your constituents, have had
enough of this failure. Every one of them--all Americans, in
fact--deserve so much more than they are getting today when it
comes to the safety of their homes and the products they buy,
and we look forward to working with you to protect them.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wallace follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Additional material submitted by Mr. Wallace has been
retained in committee files and also is available at https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=109635.]
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you for your testimony.
Now I introduce Ms. Ellis.
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CRYSTAL ELLIS
Ms. Ellis. Hello. My name is Crystal Ellis. I am an
elementary educator, mom, child safety advocate, representing
Parents Against Tip-Overs, an organization of families like
mine who have lost a child to furniture tipover.
I want to begin by saying thank you to each and every one
of you for allowing me the opportunity to speak today.
Today is a very difficult day for me. Today would be my son
Camden Ellis' seventh birthday. But, tragically, he was killed
5 years ago, on Father's Day, in a furniture tipover incident.
His three-drawer, just 30-and-three-quarter-inch-tall dresser
fell as he tried to reach inside to get his clothes, trapping
his neck between the drawers and suffocating him. He was unable
to cry for help, and we did not hear it fall.
His father found him when he went to get him up for
breakfast. I can still hear my husband's screams.
After trying my best to revive him with CPR and 4 days in a
coma at Seattle Children's, we had to say goodbye, donating his
organs to hopefully save another family from our fate.
At the time, I thought this was a freak accident, and I had
no idea that this was a danger in my home. When I discovered
that he was not only the seventh child to die because of the
negligence of this particular manufacturer, without a recall,
or that children were dying at the rate of 1 every 10 days from
furniture tipovers, I was absolutely devastated.
How was this possible? I had taken multiple getting-ready-
for-baby classes and childproofed my home. None of the
professional educators, healthcare providers, mom group
leaders, or parents had ever told me about the risk of dresser
tipovers killing my child.
I know that there are many other parents in this country
that also have no idea that their dresser is a risk. They
assume, as I did, that any product that is sold in the United
States of America has been vetted and tested by their
Government and would not be sold if it could kill us.
One death every 10 days is a crisis that needs to be
immediately addressed. It has already been 5 years since the
death of my son Camden, over 14 years since the death of Kim
Amato's daughter, Megan Beck, the earliest death in our group,
and not enough has been done to keep children safe today. I
believe a mandatory standard that takes into account real-world
use by a child with dynamic testing would have saved my son.
We need the STURDY Act for many reasons. The first is the
lack of progress in working with manufacturers to get them to
do the right thing. Consumer advocates and parents have been
trying for almost 2 decades to strengthen the standard.
Manufacturers know how to solve this problem right now by
engineering the tipovers right out of the design.
PAT members continue to attend meetings and task groups
ready to dive in to improving the standard, but by multiple
accounts and measures, this is one of the most contentious
subcommittees, F15.42, overseen by ASTM. They have stalled for
years on addressing the furniture tipover issue. They keep
saying, ``We need more data.'' Their data is our dead and
injured children. We do not need more data.
Even with the devastating statistics we already have, we
also know the data is underreported. Most consumers do not know
who the CPSC is or the importance of reporting incidents of
faulty products to them. Every dresser that falls, at the rate
of one ER visit every 17 minutes, has the potential to be a
death or a life-altering injury.
Even with the chairman of the CPSC strongly urging these
manufacturers to stop stalling and take immediate action to
increase the standard, there were still dozens of negative
votes at the last ballot.
Some manufacturer members of the ASTM subcommittee have
argued we should make the current voluntary standard mandatory,
but we know the current standard is not enough. Proof of this
exists in the IKEA Hemnes dresser, which currently meets
voluntary tipover standards. It was responsible for the death
of 2-year-old Conner DeLong in Florida and was seen in a viral
video falling on 2-year-old twin brothers in Utah, both in
2017.
We are also concerned that the creation of a mandatory
standard from the current weak voluntary standard will make it
much more difficult to make the standard strong enough to
protect consumers.
Secondly, the CPSC, even though they have expressed that
tipovers are their number-one, highest-priority issue this
year, are still not using every tool available to them,
including Section 104 rulemaking and recalling every dresser
that does not meet the current weak voluntary standard.
