<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; chicago</title>
	<atom:link href="http://amendthecpsia.com/tag/chicago/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://amendthecpsia.com</link>
	<description>Information Regarding the April 1st Rally in Washington DC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Aug 2011 06:04:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>CPSIA &#8211; Chicago Tribune and Dick Durbin Show Us How to Create a Crisis</title>
		<link>http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/02/cpsia-chicago-tribune-and-dick-durbin-show-us-how-to-create-a-crisis/</link>
		<comments>http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/02/cpsia-chicago-tribune-and-dick-durbin-show-us-how-to-create-a-crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 02:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Woldenberg, Chairman, Learning Resources, Inc.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BLOG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[article]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chairman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[covers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pool safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senator-durbin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribune]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/02/cpsia-chicago-tribune-and-dick-durbin-show-us-how-to-create-a-crisis/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On the morning of February 7, my dog brought in the Chicago Tribune and I almost asked him to take it back to the driveway. Blaring at me was the front page headline" Danger lurks in pool, spa drains ". This article was a monster - an entire page (all five columns). Apparently alerted by a "tipster" , a Tribune "investigation" discovered that some pool drains designed to meet the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool &#038; Spa Safety Act (part of the CPSIA) requirements had apparently failed certain lab tests. Notably, there have been no reported injuries as a result of this "defect", although one manufacturer asked dealers to return stock for replacement "out of an abundance of caution". Why does no injuries merit a full page article? The story continues. . . . Senator Durbin of the great state of Illinois must have read the same article, because he immediately sent a letter to the CPSC alerting them to this hazard . More precisely, alerting them to this article. I am picturing him dropping his toast in horror. What an efficient clipping service. [Two words for the Senator: "Google Alerts".] His obvious and immediate concern are commendable, if you consider reading a newspaper article adequate due diligence for one of our nation's leaders. Mr. Durbin notes the outcome of his intensive research (reading the newspaper): "This appears to have allowed dangerous drain covers to continue being sold and distributed. The issues highlighted by the Tribune story are very concerning and raise serious questions, not only about dangerous drains but also about accreditation of testing facilities on products generally." Next, the Tribune duly reported that Senator Durbin had performed his clipping service for the CPSC, thereby "legitimizing" their investigation. Case closed! The Chicago Tribune to the rescue. . . . The Tribune must be right if Dick Durbin drops everything to send a letter . . . right? Ummm, well, let's take a deeper look. [It's possible Durbin only read the headline. That's enough, right?] The Tribune investigation was started by a "tip". Someone with an interest in the drains and their effectiveness. Who might that be? I don't know myself, but there are rumors. We need not speculate on the rumors but we can certainly look at the article itself. In the article, the Tribune quotes an "expert" on pool drains, Paul Pennington. Did you know there was such a thing as a pool drain expert? Mr. Pennington intones: "Some child is going to die." And he's an expert! Sounds bad, very bad. Mr. Pennington is Chairman of the Pool Safety Council. The Tribune notes: "Paul Pennington, chairman of the nonprofit Pool Safety Council, said he has sent 73 e-mails to CPSC and standards officials, pleading with them to do something about unsafe drain covers since the new law took effect in December 2008." What a guy, tirelessly fighting for innocent children. But who is the Pool Safety Council? The Tribune explains: "His group is largely funded by the makers of devices that shut off a pool's pump when a dangerous vacuum forms, like a circuit breaker turns off power when it senses an overload." In fact, Mr. Pennington is the President of Vac-Alert Industries, Inc. Hey, here's another "shocker" - Vac-Alert has patents on vacuum alerts used in pools (patent no. 6,591,863 and 5,991,939 ). Conflict of interest? Nah! The Tribune again: "Why did Pennington think the covers were dangerous? As soon as the new drain covers hit the market in 2008, pool owners who had vacuum-release devices complained that their pumps were turning off after they installed the covers. Pennington, who owns a stake in a vacuum-release system company, investigated and concluded that the new covers were allowing the hazardous suction forces they were supposed to prevent. Pennington said his concerns were ignored by the federal government and by the standards committee that writes the testing rules for the drain covers. That committee consists mostly of people who work in the pool and spa business." Hmmm. So you have a newspaper trying to sell papers by "saving" the populace, an entrepreneur who is leading the "fight" over pool drains with patented technology ready to replace those drains, an ambitious local politician interested in making headlines while supporting the hometown paper that helped elect him , and what do you get? The feeding frenzy that gave birth to the CPSIA. Everyone's a winner . . . except for the businesses and markets caught in the middle. Makes you anxious to vote again, doesn't it? ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the morning of February 7, my dog brought in the Chicago Tribune and I almost asked him to take it back to the driveway. Blaring at me was the front page headline&#8221;<a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-07/a-z/ct-met-pool-drain-covers-20110207_1_pools-drain-hot-tubs">Danger lurks in pool, spa drains</a>&#8220;. This article was a monster &#8211; an entire page (all five columns). Apparently <a href="http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/tribnation/2011/02/how-we-did-this-story-on-pool-drain-cover-safety.html">alerted by a &#8220;tipster&#8221;</a>, a Tribune &#8220;investigation&#8221; discovered that some pool drains designed to meet the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool &#038; Spa Safety Act (part of the CPSIA) requirements had apparently failed certain lab tests. Notably, there have been no reported injuries as a result of this &#8220;defect&#8221;, although one manufacturer asked dealers to return stock for replacement &#8220;out of an abundance of caution&#8221;.</p>
