CPSC Chair Thinks Senate Bill Would Overwhelm The Agency

Nancy Nord thinks a new Senate bill that would increase the budget and power of the CPSC would overwhelm the agency and “put the American people at greater risk,” according to the Washington Post.

“It is my and the CPSC staff’s assessment that many of our existing public safety activities would have to be severely curtailed or would cease entirely in order to attempt to fulfill all of the bill’s proposed statutory directives,” acting chairman Nancy Nord wrote Wednesday in a letter to Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii).

Nord supports some of the bill’s provisions (we’re assuming she likes the part where they give her more money), but objects to two items in particular—a provision requiring the agency to hear and investigate whistle blower complaints and the raising of the cap on penalties to $100 million from $1.8 million. Nord claims that if the cap was increased, companies would flood the agency with “virtually every consumer complaint and incident of any kind, regardless of any actual product safety issue making it more likely that true safety issues will go unrecognized in the process.”

Heaven forbid the CPSC have to deal with our tipline.

Product Safety Chief Sees Setbacks in Senate Bill [Washington Post]


Edit Your Comment

  1. royal72 says:

    “It is my and the CPSC staff’s assessment that many of our existing public safety activities would have to be severely curtailed or would cease entirely in order to attempt to fulfill all of the bill’s proposed statutory directives,”

    ok, (a) you ain’t doin shit now, so what’s the difference and (b) it just won’t matter anyway. until the american consumer stops being brainwashed to buy every p.o.s., like it’s a life necessity, it’s gonna be business as usual.

  2. Girtych says:

    Did she not see the part about “more money?” If the agency does get overwhelmed, couldn’t she just hire more employees and expand their offices until they can handle the load?

  3. CurbRunner says:

    She’s nothing more than a pimpette for business.
    Get rid of her and find someone who’s up to the task and not on Bush’s leash.

  4. azntg says:

    Consumer Product Safety isn’t doing much nowadays anyway. I guess she was eager to keep the status quo… of getting money and not doing anything.

    Ms. Nord is an acting chairman, eh? I think it’s time to find a NEW chairman for the CPSC who thinks otherwise!

  5. mconfoy says:

    i am sure she would be overwhelmed being the worthless, political hack that she is. Just like Brownie and that idiot Chertoff. And the one running GSA. She’s anti-abortion, and that is all that counts. I guarantee you she is not qualified to run her dog, let alone a government agency. This is how Bush makes government look bad — he let’s idiots run it.

  6. Uh oh... Cleveland says:

    “I fear, Senator, that this extra money, enforcement, and oversight will irreparably damage the fine industry that will pay me gobs of money as soon as I get the hell out of– I’m sorry, was I speaking out loud there?”

  7. nysports says:

    Wow…first off “anti-abortion,” where the hell do you get that? And whom do you know that’s “pro-abortion?” I’ve heard of pro-life, but pro-abortion sounds like some new population control mechanism.

    Second, I love consumer protection just like the rest of you, but most of the “lead paint” incidents that we all hyperventilate about are like little dots of the stuff that could only hurt someone, mildly, if they removed part of the toy and ate it. If companies are worried that ANY small mistake could cost them $100 million, it will overwhelm the agency. Reason people, reason.

  8. Trai_Dep says:

    @nysports: “whom do you know that’s “pro-abortion?”

    Just about any Republican when they need it? Starting with Bob Barr and continuing ad infinitum?

    The fact is, like abortion, no one LIKES it, but government regulation and whistle-blowing is needed in a world where things veer off from concocted plans. “My second (third?) wife (mistress) will NEVER get pregnant,” “companies would NEVER bring hazardous products to market without immediately withdrawing them and fixing their mistakes,” and “food companies would NEVER sell poisoned goods.”

    And, Consumerist, when you have a story covering CPSC, could you include the words “Consumer Product Safety Commission” someplace in the article? Sort of confusing for those that don’t speak bureaucratese. :)

  9. Nemesis_Enforcer says:

    @nysports: Actually I am very Pro-Abortion. If you cant either support, love or care for your child you shouldn’t have it. Too many American kids need help via adoption, we should revise our adoption process and outlaw getting kids from other countries unless there aren’t any american kids available.
    There are way to many parasites popping out kids left and right just for more welfare and food stamps.

  10. Consumerist Moderator - ACAMBRAS says:





    This post and thread are about the CPSC and have nothing to do with the abortion debate. Please don’t go there.

  11. andrewsmash says:

    Most large businesses in this country have taken advantage of off-shore manufacturing in order to increase the profits of their executives and share-holders to record levels. If they want to let others build things so that they can have cheap manufacturing costs, it’s time to hold them to the same standards as those companies who actually products here – you know, the ones that actually make it possible for America to have a middle class. Maybe we could fund consumer protection with tariffs placed on America companies who import foreign-made products and sell them under an American brand name. Especially the ones who brag about being American-made. I’m looking at you Ford.

  12. tadowguy says:

    Is Nancy Nord her real name? It sounds like a porn name to me.

  13. endicottroad says:

    Consumer protection? What consumer protection?