Also, from participating in the ASTM meeting on May 10, I
strongly feel the manufacturers are not afraid of repercussions
from the CPSC. Between their small budget and their hands being
tied by the limitations from Section 6(b) of the Consumer
Product Safety Act, the manufacturers know they have time to
stall, time that will result in more deaths of children.
Today, Parents Against Tip-Overs is here to be a voice for
our children who have lost theirs, a voice for parents who are
home today acting as full-time caregivers for their children
who survived a tipover incident but have been left with life-
altering injuries, and a voice for parents who cannot find
theirs because they are overwhelmed by the darkness of grief
and sadness that we have all experienced.
I would like to make it clear that furniture tipover is not
a partisan issue. I assure you, furniture falls on both
Republican and Democratic children equally. Unstable furniture
does not discriminate.
Thank you again for allowing me to speak today, and I hope
you will join me in protecting children and families in this
country by supporting the STURDY Act.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ellis follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, Ms. Ellis. I think you are an
American hero, and I appreciate your testimony.
And now I am happy to introduce Mr. Parsons.
You are recognized for 5 minutes. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER PARSONS
Mr. Parsons. Thank you, Chairwoman Schakowsky, Ranking
Member McMorris Rodgers, and members of the subcommittee. I am
Christopher Parsons, president of the Minnesota Professional
Fire Fighters. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before
you on behalf of the International Association of Fire
Fighters, General President Harold Schaitberger, and the over
316,000 firefighters and emergency medical personnel who
comprise our union.
I serve as captain with the St. Paul, Minnesota, Fire
Department and have seen firsthand the unfortunate results of
lax consumer safety laws and enforcement in my community.
Inaction on these issues impacts not only the public, but also
injures firefighters.
I testify today to the fact that the Federal Government can
and should do more to help prevent tragedies and the loss of
health and life, and offer my full support for SOFFA, the
Portable Fuel Container Safety Act, and the Nicholas and
Zachary Burt Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Prevention Act.
In 2018, firefighters and paramedics responded to nearly
1.5 million working fires. With each response, firefighters
were exposed to large amounts of flame retardants. Once thought
to provide a measure of protection, flame retardants were
placed in furniture to meet an outdated 44-year-old standard
and, unfortunately, proved to be toxic when on fire.
According to numerous scientific studies, firefighters are
dying from cancer at an alarming rate. Studies by NIOSH and
others have found that firefighters have an increased risk of
dying from cancer as compared to the general population.
We know that, when burned, flame retardants emit cancer-
causing furans and dioxins into the air. A study of
firefighters' blood after working fires found levels of furans
and dioxins more than 100 times higher than the public.
We also know that flame retardants are not only toxic, but
also ineffective. One study concluded that fires involving
furniture treated with flame retardants only provided 3 extra
seconds of escape time while producing twice the amount of
smoke, 7 times the amount of carbon monoxide, and 80 times the
amount of soot compared to nontreated furniture. The toxic soup
inhibits occupants' escape from a burning building, adding
further risk of injury and death.
Given their toxicity and suspect value, we see no reason to
continue the use of toxic flame retardants. The IFF is pleased
to endorse SOFFA to make California Technical Bulletin 117-2013
a national standard, replacing an outdated open flame test,
which led to the use of toxic flame retardants in furniture,
with a more modern, realistic smolder test.
The 2013 California standard reduced the presence of flame
retardants, lessening the harmful impacts suffered by
firefighters exposed to such chemicals. By passing this bill,
Congress will extend these protections to firefighters
nationwide.
The IFF also supports the committee's efforts to update
fuel container standards. Each year, approximately 450 burn
victims will succumb to injuries sustained by a preventible
phenomenon known as flame jetting. Flame jetting occurs when
flammable vapors escape from an open nozzle and are ignited,
creating an explosive flame-thrower-type blaze.
I have witnessed flame jetting at a fire. The initial fire
was located on the exterior deck of a house, but the jetting
flame caused an immediate increase in the fire's intensity. The
jetting flame from a portable fuel container on the deck shot
through a doorway into the interior of the house and turned a
relatively uneventful fire into a prolonged and sustained
attack, causing significantly more damage than would have been
expected from the original fire.
For as little as 25 cents, manufacturers of portable
flammable liquid containers can add a flame arrestor to prevent
the rapid release of vapors that cause flame jetting. The
Portable Fuel Container Safety Act would direct the
installation of flame arrestors in all containers manufactured
to hold flammable liquids.