<p>Why does no injuries merit a full page article?  The story continues. . . .</p>
<p>Senator Durbin of the great state of Illinois must have read the same article, because he immediately <a href="http://durbin.senate.gov/showRelease.cfm?releaseId=331020">sent a letter to the CPSC alerting them to this hazard</a>. More precisely, alerting them to this article.  I am picturing him dropping his toast in horror.  What an efficient clipping service. [Two words for the Senator: "Google Alerts".] His obvious and immediate concern are commendable, if you consider reading a newspaper article adequate due diligence for one of our nation&#8217;s leaders. Mr. Durbin notes the outcome of his intensive research (reading the newspaper): &#8220;This appears to have allowed dangerous drain covers to continue being sold and distributed. The issues highlighted by the Tribune story are very concerning and raise serious questions, not only about dangerous drains but also about accreditation of testing facilities on products generally.&#8221;</p>
<p>Next, <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-08/news/ct-met-durbin-pool-drain-covers-20110208_1_dick-durbin-drain-safety-equipment">the Tribune duly reported that Senator Durbin had performed his clipping service </a>for the CPSC, thereby &#8220;legitimizing&#8221; their investigation. Case closed! The Chicago Tribune to the rescue. . . .</p>
<p>The Tribune must be right if Dick Durbin drops everything to send a letter . . . right?</p>
<p>Ummm, well, let&#8217;s take a deeper look. [It's possible Durbin only read the headline. That's enough, right?] The Tribune investigation was started by a &#8220;tip&#8221;. Someone with an interest in the drains and their effectiveness. Who might that be? I don&#8217;t know myself, but there are rumors. We need not speculate on the rumors but we can certainly look at the article itself. In the article, the Tribune quotes an &#8220;expert&#8221; on pool drains, Paul Pennington. Did you know there was such a thing as a pool drain expert?  Mr. Pennington intones: &#8220;Some child is going to die.&#8221; And he&#8217;s an expert!  Sounds bad, very bad.</p>
<p>Mr. Pennington is Chairman of the Pool Safety Council. The Tribune notes: &#8220;Paul Pennington, chairman of the nonprofit Pool Safety Council, said he has sent 73 e-mails to CPSC and standards officials, pleading with them to do something about unsafe drain covers since the new law took effect in December 2008.&#8221; What a guy, tirelessly fighting for innocent children. </p>
<p>But who is the Pool Safety Council? The Tribune explains: &#8220;His group is largely funded by the makers of devices that shut off a pool&#8217;s pump when a dangerous vacuum forms, like a circuit breaker turns off power when it senses an overload.&#8221;  In fact, Mr. Pennington is the President of <a href="http://www.vac-alert.com/index.html">Vac-Alert Industries, Inc.</a> Hey, here&#8217;s another &#8220;shocker&#8221; &#8211; Vac-Alert has patents on vacuum alerts used in pools (patent no. <a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&#038;Sect2=HITOFF&#038;p=1&#038;u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&#038;r=1&#038;f=G&#038;l=50&#038;co1=AND&#038;d=PTXT&#038;s1=vac-alert.ASNM.&#038;OS=AN/vac-alert&#038;RS=AN/vac-alert">6,591,863</a> and <a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&#038;Sect2=HITOFF&#038;p=1&#038;u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&#038;r=2&#038;f=G&#038;l=50&#038;co1=AND&#038;d=PTXT&#038;s1=vac-alert.ASNM.&#038;OS=AN/vac-alert&#038;RS=AN/vac-alert">5,991,939</a>).</p>
<p>Conflict of interest? Nah!  The Tribune again: &#8220;Why did Pennington think the covers were dangerous? As soon as the new drain covers hit the market in 2008, pool owners who had vacuum-release devices complained that their pumps were turning off after they installed the covers. Pennington, who owns a stake in a vacuum-release system company, investigated and concluded that the new covers were allowing the hazardous suction forces they were supposed to prevent. Pennington said his concerns were ignored by the federal government and by the standards committee that writes the testing rules for the drain covers. That committee consists mostly of people who work in the pool and spa business.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hmmm.  So you have a newspaper trying to sell papers by &#8220;saving&#8221; the populace, an entrepreneur who is leading the &#8220;fight&#8221; over pool drains with patented technology ready to replace those drains, an ambitious local politician interested in making headlines while supporting the hometown paper <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-10-20/news/0810190141_1_partisanship-senate-majority-whip-merit-support"> that helped elect him</a>, and what do you get?  The feeding frenzy that gave birth to the CPSIA.  Everyone&#8217;s a winner . . . except for the businesses and markets caught in the middle.</p>
<p>Makes you anxious to vote again, doesn&#8217;t it?
<div><img width="1" height="1" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8811142208729284263-3207848859616806873?l=learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com" alt="" /></div>
<p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Cpsia/~4/nlpiAAsyS3k" height="1" width="1" /></p>
<p>Read more here:<br /><a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/" title="CPSIA - Chicago Tribune and Dick Durbin Show Us How to Create a Crisis">CPSIA &#8211; Chicago Tribune and Dick Durbin Show Us How to Create a Crisis</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/02/cpsia-chicago-tribune-and-dick-durbin-show-us-how-to-create-a-crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPSIA &#8211; Let&#8217;s Take a Break and Think About Illinois Taxes</title>
		<link>http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/01/cpsia-lets-take-a-break-and-think-about-illinois-taxes/</link>
		<comments>http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/01/cpsia-lets-take-a-break-and-think-about-illinois-taxes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 03:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Woldenberg, Chairman, Learning Resources, Inc.