States step in to get the lead out

Yesterday, California Attorney General Edmund Brown and Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo filed suit against 20 companies for manufacturing and selling toys with “unlawful quantities of lead.”   The suits allege that the companies knowingly exposed individuals to lead and failed to provide warnings about this risk.  Under California’s Proposition 65, businesses cannot expose individuals to hazardous chemicals without posting a clear warning.

The companies named in the lawsuit included Mattel, Fisher-Price, Michaels Stores, Toys 'R' Us, Wal-Mart, Target, Sears, KB Toys, Costco Wholesale, A&A Global Industries, RC2 Corporation, Eveready Battery Company, Kids II, Kmart, Marvel Entertainment and Toy Investments.  Businesses that violate Proposition 65 are subject to civil penalties of up to $2,500 per day for each violation.  Yesterday’s lawsuit seeks to remedy past violations and prompt manufacturers and retailers to establish processes that prevent toys with lead from being sold in the future.

Illinois is also taking on the issue.  A law recently passed in that state forbids the sale of children’s products with more than 600 parts per million total lead.  Although this limit is the same as the federal standard for lead in paint, the Illinois law is broader since it also applies to plastics, metals and any other materials used in children’s products.

Sunday’s Chicago Tribune reported on their extensive tests conducted on lead in toys.  Of the 800 toys tested, 12 failed federal standards and another 9 failed Illinois standards.  Several of the products were pulled off store shelves after retailers learned of the Tribune’s test results. And the newspaper reported today that all 21 tainted products are now the subject of an investigation by State Attorney General Lisa Madigan who has a reputation for strict enforcement of Illinois’ lead laws. 

According to the Tribune article Sunday, a spokesperson from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission said that their federal agency “would rather have one U.S. law for lead in toys as opposed to the current patchwork of federal and state rules.”  But states can take steps that raise the public health and safety bar, and should always be allowed to do so. For example, California and Illinois laws on lead are more comprehensive than the federal laws. States are taking matters into their own hands while the CPSC Acting Chairman Nancy Nord opposes legislation that would, among other things, strengthen federal regulations for lead in all children’s products.

In response to strong state laws, industry efforts have geared up to ensure that federal regulation would thwart state laws.  That might be good for business but it's bad for states whose citizens feel their tax dollars should pay for a high level of consumer protection.    

While only two states are flexing their muscle on the lead in toys issue, consumers in the other 48 states may wind up reaping the benefits.  Major retailers may find logistic problems in not being able to sell the same merchandise in all the states in which they do business.  If companies have to sort out what products can and can't be sold in California and  Illinois, they might just end up crossing them off the entire country's list altogether.
—Don Mays