Finally, the IFF is pleased to support the Nicholas and
Zachary Burt Memorial Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Prevention Act.
Each year, carbon monoxide poisoning results in more than
20,000 emergency room visits and 400 deaths nationwide. In
1995, Minnesotans Nicholas and Zachary Burt tragically died in
their beds as a result of carbon monoxide poisoning.
Like the Rochester firefighters that responded to the
Burts' tragic incident, I, too, have witnessed the deadly
effects of carbon monoxide firsthand when responding to a St.
Paul senior citizen who had passed away from carbon monoxide
poisoning.
Fatalities like these are avoidable with the installation
of an inexpensive working carbon monoxide detector in the home.
Despite the clear dangers of carbon monoxide, many people
remain unaware of the need for carbon monoxide detectors. This
bill aims to change that. It will assist States in delivering
public education on the dangers of carbon monoxide poisoning
while simultaneously providing grants to purchase and install
detectors in the homes of elderly and low-income citizens and
schools.
In conclusion, I and the International Association of Fire
Fighters express our support for these three important public
safety bills, and I am happy to answer any questions you may
have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Parsons follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you. I think, as first responders,
that we think all firefighters are heroes as well. So thank
you.
And, Mr. Samuels, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES A. SAMUELS
Mr. Samuels. Chair Schakowsky, Ranking Member Rodgers, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to
testify about the CPSC Fast-Track Recall Program. I am Chuck
Samuels, and I have practiced CPSC law for 35 years.
The work of this small agency is critical to the safety of
Americans. The vast majority of industry rightfully considers
product safety a preeminent value. Companies design and build
products to be safe. Sometimes their efforts fail and recalls
are required.
Thank you, Representative Rodgers, for introducing H.R.
3169, the FASTER Act, a thoughtful start to improving Fast-
Track. Fast-Track incentivizes companies to quickly remove
unsafe products from the marketplace and consumers' homes.
Fast-Track is a significant innovation. Unfortunately, it
has become ossified. It should not be allowed to languish. It
should be revitalized.
To participate in Fast-Track, a business must be prepared
to implement a corrective action plan, including a consumer-
level recall within 20 working days of submitting a Fast-Track
report. The first must immediately stop sale and distribution
of the product. About one-third of corrective actions have been
Fast-Tracks.
The program also provides benefits to firms. By removing
the product from commerce quickly, the potential for injuries
and product liability claims is reduced and CPSC will not make
a preliminary determination that the product contains a defect
that creates a substantial product hazard.
A Fast-Track corrective action plan includes a remedy, a
joint news release with CPSC, other customer-level
communications, communications through the distribution chain,
and a reverse logistics plan.
This is a significant amount of work and requires major
planning by the company and others. It also requires--and here
is the hangup--timely review and approval by the CPSC. If that
review is not forthcoming, then all components of a corrective
action plan languish, and the Fast-Track is no longer fast.
What I have seen over the years is the process slows down
considerably because of prolonged examination and back and
forth, both internal and between staff and firms, regarding the
components of the recall, and especially the press release or
other communication. This emphasizes one-size-fits-all over the
need for quickly getting safety information to consumers.
Because Fast-Track is no longer fast, some companies are
bypassing it and opting for the conventional approach to CPSC,
working with Health Canada more quickly than CPSC, or
announcing the recall on their own without CPSC.
This situation is not the fault of any particular CPSC
administration or staff, but rather the natural
bureaucratization of a program, and agency concern that it not
be criticized.
I have seen delays due to additional information requests,
long CPSC reviews of data and nonsubstantive back and forth
about press releases and other communications. Whether through
lack of resources or internal sign-off requirements, this can
take weeks.
I have also experienced significant delays in the recall
announcement due to additional information requests and
customer notification letter revisions which were not
substantive.
None of these minor agreements are worth lengthy delays.
The FASTER Act speeds up things. If a company provides the
required information, then the Commission shall promptly post
the notice on the Commission's website.
The bill has safeguards. If the Commission obtains
information that the remedy provided in a recall is inadequate
to address the product hazard, it will investigate. This should
be very rare because companies have an interest in ensuring the
success of their recalls.
This legislation is informed by recalls under FDA and
NHTSA. They do not micromanage recalls, and their approach is
successful.