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BLOG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[a-more-generous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kathy-moore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lincoln-park]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[night]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[springfield]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wednesday-]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/01/cpsia-lets-take-a-break-and-think-about-illinois-taxes/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey, every once in a while it's worth taking a breather and considering other truly amazing political stories from the big city. Consider this story entitled " Billion Dollar Baby: A Cautionary Tale " published today by Andy Shaw, formerly a local Chicago ABC-TV correspondent and now President of the Better Government Association (good luck there, Andy!). In this tale, Mr. Shaw recounts how Illinois' 67% tax increase was passed by a single vote Tuesday evening during a short, one-week lame duck session. You see, the Dems who run this State with an iron fist were facing the loss of several seats to the Republicans when the new legislature was sworn into office on Wednesday, hence the need to pass the tax increase Tuesday in the middle of the night. How to do it, how to do it??? Mr. Shaw: "She is somebody somebody sent. In the best—or maybe it’s the worst—tradition of local politics. And she was pressured into voting for a multi-billion dollar hike in the state income tax in the wee hours of Wednesday morning. By her Democratic Party allies in Springfield. Some of her friends and neighbors may be unhappy with the tax vote but she won’t be facing any political consequences or voter backlash. And here’s why: She stepped down as an Illinois State Representative at noon on Wednesday. After one week on the job. That’s right—one week. She was, in simple terms, the lamest lame duck in a feckless Springfield flock. A billion-dollar baby. “She” is Kathy Moore, a Lincoln Park friend and former public school teacher who was put in that unenviable position by the stark reality of political hide-and-seek. Or, in this case, seek-and-hide. Her reliably Democratic 11th District, which includes Lincoln Park and Lakeview, elected a brand new state representative, Ann Williams, in November, to replace John Fritchey, a popular long-time rep who won election to a seat on the Cook County Board. Fritchey began his new job in December, so Williams could have been sworn in as a state rep a month ago to represent the district in the lame-duck session going on in Springfield this past week. That was her initial plan. But there were questions about how she would vote if a tax plan was on the lame-duck agenda. Williams claims that local Democratic leaders, including Fritchey and Senate President John Cullerton, wanted her commitment to support the tax hike before arranging for her to be sworn in. They say she got cold feet and decided not to start early—choosing instead to wait until Wednesday, when the rest of the freshman legislative class was sworn in. (That, parenthetically, will save the taxpayers a few bucks because Williams won’t qualify for a more generous legislative pension than the one awaiting the new class in Springfield, thanks to a modest pension reform bill that took effect on Jan. 1. But her decision will cost the 11th District politically because, instead of moving to the top of the seniority list of new legislators by starting in December, she will be near the bottom since she’s entering with all of the other newbies, and her last name begins with “W,” a letter near the end of the alphabet. Oh well.) Meanwhile, back at the raunch—yes, I said raunch and not ranch—Williams’s decision not to be seated early meant the political bosses in the district—Fritchey, Cullerton and the other ward committeemen—had to find someone else to fill the seat for the one-week lame-duck session. So they recruited Kathy Moore, the wife of Tom Moore, a well-known Lincoln Park zoning lawyer—because Kathy had the time and the willingness to “serve.” And down I-55 she went. Admitting sheepishly at a party last week that “they tell me what (voting) button to push and I push it.” Democracy in action. So when the tax bill passed, without a single vote to spare, our lawmaker-for-a-week was a major reason. She says she’s not happy about voting for a gargantuan tax increase but she doesn’t think that she, or the state, had any other choice. Even though, as of Sunday, she hadn’t seen a bill. Or a press release. Or a fact sheet. Or a list of cuts, accountability measures and streamlining to go along with the increase. “I hope it works,” she said wistfully in a text message on Wednesday morning. Williams says, for the record, that she would’ve had a hard time supporting the tax bill in its present form. In any event, Kathy Moore was back home in Chicago by Wednesday night after morphing into a regular resident following her week as a political pumpkin. Kind of like “Cinderella” in reverse. And she may not be the life of the cocktail parties in the neighborhood for awhile, at least among the well-healed wine-and-cheese folks who will have several-thousand fewer dollars in their pockets for each of the next four years. As for Ann Williams, the newly elected House member, she assumed her duties as the new representative of the 11th district at noon on Wednesday. And my spies at her Springfield welcoming parties report there was no evidence of any dust, dirt or snow from the rock she’s been hiding under. Don’t you just love the Illinois Way? And can’t you see why we love being civic watchdogs?" ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, every once in a while it&#8217;s worth taking a breather and considering other truly amazing political stories from the big city. Consider this story entitled &#8220;<a href="http://shawblog.bettergov.org/2011/01/13/billion-dollar-baby-a-cautionary-tale/">Billion Dollar Baby: A Cautionary Tale</a>&#8221; published today by Andy Shaw, formerly a local Chicago ABC-TV correspondent and now President of the Better Government Association (good luck there, Andy!).  </p>
<p>In this tale, Mr. Shaw recounts how Illinois&#8217; 67% tax increase was passed by a single vote Tuesday evening during a short, one-week lame duck session. You see, the Dems who run this State with an iron fist were facing the loss of several seats to the Republicans when the new legislature was sworn into office on Wednesday, hence the need to pass the tax increase Tuesday in the middle of the night. How to do it, how to do it???</p>
<p>Mr. Shaw:</p>
<p>&#8220;She is somebody somebody sent.</p>
<p>In the best—or maybe it’s the worst—tradition of local politics. And she was pressured into voting for a multi-billion dollar hike in the state income tax in the wee hours of Wednesday morning. By her Democratic Party allies in Springfield.</p>
<p>Some of her friends and neighbors may be unhappy with the tax vote but she won’t be facing any political consequences or voter backlash. And here’s why: She stepped down as an Illinois State Representative at noon on Wednesday. After one week on the job. That’s right—one week. She was, in simple terms, the lamest lame duck in a feckless Springfield flock. A billion-dollar baby.</p>
<p>“She” is Kathy Moore, a Lincoln Park friend and former public school teacher who was put in that unenviable position by the stark reality of political hide-and-seek. Or, in this case, seek-and-hide. Her reliably Democratic 11th District, which includes Lincoln Park and Lakeview, elected a brand new state representative, Ann Williams, in November, to replace John Fritchey, a popular long-time rep who won election to a seat on the Cook County Board. Fritchey began his new job in December, so Williams could have been sworn in as a state rep a month ago to represent the district in the lame-duck session going on in Springfield this past week. That was her initial plan.</p>
