CPSIA: Because otherwise companies will kill their customers

Posted by Marc Hodak on January 28, 2009 under Invisible trade-offs | 3 Comments to Read

Forbes has been highlighting the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act in a series of articles by Walter Olson and Paul Rubin.  These articles provide an excellent example of regulatory overkill, and how doing “for the children” invariably ends up doing it to those children’s parents, with little noticeable benefit for the children themselves.

Meanwhile, the safety nannies are keeping the pressure on.  In a typical “it’s for the kids” logic, consumer advocates continue to point out that (a) lead is bad, and (b) the bill passed by an overwhelming majority (“we’re all parents and grandparents”).  They also helpfully point out that some congressmen, responding to howls of protest, have already offered some advice to the CPSC on how to keep the implementation costs down, advice it’s not clear the CPSC will be able to follow.  And don’t you know, those business ingrates are still not happy.

What the consumer advocates ignore is that this law simply makes no sense.  It is founded on the principle that people who sell things to kids are indifferent to any injury they might cause.  Toy makers, who completely depend on the happiness of their little customers, happen to know lead is bad.  That’s why Mattel reacted the way they did when they found out.  What keeps them awake at night is not the possibility of offending the effete sensibilities of the safety nannies, it’s the possibility of losing their customers.

And, also, if the number of congressmen rushing to pass a bill in hysteria is the measure of a bill’s virtue, then my troubled, liberal friends should have no problem with this.