We must make sure that the bill language doesn't result in
the premature public posting of information about a recall
before the company is ready to launch. It is frustrating and
creates anxiety among consumers to learn about a recall and
then have to wait for lengthy periods before they can receive
appropriate relief.
We also need to make sure that we are not providing the
Commission such great discretion that companies will fear that
they will have to undertake multiple recalls. This would freeze
the program.
The thrust of the FASTER Act is that the necessary
information can get out to consumers quickly, and consumers can
act as part of the recall or on their own to protect themselves
and their families. If the company has proposed a remedy that
is unsafe, then of course the Commission must have the
authority to protect the public.
I hope the subcommittee will use this bill as a basis for
engagement with all the stakeholders, including the CPSC.
Undoubtedly, alternative language will be offered, which we
will need to consider.
Thank you, and I would be very pleased to answer any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Samuels follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you so much, Mr. Samuels, and thank
you for being within the time, too. Appreciate that.
We have now concluded the witness opening statements for
our first panel. We now move to Member questions. Each Member
will have 5 minutes to ask questions of our witnesses. I will
start by asking some questions.
Ms. Ellis, again, I just can't thank you enough. It takes
great courage for you to be here.
What I wanted to have you elaborate on is, why can't we
just rely on voluntary standards that are being developed? Two
parts, both the standard itself and also the voluntary part of
that. Love your comments.
Ms. Ellis. Thank you.
So, to address the issue of voluntary standard: First and
foremost, the voluntary standard that we have currently is
still allowing children to be injured and to die. Conner DeLong
is an example, and the twins in Utah are another example. I am
so grateful that they are OK, but it shows that the standard is
not OK.
Secondly, a voluntary standard, to be honest, isn't even
wanted by industry. The compliant industry folks want a
mandatory standard so that other people, other industry
members, will be held accountable and held to the same
standard.
So it is something that we do agree on, which is a
mandatory standard. We just need to make it tougher than the
current voluntary standard.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
I know you now have a group. How big is the group of
parents that have lost children?
Ms. Ellis. Well, our founding membership started with nine
parents. However, we are growing, and we continue to grow. And
there are so many parents that we represent the voice of that
may never be in a place to advocate, that are too broken by
this tragedy to use their voice to speak.
Ms. Schakowsky. Let me ask you this: Have you heard from
any of these people, both the members of your group and people
you have talked to, that there was any hint whatsoever that
this was a dangerous product?
Ms. Ellis. No one knew. No one knew. And it didn't matter
what the price point of their dresser was. We have had very
expensive dressers kill children. We have had cheap dressers
kill children. It is across all demographics, and no one knew.
No one knew.
Ms. Schakowsky. Mr. Wallace, Consumer Reports has done a
lot of testing on furniture to learn more about how to prevent
tipovers. Can consumers tell if a dresser will tip over by
looking at it or even manipulating it in some way?
Mr. Wallace. No. Consumer Reports' investigation found that
there is no easy way for consumers to tell whether a dresser is
more or less likely to tip over just by looking at it.
Ms. Schakowsky. This week I introduced the Safe Cribs Act,
which would ban crib bumpers. Crib bumpers, pads, have been
banned in Chicago since 2011, and for good reason. Crib bumpers
are inconsistent with the safety standards, as has been talked
about by the professionals, by the doctors, who for years have
recommended that babies sleep in baby cribs free of clutter.
The city council approved the ordinance in response to
news, investigatory news stories that found Federal regulators
received reports of babies suffocating for years but failed to
do anything about it.
Again, Mr. Wallace, what are your thoughts on banning crib
bumpers?
Mr. Wallace. It should happen. I mean, crib bumpers are
not--they contribute to an unsafe sleep environment. The
American Academy of Pediatrics is clear in its thorough policy
statement, developed over the course of years, looking at the
medical evidence, that a baby should sleep on its back, in its
own space, on a flat surface, firm and flat surface, that has
nothing else in there, no added bedding, and the baby in its
own space.
And that is why it is critically important not to have
these products out on the market, because we suspect there is a
lot of confusion out there. Right now, parents may even think
that these are necessary for the safety of their babies.
That is not the case anymore. There used to be--under the
old crib standard, the gaps between the slats were quite wide.
Today, products manufactured to the new standard, it is narrow,
and a baby's head can no longer get entrapped between the slats
as a result.