<p>But there were questions about how she would vote if a tax plan was on the lame-duck agenda. Williams claims that local Democratic leaders, including Fritchey and Senate President John Cullerton, wanted her commitment to support the tax hike before arranging for her to be sworn in. They say she got cold feet and decided not to start early—choosing instead to wait until Wednesday, when the rest of the freshman legislative class was sworn in.</p>
<p>(That, parenthetically, will save the taxpayers a few bucks because Williams won’t qualify for a more generous legislative pension than the one awaiting the new class in Springfield, thanks to a modest pension reform bill that took effect on Jan. 1. But her decision will cost the 11th District politically because, instead of moving to the top of the seniority list of new legislators by starting in December, she will be near the bottom since she’s entering with all of the other newbies, and her last name begins with “W,” a letter near the end of the alphabet. Oh well.)</p>
<p>Meanwhile, back at the raunch—yes, I said raunch and not ranch—Williams’s decision not to be seated early meant the political bosses in the district—Fritchey, Cullerton and the other ward committeemen—had to find someone else to fill the seat for the one-week lame-duck session. So they recruited Kathy Moore, the wife of Tom Moore, a well-known Lincoln Park zoning lawyer—because Kathy had the time and the willingness to “serve.” And down I-55 she went. Admitting sheepishly at a party last week that “they tell me what (voting) button to push and I push it.” Democracy in action.</p>
<p>So when the tax bill passed, without a single vote to spare, our lawmaker-for-a-week was a major reason. She says she’s not happy about voting for a gargantuan tax increase but she doesn’t think that she, or the state, had any other choice. Even though, as of Sunday, she hadn’t seen a bill. Or a press release. Or a fact sheet. Or a list of cuts, accountability measures and streamlining to go along with the increase.</p>
<p>“I hope it works,” she said wistfully in a text message on Wednesday morning. Williams says, for the record, that she would’ve had a hard time supporting the tax bill in its present form.</p>
<p>In any event, Kathy Moore was back home in Chicago by Wednesday night after morphing into a regular resident following her week as a political pumpkin. Kind of like “Cinderella” in reverse. And she may not be the life of the cocktail parties in the neighborhood for awhile, at least among the well-healed wine-and-cheese folks who will have several-thousand fewer dollars in their pockets for each of the next four years.</p>
<p>As for Ann Williams, the newly elected House member, she assumed her duties as the new representative of the 11th district at noon on Wednesday. And my spies at her Springfield welcoming parties report there was no evidence of any dust, dirt or snow from the rock she’s been hiding under.</p>
<p>Don’t you just love the Illinois Way? And can’t you see why we love being civic watchdogs?&#8221;
<div><img width="1" height="1" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8811142208729284263-3396041914267226859?l=learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com" alt="" /></div>
<p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Cpsia/~4/0vzA3NFJJxg" height="1" width="1" /></p>
<p>Read more here:<br /><a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/" title="CPSIA - Let's Take a Break and Think About Illinois Taxes">CPSIA &#8211; Let&#8217;s Take a Break and Think About Illinois Taxes</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://amendthecpsia.com/2011/01/cpsia-lets-take-a-break-and-think-about-illinois-taxes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPSIA &#8211; WSJ Profiles RW in Article on Business Backlash</title>
		<link>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/10/cpsia-wsj-profiles-rw-in-article-on-business-backlash/</link>
		<comments>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/10/cpsia-wsj-profiles-rw-in-article-on-business-backlash/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 03:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Woldenberg, Chairman, Learning Resources, Inc.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BLOG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[a-run-against]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporate casualties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[holiday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news reports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shame and dishonor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/10/cpsia-wsj-profiles-rw-in-article-on-business-backlash/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[POLITICS OCTOBER 12, 2010 Business Backlash Grows By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON VERNON HILLS, Ill.—Rick Woldenberg runs an educational-products company from a suburban Chicago office stacked with brightly colored toys. He supported President Barack Obama in 2008. But he has turned on Democrats this year. Sally Ryan for The Wall Street Journal Rick Woldenberg, chairman of Learning Resources in Chicago, backed President Barack Obama in 2008 but is now raising money for Republicans. Mr. Woldenberg is angry that Congress and the Obama administration won't revise expansive new rules on lead testing in children's products that he says will kill his business, Learning Resources Inc. So he is raising money for Republicans among Chicago business owners to help the GOP—so much money that he is rattling the incumbent in what has been one of the safest Democratic seats in Mr. Obama's home state. "If Democrats are going to put me out of business, I'm going to put them out of business first," he said. Disaffected business owners like Mr. Woldenberg have emerged as a potent force in the 2010 campaign. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which plans to spend $75 million in this election cycle, says it has exceeded its targets for raising money from small businesses every quarter this year, despite the poor economy. More small-business candidates are running for public office than at any time in a generation, say officials at the National Federation of Independent Business, the capital's chief small-business lobby. Business contributions are fueling campaign efforts by conservative and business groups, which are gearing up to spend as much as $300 million to help Republicans this fall. Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats have wooed small-business owners with a series of tax breaks and a $30 billion lending program that was the centerpiece of a Small Business Jobs Act Mr. Obama signed last week at a White House ceremony attended by a group of supportive entrepreneurs. But many small-business owners still fault Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats for what they see as a costly explosion of new rules and regulations. "I think Obama ran as more of a moderate, and business people here are now realizing that this huge expansion of government is not sustainable," said Leo Dombrowski, an attorney at Wildman, Harrold, Allen &#038; Dixon LLP in Chicago, whose clients are fighting new environmental rules. Mr. Woldenberg has helped raise more than $470,000 for Joel Pollak, a 32-year old Harvard Law School graduate who is challenging Rep. Jan Schakowsky in Chicago's 9th district, a friend of Mr. Obama who is an author and ardent defender of the new children's-product lead law. That's 20 times more than any Republican has ever raised for a run against Ms. Schakowsky, who won 75% of the vote in the last election and is vying for a 7th term. "This is a war," he said. "Individuals can make a difference, and I want my kids to see it." Over the past few months, Mr. Pollak said, he and Mr. Woldenberg have been trying to tap into "donors residing outside the district with a strong business or personal motivation." The Pollak campaign scored a fundraising appearance by Republican economic policy star Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Mr. Pollak took the podium and pointed out Schakowsky campaign manager Alex Armour, who was in the crowd videotaping the event. Ms. Schakowsky is polling at slightly more than 60%, according to her internal polls, a solid lead but narrower than in the past. The campaign has hired four field staffers for the first time, and is sending less money to Democrats in closer races. "I'm not worried about it, but I'm taking it seriously," she said. Ms. Schakowsky said Mr. Woldenberg's success as a fundraiser, is proof that "very cynical … special interests are highly engaged in the campaign." As for the lead law, she said she was proud of it. "The goal is to save children from toys that are toxic." Mr. Woldenberg's efforts include addressing 130 people in a Holiday Inn ballroom in suburban Skokie, Ill., during Mr. Pollak's "Chicagoland Business Breakfast" in late September. He held up a "box of rocks," the company's igneous rock collection kit, and read its new consumer warning. "Caution: federal law requires us to advise that the rocks in this educational product may contain lead and might be harmful if swallowed,'" he read, to laughter. "This is humiliating," he said, ticking off the costs of the law. "I'm hoping Joel can help us." Two dozen attendees took the microphone, voicing concerns with health-care, tax, environmental and workplace rules. They included Jay Stieber, vice president of restaurant chain Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises Inc., and chairman of the Illinois Restaurant Association, who has his headquarters in the 9th district. He and his family have contributed the maximum $4,800 to Mr. Pollak. "The hospitality industry is the biggest employer in Illinois, and my partners and I have been lifelong Democrats," he said, but changed sides because "I can't stand here and tell you what health-care is going to cost." Write to Elizabeth Williamson at elizabeth.williamson@wsj.com ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>POLITICS<br />OCTOBER 12, 2010</p>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704380504575529921655964414.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews#articleTabs%3Darticle"><span><strong>Business Backlash Grows</strong></span> </a></p>
<p>By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON</p>
<p>VERNON HILLS, Ill.—Rick Woldenberg runs an educational-products company from a suburban Chicago office stacked with brightly colored toys. He supported President Barack Obama in 2008. But he has turned on Democrats this year.</p>
<p><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fj0SzI8uo6o/TLPX9BLmDMI/AAAAAAAAAIo/c8x3HU2L_Ic/s1600/NA-BI436_BACKLA_G_20101011204413.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 267px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5526998611002789058" border="0" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fj0SzI8uo6o/TLPX9BLmDMI/AAAAAAAAAIo/c8x3HU2L_Ic/s400/NA-BI436_BACKLA_G_20101011204413.jpg" /></a></p>
<p><span>Sally Ryan for The Wall Street Journal<br /></span><br />Rick Woldenberg, chairman of Learning Resources in Chicago, backed President Barack Obama in 2008 but is now raising money for Republicans.</p>
<p>Mr. Woldenberg is angry that Congress and the Obama administration won&#8217;t revise expansive new rules on lead testing in children&#8217;s products that he says will kill his business, Learning Resources Inc. So he is raising money for Republicans among Chicago business owners to help the GOP—so much money that he is rattling the incumbent in what has been one of the safest Democratic seats in Mr. Obama&#8217;s home state.</p>
<p>&#8220;If Democrats are going to put me out of business, I&#8217;m going to put them out of business first,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>Disaffected business owners like Mr. Woldenberg have emerged as a potent force in the 2010 campaign. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which plans to spend $75 million in this election cycle, says it has exceeded its targets for raising money from small businesses every quarter this year, despite the poor economy. More small-business candidates are running for public office than at any time in a generation, say officials at the National Federation of Independent Business, the capital&#8217;s chief small-business lobby.</p>
<p>Business contributions are fueling campaign efforts by conservative and business groups, which are gearing up to spend as much as $300 million to help Republicans this fall.</p>
<p>Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats have wooed small-business owners with a series of tax breaks and a $30 billion lending program that was the centerpiece of a Small Business Jobs Act Mr. Obama signed last week at a White House ceremony attended by a group of supportive entrepreneurs.</p>
<p>But many small-business owners still fault Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats for what they see as a costly explosion of new rules and regulations.</p>
<p>&#8220;I think Obama ran as more of a moderate, and business people here are now realizing that this huge expansion of government is not sustainable,&#8221; said Leo Dombrowski, an attorney at Wildman, Harrold, Allen &#038; Dixon LLP in Chicago, whose clients are fighting new environmental rules.</p>
<p>Mr. Woldenberg has helped raise more than $470,000 for Joel Pollak, a 32-year old Harvard Law School graduate who is challenging Rep. Jan Schakowsky in Chicago&#8217;s 9th district, a friend of Mr. Obama who is an author and ardent defender of the new children&#8217;s-product lead law. That&#8217;s 20 times more than any Republican has ever raised for a run against Ms. Schakowsky, who won 75% of the vote in the last election and is vying for a 7th term.</p>
<p>&#8220;This is a war,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Individuals can make a difference, and I want my kids to see it.&#8221;</p>