Therefore, these products not only create a danger to
children, but they are also unnecessary from a safety
perspective.
Ms. Schakowsky. You know, we have done a lot with cribs.
There is no longer--I remember with my kids, the drop-side
cribs, and so it seems that we need to go a step further here.
I appreciate all of our witnesses. And now I would like to
recognize our ranking member, Mrs. Rodgers, for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to say
thanks for holding this hearing today so that we can learn and
dig into these issues more deeply.
As most of you know, I am an older mom. I have three young
children now. They are 12, 8, and 5. I remember Brian had some
friends who had lost a toddler when a bookshelf fell over on
him, and Brian has been paranoid about the tipover furniture in
our household.
Being a parent is the best thing that has happened and also
the hardest thing that has happened. And I, too, want to just
say thank you, especially to the parents, for the courage and
the advocacy, taking what is unimaginable grief and becoming
advocates so that all of us across this country can learn and
then take action to make sure that we are doing everything
possible to protect others.
So I want to say thank you, Crystal. I want to say thank
you to Margaret that I see in the audience, and others that are
advocating so that we can figure out how to get this right.
Captain Parsons, I want to say thank you for your service
in highlighting so many issues important to firefighters, and
also as we try to protect people from the danger of fire.
Mr. Wallace, on my legislation, on the FASTER Act, I would
just encourage you to let me know what you think needs to
happen so that we can make the Fast-Track Recall Program
actually work. That is the goal of the legislation, and my goal
is to make it bipartisan so that we can actually get it done.
Mr. Samuels, your testimony certainly highlighted some
around the Fast-Track Recall Program. And since that is the
bill that I am advocating for this morning, I just wanted you
to take some time and highlight some of the examples on how the
process has slowed and what has caused the delays.
Mr. Samuels. Thank you very much.
Where you have a situation where the company recognizes
that there must be a recall, then you want to get out to the
public as soon as possible when you are ready to announce the
recall. That is the whole genius of the Fast-Track program,
which was developed by career employees at the CPSC 20-some
years ago. It was recognized actually by Vice President Gore
with an innovation award.
But over time, what has happened is, as with many things in
a regulatory environment and bureaucracy, they have fallen into
patterns. The program has become ossified and stultified. They
want to have exactly the same press release. They want to have
everybody follow the same path for recall.
Wording changes in press releases, changes in the
communications to consumers or to distributors or retailers,
they have got certain formats. They insist on it. Sometimes
they ask questions or try and impose requirements when you
really should be getting out to the public and announcing this
recall.
So that is what the problem is, and your bill is a great
starting point for a discussion about what we can do so that we
can, when companies are ready, make these announcements as soon
as possible.
Mrs. Rodgers. So, to be clear, the CPSC has other avenues
under current law to investigate companies and conduct recalls,
right?
Mr. Samuels. Absolutely.
Mrs. Rodgers. Right. And this bill would not impact those
authorities?
Mr. Samuels. Not at all. The basic requirements for filing
under Section 15 of the Consumer Product Safety Act is
untouched. Most recalls probably will continue under the
conventional process.
And if a company uses the Fast-Track--even now, but
certainly under your bill--and their remedy is inadequate, they
don't do a good job in repairing the product or replacing it
with a safe product, or they don't accurately describe the
products that need to be recalled, then CPSC has the authority
now, and it would have the authority under your bill, to
require possibly a second recall.
Mrs. Rodgers. OK. Thank you very much.
I yield back.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
I now recognize Congresswoman Blunt Rochester for 5
minutes. Thank you.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
And thank you so much to the panel. A special note of
thanks to the parents, and especially Ms. Ellis.
Before coming in, we had the opportunity to talk, and I
just want to say that on the seventh birthday of Camden, there
is no better way to honor him than standing up for families and
children across our country. So I just want to say thank you
for that, and on behalf of Camden, Happy Birthday.
When I thought about this issue and listening even to my
colleagues, you hear the conversation about carbon monoxide
poisoning. In Delaware, we have an actual father who
experienced this with his son in a motel, a very famous person
actually. He was able to advocate and get help on the State
level to get legislation.
When we talk about Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, I remember
as a parent--my children are 30 and 33--but at that time, we
made bumpers for our baby cribs. We did things that we thought
were the right thing to do. And I also thought about the
tipping over, the same thing.
And, Ms. Ellis, you actually made a comment, and it wasn't
in my script to ask this question, but you made a comment that
most--many people don't even know what CPSC is. So they don't
even know to go and get help or to find out if there is
something that they need to be protected from.
My question is to you and to the panel. Can you speak to
the lack of knowledge about CPSC and the implications, and then
any recommendations that you would have?
So maybe we could start with Mr. Wallace and go down.
Mr. Wallace. Sure. I will just very briefly say that when
it comes to the tipovers issue, when it comes to--I mean, one
of the most important steps that anybody can take in their
homes, if they have a large piece of furniture, like a dresser,
is to anchor it to the wall.
But at the same time, we found, through a survey of
consumers, nationally representative survey, that it is just
not an easy fix for most consumers. And many of them hadn't
even heard of it. And so that is an example.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Right, right, thank you.
Ms. Ellis?
Ms. Ellis. I will speak to the fact that not only did I not
know what the CPSC was, I just assumed government protected me.
I didn't know what specific agency. I just figured my
government protected me.
And then after Camden died, I spoke to Cathy about, there
are a lot of government agencies coming in, asking you what you
did wrong, what is going on. You have police, you have the
hospital administrators. And I am a law-abiding citizen, but I
was terrified that my other child was going to be taken away in
the interim until they could figure it out.
Then the CPSC sends me a letter saying: We want to know all
about your accident, give me all of the details. And I went: No
thanks. Because it is just not--I don't know what your purpose
is, I have never heard of you, and why would I want to tell one
more government agency the most terrifying day of my life?
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you.
Captain?
Mr. Parsons. Chairwoman Schakowsky, Congresswoman Blunt
Rochester, before I got involved in my work on phasing out
flame retardants in Minnesota, I had very little knowledge of
the CPSC and the work that it has done. It is extremely
important work. We all lead busy lives, and we are not always
able to digest all the information that is out there on
products.
But I remember as a child growing up in the 1980s when the
big smoking initiatives were occurring, through the Surgeon
General, we cut down on smoking, smoking among children.
Perhaps we need another initiative along that lines because
consumer protection is critical for the general public.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you.
And, Mr. Samuels, I have about 40 seconds.
Mr. Samuels. Well, let me just say that this agency is
significantly underresourced. That is the fault of the
Congress. It doesn't have the capabilities to do the
communications and education that it should. Its budget is
vastly smaller than the FDA's. And it really needs the support
of Congress.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you so much. I will submit my
other questions for the record.
But I want to just thank you all for being here.
And thank you for the leadership from Chairwoman Schakowsky
and Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
I yield.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
I just want to tell everyone that is listening now,
Recalls.gov will connect you to a list of those products that
have been recalled. And SaferProducts.gov is a place to go
where you can report if there are products that you have
experienced as being unsafe. I just wanted to say that.
And I recognize Mr. Latta for 5 minutes.
Mr. Latta. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, for calling
today's hearing.
And thanks to our witnesses for being with us today.
And, Ms. Ellis, thanks very much for your testimony.
If I could ask several of my questions with you, Mr.
Wallace. While newer crib standards have narrowed the distance
between slats to prevent head entrapment, I continue to be
concerned about the limb entrapment for children. To prevent
limb entrapment, several companies have manufactured and
marketed mesh crib liners instead of the padded bumpers we are
familiar with. Several studies looking at mesh crib liners have
shown that there have been no fatalities or injuries treated in
emergency departments and no incidents involved in the risk of
suffocation.
In the State of Ohio and several other States, lawmakers
have recognized this data and excluded mesh crib liners from
legislation that ban crib bumpers. If mesh crib liners are also
banned, along with padded crib bumpers, my fear is that parents
are going to start taking matters into their own hands and come
up with different types of self-improvised solutions to prevent
that limb entrapment.
In your written testimony, you state that these products do
not serve any safety purpose. Did you consider the mesh crib
liners when you made your determination?
Mr. Wallace. I am sorry. I couldn't hear the very end.
Mr. Latta. Did you consider the mesh crib liners when you
made your determination?
Mr. Wallace. Padded crib bumpers, we know, are linked to
suffocation, strangulation, entrapment. Mesh crib liners, there
is just not a lot of data. They are pretty new products. And I
think the Ohio law was wise in recognizing that the question
needed to be revisited after a period of time.