<p>Over the past few months, Mr. Pollak said, he and Mr. Woldenberg have been trying to tap into &#8220;donors residing outside the district with a strong business or personal motivation.&#8221; The Pollak campaign scored a fundraising appearance by Republican economic policy star Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Mr. Pollak took the podium and pointed out Schakowsky campaign manager Alex Armour, who was in the crowd videotaping the event.</p>
<p>Ms. Schakowsky is polling at slightly more than 60%, according to her internal polls, a solid lead but narrower than in the past. The campaign has hired four field staffers for the first time, and is sending less money to Democrats in closer races.</p>
<p>&#8220;I&#8217;m not worried about it, but I&#8217;m taking it seriously,&#8221; she said. Ms. Schakowsky said Mr. Woldenberg&#8217;s success as a fundraiser, is proof that &#8220;very cynical … special interests are highly engaged in the campaign.&#8221;</p>
<p>As for the lead law, she said she was proud of it. &#8220;The goal is to save children from toys that are toxic.&#8221;</p>
<p>Mr. Woldenberg&#8217;s efforts include addressing 130 people in a Holiday Inn ballroom in suburban Skokie, Ill., during Mr. Pollak&#8217;s &#8220;Chicagoland Business Breakfast&#8221; in late September.</p>
<p>He held up a &#8220;box of rocks,&#8221; the company&#8217;s igneous rock collection kit, and read its new consumer warning.</p>
<p>&#8220;Caution: federal law requires us to advise that the rocks in this educational product may contain lead and might be harmful if swallowed,&#8217;&#8221; he read, to laughter.</p>
<p>&#8220;This is humiliating,&#8221; he said, ticking off the costs of the law. &#8220;I&#8217;m hoping Joel can help us.&#8221;</p>
<p>Two dozen attendees took the microphone, voicing concerns with health-care, tax, environmental and workplace rules. They included Jay Stieber, vice president of restaurant chain Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises Inc., and chairman of the Illinois Restaurant Association, who has his headquarters in the 9th district. He and his family have contributed the maximum $4,800 to Mr. Pollak.</p>
<p>&#8220;The hospitality industry is the biggest employer in Illinois, and my partners and I have been lifelong Democrats,&#8221; he said, but changed sides because &#8220;I can&#8217;t stand here and tell you what health-care is going to cost.&#8221;</p>
<p><span><span>Write to Elizabeth</span><span> Williamson at <a href="mailto:elizabeth.williamson@wsj.com">elizabeth.williamson@wsj.com</a> </span></span><span></span>
<div><img width="1" height="1" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8811142208729284263-3237762725412328801?l=learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com" alt="" /></div>
<p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Cpsia/~4/_xvM3tahS9M" height="1" width="1" /></p>
<p>Read more here:<br /><a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/" title="CPSIA - WSJ Profiles RW in Article on Business Backlash">CPSIA &#8211; WSJ Profiles RW in Article on Business Backlash</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/10/cpsia-wsj-profiles-rw-in-article-on-business-backlash/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPSIA &#8211; Illinois Politics in the Gutter</title>
		<link>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/08/cpsia-illinois-politics-in-the-gutter/</link>
		<comments>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/08/cpsia-illinois-politics-in-the-gutter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Woldenberg, Chairman, Learning Resources, Inc.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BLOG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boxer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[city]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[country]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democrat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[felons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weather]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/08/cpsia-illinois-politics-in-the-gutter/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ 742 days have passed since ANY Democrat in Congress did ANYTHING to help us on the CPSIA. There are 69 days left until Election Day. After two years of banging my head against the wall on the CPSIA, it has become clear that much of the problem is in Congressional leaders from two states, California (Waxman, Boxer, Feinstein) and Illinois (Durbin, Rush, Schakowsky). [I hope I'm not forgetting any other "worthies".] I live in Illinois. The fact that our state is part of this disaster is no surprise. I get to follow the local political goings-on in the paper and on the Internet. Of course, people talk, too. We sure know how to pick 'em in Illinois . . . . I think it's well-known that I am not a big fan of Ms. Schakowsky for her cheerleading for the noxious CPSIA and her leadership of the gang that stymied any effort to fix that awful law and its regulatory by-products. And it's hard not to be utterly disgusted by her legislative agenda, which earned her the rank of NUMBER ONE SPENDER IN CONGRESS and which has been a job-killer of the first order. She provides many reasons to dislike her passionately . . . but did you also know that her husband is a FELON? As a lawyer, I have very little sympathy for felons. One never becomes a felon by accident. [As a matter of fact, the prospect of being accused of a felony under the CPSIA is one of my hottest "hot buttons" as I deeply resent that our government could make something that inappropriate possible under federal law.] Yes, in fact, Schakowsky's husband is a crook. Robert Creamer was convicted of financial crimes in 2005 (check kiting and tax evasion, a $2.3 million fraud committed against nine financial institutions to fund his salary, among other things) while Schakowsky was a sitting member of Congress, served five months in the pokey for his felonies and then was placed under house arrest with his member of Congress spouse for 11 months . Perhaps you think this is some sort of Illinois sitcom or perhaps a new kind of reality show. Here is Creamer's jail release record , if you are curious. Creamer's criminal record is absent from his bio , interestingly enough. Anyone shocked to learn that Creamer was an important advisor to our very own Governor Blagojevich, a fellow felon? Creamer has quite a business going as a political consultant - Democrats from all over the country clamor for his help. Hmmm. And the Illinois sewer continues to spew to this very day. Mr. Creamer, who was a critical thought leader and trainer for the 2008 Obama campaign (Obama is another Illinoisan with a CPSIA taint), is now apparently part of Democrat Alexi Giannoulias' campaign for Senate against Mark Kirk. Here's a still of Alexi Giannoulias posing with Mr. Creamer: Also conversing with Mssrs. Giannoulias and Creamer is lobbyist Larry Suffredin. Here's what Wikipedia says about his lobbying practice: "Suffredin is a registered lobbyist with Cook County, the City of Chicago, and the State of Illinois. Suffredin lobbyist clients include resort and casino company MGM Mirage, owners of the Grand Victoria Casino in Elgin, Illinois, and Penn National Gaming, owners of the Hollywood Casino, Aurora, Illinois, the Illinois Alliance of Competitive Telephone Companies, the Donors Forum of Chicago, the Illinois Arts Alliance, and Illinois Citizens for Handgun Control, the Chicago Bar Association, and Kankakee Regional Landfill LLC. He is also a registered lobbyist for Abbott Laboratories, Nursepower Services Corporation, and Quest Diagnostics." I assume the three of them were discussing the weather. "Pretty sunny out today, Bob." "Larry, did you see that rain cloud as you drove in?" "Alexi, surely it won't rain on your parade!" This still is from a Giannoulias campaign video pitching an endorsement by Jan Schakowsky. Perhaps there are a few dots to connect here. . . . Giannoulias chats with Creamer at the 1:45 point in the video, check it out yourself: An Illinois Senatorial candidate hanging out with a felon who stole from banks? Hey, isn't that practically the very question that dogs Giannoulias in this campaign? How ironic! And then there's the issue of members of Congress who consort with thieves. This is even more ironic given the Dems' practice this year of viciously bashing banks and bank bailouts. Perhaps defrauding banks is okay, but keeping them afloat is not. there an odor in the room??? What integrity! How inspiring! Can't wait to vote . . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><span>742 days have passed since ANY Democrat in Congress did ANYTHING to help us on the CPSIA. There are 69 days left until Election Day.</span></strong></p>
<p>After two years of banging my head against the wall on the CPSIA, it has become clear that much of the problem is in Congressional leaders from two states, California (Waxman, Boxer, Feinstein) and Illinois (Durbin, Rush, Schakowsky). [I hope I'm not forgetting any other "worthies".] I live in Illinois. The fact that our state is part of this disaster is no surprise. I get to follow the local political goings-on in the paper and on the Internet. Of course, people talk, too. We sure know how to pick &#8216;em in Illinois . . . .</p>
<p>I think it&#8217;s well-known that I am not a big fan of Ms. Schakowsky for her cheerleading for the noxious CPSIA and her leadership of the gang that stymied any effort to fix that awful law and its regulatory by-products. And it&#8217;s hard not to be utterly disgusted by her legislative agenda, which earned her the rank of <a href="http://www.ntu.org/ntuf/pdf/housesortedspending.pdf">NUMBER ONE SPENDER IN CONGRESS</a> and which has been a job-killer of the first order. She provides many reasons to dislike her passionately . . . but did you also know that her husband is a FELON? As a lawyer, I have very little sympathy for felons. One never becomes a felon by accident. [As a matter of fact, the prospect of being accused of a felony under the CPSIA is one of my hottest "hot buttons" as I deeply resent that our government could make something that inappropriate possible under federal law.]</p>
<p>Yes, in fact, Schakowsky&#8217;s husband is a crook. Robert Creamer was <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-08-31-congresswoman-husband_x.htm">convicted of financial crimes in 2005</a> (check kiting and tax evasion, a $2.3 million fraud committed against nine financial institutions to fund his salary, among other things) while Schakowsky was a sitting member of Congress, <a href="http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&#038;id=4057552">served five months in the pokey for his felonies and then was placed under house arrest with his member of Congress spouse for 11 months</a>. Perhaps you think this is some sort of Illinois sitcom or perhaps a new kind of reality show. Here is <a href="http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&#038;needingMoreList=false&#038;LastName=Creamer&#038;Middle=&#038;FirstName=Robert&#038;Race=U&#038;Sex=U&#038;Age=&#038;x=0&#038;y">Creamer&#8217;s jail release record</a>, if you are curious.</p>
<p>Creamer&#8217;s criminal record is <a href="http://www.stratcongroup.com/publication/about.php">absent from his bio</a>, interestingly enough. Anyone shocked to learn that Creamer was an important advisor to our very own Governor Blagojevich, a fellow felon? Creamer has <a href="http://www.stratcongroup.com/clients.php">quite a business</a> going as a political consultant &#8211; Democrats from all over the country clamor for his help. Hmmm.</p>
<p>And the Illinois sewer continues to spew to this very day. Mr. Creamer, who was a critical thought leader and trainer for the 2008 Obama campaign (Obama is another Illinoisan with a CPSIA taint), is now apparently part of Democrat Alexi Giannoulias&#8217; campaign for Senate against Mark Kirk. Here&#8217;s a still of Alexi Giannoulias posing with Mr. Creamer:</p>
<p><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fj0SzI8uo6o/THX4qpqPTEI/AAAAAAAAAII/MfrajAfevmo/s1600/Creamer_and_Giannoulias.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 218px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5509583130778881090" border="0" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fj0SzI8uo6o/THX4qpqPTEI/AAAAAAAAAII/MfrajAfevmo/s400/Creamer_and_Giannoulias.jpg" /></a> Also conversing with Mssrs. Giannoulias and Creamer is lobbyist Larry Suffredin. Here&#8217;s what <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Suffredin">Wikipedia</a> says about his lobbying practice: &#8220;Suffredin is a registered lobbyist with Cook County, the City of Chicago, and the State of Illinois. Suffredin lobbyist clients include resort and casino company MGM Mirage, owners of the Grand Victoria Casino in Elgin, Illinois, and Penn National Gaming, owners of the Hollywood Casino, Aurora, Illinois, the Illinois Alliance of Competitive Telephone Companies, the Donors Forum of Chicago, the Illinois Arts Alliance, and Illinois Citizens for Handgun Control, the Chicago Bar Association, and Kankakee Regional Landfill LLC. He is also a registered lobbyist for Abbott Laboratories, Nursepower Services Corporation, and Quest Diagnostics.&#8221;</p>
<p>I assume the three of them were discussing the weather. &#8220;Pretty sunny out today, Bob.&#8221; &#8220;Larry, did you see that rain cloud as you drove in?&#8221; &#8220;Alexi, surely it won&#8217;t rain on your parade!&#8221;</p>
<p>This still is from a Giannoulias campaign video pitching an endorsement by Jan Schakowsky. Perhaps there are a few dots to connect here. . . . Giannoulias chats with Creamer at the 1:45 point in the video, check it out yourself:</p>
<p>An Illinois Senatorial candidate hanging out with a felon who stole from banks? Hey, isn&#8217;t that <a href="http://www.nrsc.org/failed-mob-banker-alexi-giannoulias-lies-about-loans-he-made-to-convicted-mobster,-pimp">practically the very question that dogs Giannoulias</a> in this campaign? How ironic! And then there&#8217;s the issue of members of Congress who consort with thieves. This is even more ironic given the Dems&#8217; practice this year of viciously bashing banks and bank bailouts. Perhaps defrauding banks is okay, but keeping them afloat is not. there an odor in the room???</p>
<p>What integrity! How inspiring! Can&#8217;t wait to vote . . . .