Right now, it is carved out from the Ohio law, mesh liners,
but the law charges everybody to come back after, I believe, 2
years and revisit the state of the evidence.
Mr. Latta. But now have you conducted any tests or anything
like that at Consumer Reports on those?
Mr. Wallace. We have not tested mesh liners or crib bumpers
that are padded.
Mr. Latta. And are you intending that in the near future?
Mr. Wallace. We don't currently have plans. We don't think
that they are consistent with a safe sleep environment. We
think that a bare crib is best and that we want to make sure
not to confuse anybody about that or to send any mixed
messages. Because it is critical to get that message out, as we
have since the 1980s, that bare is best. A bare crib, bassinet,
or play yard is best, and it is critical not to put anything
extra in there, into the infant's sleep environment.
Mr. Latta. Thank you.
I could ask my next question to you, Captain Parsons.
Thanks very much for everything you do out there.
I would like to focus on H.R. 806, which is the Portable
Fuel Container Safety Act, which I am also a cosponsor. And,
again, this legislation would require that flame-mitigation
devices or arrestors would be used on portable fuel containers
for those flammable liquid fuels. It would also allow for a
voluntary standard to be considered as the consumer product
safety rule if it meets the intent of the bill and other
requirements.
Captain, could you go into more detail and describe the
different types of flame arrestors that are available in the
market today?
Mr. Parsons. Congressman Latta, I do not have information
on the specific types of flame arrestors. I would be more than
happy to provide that information to you at a later time.
Mr. Latta. OK. I would appreciate that.
And, again, could you--I know you talked about it a little
bit earlier--could you go again into the detail in discussing
how the flame arrestors prevent the flames from jetting out?
Mr. Parsons. Congressman Latta, my understanding is that
when a flammable liquid container ignites, pressure builds up
in the container itself, and that then shoots flammable vapors
out of the opening. This arrestor would keep the vapors from
escaping through that opening, thus keeping a flame from
shooting from the opening.
Mr. Latta. Thank you very much.
And, Madam Chair, I am going to yield back the balance of
my time.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
I am now going to recognize Congressman Soto for 5 minutes.
Let me just announce that on the clock there is just under
4 minutes for vote. However, 364 people have not voted. So we
will continue with you, Mr. Soto.
Mr. Soto. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I am just going
to make a brief comment, knowing that we have votes pending.
It wasn't more than 2 weeks ago I had a Florida mom, Meghan
DeLong, come into my office from the Sarasota area, talking
about her child Conner, who died due to a dresser that was not
balanced correctly, and implored me to make sure to support the
STURDY Act.
I know that we have also here today, we are joined by
Crystal Ellis. Thank you for being here and fighting for our
kids.
Whether it is that, whether it is the inclined sleeper,
whether it is crib bumpers or carbon monoxide detectors or so
many of the other great bills that are up today that we are
workshopping, there is the sense--and it was said here--that
people assume that government is doing something about it, but
that is not always true. People assume that the agencies are
doing something about it, and that is not always true. But that
is why we are here today.
I thank you for your leadership, Madam Chairwoman, on
having a workshop on these bills, because for every one of
these, there are hundreds to thousands of stories of everyone
from infants and young children to our seniors that are put at
risk and, God forbid, pass away because of negligently built,
risky products.
So, when people assume the government is working on it,
this committee hearing today is evidence that we are, and that
we are hearing these stories and these cries from across the
Nation. So thank you for that leadership.
Ms. Schakowsky. If you would be willing to yield then to--
--
Mr. Soto. Yes, yield back.
Ms. Schakowsky [continuing]. To Congresswoman Kelly the
remainder or part of your time----
Mr. Soto. Yes, I yield to Congresswoman Kelly.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Rep. And thank you, Chairwoman.
Ms. Ellis, I want to thank you also for your testimony
today. I am deeply sorry for the unnecessary loss you and your
family have endured.
As you mentioned, the life-threatening hazards of unsafe
household products, such as dressers or crib bumpers, can
affect anyone and everyone. And my own district, the city of
Chicago, as you have heard, has banned the use of crib bumpers,
making every infant in Chicago safer and giving Chicago parents
more of a peace of mind.
However, only a third of my district is actually in the
city of Chicago. Most live in the south suburbs. And then I
have a rural portion. So, put in another way, children in two-
thirds of my district are at risk, just like your son. Parents
in two-thirds of my district are burdened with homework to
ensure their purchase is safe.
I wanted to ask a question. When we talk about education,
all of you have talked about the education, beside, like,
doctors or parents going to parent groups that are going to
have children, or in your case, is it firefighters, who should
educate beyond government? I know we have our responsibility to
do what we need to do, but what would you recommend so we do
get to everyday people about what they should do?
Ms. Ellis. I really am glad to see that the American
Academy of Pediatrics is backing the STURDY Act. I think I have
been saying with my pediatrician, who had a tipover story
herself--she happened to be in the room with her 8-year-old
when it happened--and I am also working in Washington State
with Child Profile to add risk of tipover information to the
packets that get sent to families.
But sometimes people don't read those. So I think a
conversation, especially with your pediatrician, when you are
going in for those well-child checks, hey, have you looked at
your dresser, have you anchored it to the wall, have you
considered all of the different hazards in your home, it should
be part of that conversation.
Ms. Kelly. And Captain?
Mr. Parsons. Congresswoman Kelly, when I first started
working with the flame-retardant issue I was scratching my
head, why would a firefighter be against flame retardants? And
the more that I dug into it, the more education that I got from
my union, the IFF, and other colleagues in other States, the
issue was very clear and very present in all of our lives. As
firefighters, we were all affected.
So, as president of the Minnesota State Association, we
took it upon ourselves to educate our firefighters in the
State, because firefighters will listen to other firefighters.
So that is how we tackled that.
As far as consumer safety products, perhaps putting more of
an onus on manufacturers and retailers to get it on the
packaging. You know, you can't buy cigarettes without seeing
that Surgeon General's warning front and center. So perhaps
something like that to where it is in everybody's mind.
Thank you.
Ms. Kelly. I yield back.
And thank you, Chairwoman, for your vigilance.
Ms. Schakowsky. Mr. O'Halleran, there are still 270 people
that have not voted yet. Not that I want to promote delinquency
when it comes to voting, but I wondered if you had something
short that you wanted to present.
Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is short.
As a former first responder, a police officer, Captain, we
have seen a lot of deaths, some preventable, some accidental.
Ms. Ellis' case, it was preventable. In many cases of young
children dying, it is preventable. And what I heard, a common
theme here today is that the action that there is by agencies
is too slow. The education process is needed to be gotten to a
higher level.
Mr. Samuels, you clearly indicated that the agency is
underfunded, vastly underfunded. I believe it is, along with
many other agencies that address the needs of the safety of our
citizens. And there is a need.
Ms. Ellis, you said there is a need to do more.
It is critical that we do more, and it is also critical
that Congress looks itself in the mirror and says, ``We need to
do more.''
This idea that people look at agencies and say it is the
agency's fault--the agency is only going to be as good as the
people it hires, the supervision, and the amount of funding we
give it to be able to do its mission.
And so I am sorry, Ms. Ellis, that you have to be here
today, but thank you for what you do.
When it comes to education, we should understand that we
are all, all of us are involved. I have three young
grandchildren, a fourth one that is a little older. And when we
go into the home, we always check to see if the straps are on,
if the sockets are taken care of. Our children are too precious
to us all. And if you have seen the trauma that the captain and
I and others have seen, you can understand the relevance of
making sure we get this done right.
Thank you very much.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
Let me close by saying, again, to thank all the witnesses.
There may be others who wanted to come back, but we are
probably going to be on the floor for about 2\1/2\ hours. So I
wanted to thank you for being here.
I want to put in the record a statement from Representative
Mike Thompson, a statement from Safe Kids Worldwide president,
a letter from the National Association of Manufacturers, a
letter from BreathableBaby, LLC, a letter from the American
Home Furnishings Alliance, an article from The Washington Post
regarding inclined sleepers, a letter from Kids in Danger and
the Consumer Federation of America, a letter from the Security
Industry Association, a letter from Safe Kids Worldwide.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Schakowsky. And I want to remind Members that, pursuant
to committee rules, they have 10 business days to submit
additional questions for the record, to be answered by
witnesses who have appeared. I want to ask each witness to
respond promptly to any such questions that may arise.
And just a final, huge thank you. What you are doing today
is saving lives.
And with that, the subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]