<div><img width="1" height="1" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8811142208729284263-9102686108393452249?l=learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com" alt="" /></div>
<p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Cpsia/~4/uV4fnBkZtGo" height="1" width="1" /></p>
<p>Read more here:<br /><a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/" title="CPSIA - Illinois Politics in the Gutter">CPSIA &#8211; Illinois Politics in the Gutter</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/08/cpsia-illinois-politics-in-the-gutter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPSIA &#8211; What is a &quot;Substantial Product Hazard&quot;?</title>
		<link>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/05/cpsia-what-is-a-substantial-product-hazard/</link>
		<comments>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/05/cpsia-what-is-a-substantial-product-hazard/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 03:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Woldenberg, Chairman, Learning Resources, Inc.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BLOG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cpsc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cpsc leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discipline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recalls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/05/cpsia-what-is-a-substantial-product-hazard/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ How does the CPSC decide which items to recall and which ones to permit to remain in the market? The basis for a CPSC recall is found in Section 15(c) and 15(d) of the Consumer Product Safety Act . The CPSC is only entitled to recall items which present a "substantial product hazard", defined in section 15(a) in relevant part as: " a product defect which (because of the pattern of defect, the number of defective products distributed in commerce, the severity of the risk, or otherwise) creates a substantial risk of injury to the public. " Can the CPSC designate anything it wants as a "substantial product hazard"? Not in my opinion, if this legal standard is to have any meaning. Some things are substantial product hazards, and some things are lesser hazards. Those lesser hazards may still be of concern to the CPSC, but the agency lacks the legal authority to order their recall. Other solutions, such as public warnings or voluntary action by the industry, can appropriately address less severe risks adequately. It gets tricky when there are injuries to children. [This legal dilemma has previously been parodied by The Onion - eerily anticipating the recall of dart guns pictured here.] If there are injuries or deaths, will the product always be considered a "substantial product hazard"? What if the accidents occur because of product abuse, recklessness or age-inappropriate behavior? If injuries under those circumstances constitute a "substantial product hazard", will ALL similar abuses of products be considered a "substantial product hazard"? I would think this line of reasoning would make many things, including guns, knives and even forks, suitably for urgent recall. What about broken glass - if a kid eats broken glass or ceramic, wouldn't he/she be terribly injured? Should the CPSC now recall everything made of glass? What about newspapers - paper can burn and cause injury. Recall the Chicago Tribune? [This is my fantasy.] And if you can go this far, why must the abuse or inappropriate behavior even have to take place? Why not recall items just because you can imagine an injury occurring from an abuse that may have never happened? Is that a "substantial product hazard"? Is this pure fantasy or could recalls occur on this basis? Read on. When there are injuries to kids, emotions run high, and the "substantial product hazard" standard expands. Add in newspaper headlines, and anything seems possible nowadays. Let's not forget that in the last eleven years, there has been ONE death from lead, when a four year old swallowed a lead jewelry charm - and, BINGO, we were gifted the CPSIA as a result. The law gives a lot of wiggle room to the motivated regulator. Some recent recalls call into question whether the substantial product hazard" standard is being observed at all. Case 1: Cadmium jewelry . It is accepted that cadmium has been used in jewelry for decades, although not widely. Nevertheless, to my knowledge, there has never been a reported case of "cadmium poisoning" from jewelry. Pediatricians have virtually no awareness of cadmium poisoning as a health threat. The low probability of childhood injury from cadmium in children's products is also evidenced by the CPSC's lack of data on the health impact of ingesting cadmium in this form - it never came up until the Associated Press sounded the "alarm". The available data on cadmium relates only to workplace exposure or airborne cadmium . It is equally well-accepted that children inappropriately mouth jewelry. It is also known that children can and do swallow jewelry, which happens thousands of times each year. No child thinks jewelry is food - but these things happen. Cadmium is in (some) children's jewelry. Kids are known to mouth and/or swallow jewelry. Cadmium is a dangerous metal and can be harmful if swallowed. So, does this mean that cadmium in jewelry a "substantial product hazard"? Given that there has NEVER been a reported case of injury, it is hard to describe the risk of "severe" or even "substantial". It is best described as "possible". Yet, the CPSC has recalled cadmium jewelry three times now. Unfortunately, the CPSC has chosen to respond to the stimulus of newspaper headlines and the ill-informed action of state legislatures, rather than the discipline imposed by its own statutory legal standard. By labeling this hazard "substantial", the CPSC creates many problems that could have lasting impact on the market. It imposes high costs on the industry for something that may not matter much, dilutes the impact of recalls of more dangerous products (have you noticed that the pace of recalls has really picked up at the agency - does that help or hurt the CPSC's mission?), and diverts the resources and attention of the CPSC staff away from larger and more pressing issues. Perhaps worst of all, contrary to the assertions of Inez Tenenbaum , the confidence of the marketplace is being eroded by the deluge of recalls. Who can you trust anymore? Is the message that you can only trust Mother Government? If so, is Mother Government planning to take over the manufacturing of all children's products next? No one will have enough capital to survive this style of "regulating" for much longer so they better get ready to take over. This is no market stimulus program. Case 2 : Dart Guns . I am in the educational toy business and have children of my own. So I am prejudiced - I have no idea why anyone makes toys of this nature. Our company certainly doesn't, and we never allowed them in our home either. However, in our society, guns and dart guns have a certain appeal and they apparently sell well. Family Dollar Stores sold 1.8 million units of a small dart gun set for $1.50 in recent years (pictured above). It looks pretty generic to me, and for $1.50, it is clearly a cheap, disposable novelty toy. Sadly, two boys (9 and 10 years old, respectively) died in separate incidents in which they were chewing on these darts and aspirated them. The dart suction cup blocked their airways, leading to tragedy. These terrible accidents are sad confirmation of the unnecessary risk posed by dart guns as toys. But do these circumstances meet the "substantial product hazard" standard? If they don't, how can the CPSC recall this item? My argument is that while this toy is very objectionable and apparently capable of harming children, I do not know if they rise to the level of a "substantial" product hazard just because of the two accidental deaths (especially in light of 1.8 million sets sold, plus many millions more of similar items already in the market presenting the same "risk"). The statute does not provide that deaths automatically constitute substantial product hazards. Presumably, if that's what Congress meant, it might have said so. The tragic accidents occurred when two children were doing something they shouldn't. They were also at an age where they were supposed to know better. That doesn't make the loss of these boys any less painful but it does suggest that these incidents were terrible accidents rather than substantial product hazards. It may be that the families' remedies should be in the courts, not via the CPSC. In any event, if we (as a society) don't like dart guns, that's fine - we should ban them. Notably, the CPSC is not taking that position in this case. Recalls cost a lot of money, and it is naive to believe that the market will not respond to an erosion in the legal standard for recalls. Legal standards are an important part of the "rules of the road". If the rules change, the entire game changes. In this case, if we are all exposed to the risk of a massive, multi-year recall of our legal products because of accidents and tragedies arising out of misuse, we will have to change our business models in ways very disadvantageous to consumers. No one has the profit margin to accommodate these unplanned and random expenses. We have no answer for this business problem - we are not clairvoyant. For small, niche businesses like ours, the erosion of expected legal protections is very scary. These recalls are a gross expansion of capricious government power, no matter how scary cadmium jewelry is or how much we might be angry at dart gun makers. With an increasingly reactive CPSC demanding recalls to meet the expectations of newspaper headlines, randomness is complicating business planning and generally demoralizing the regulated community. I may sound like a broken record, but this style of government is stoking voter anger. We have little recourse over these policies or over the intransigence of the Dems in Congress other than in the voting booth. I, for one, won't forget all this. We need a new sheriff in town. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fj0SzI8uo6o/S_IMCe-GkAI/AAAAAAAAAHI/_2Raq37wDtg/s1600/Recalled+Dart+Gun.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 333px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5472449734021386242" border="0" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_fj0SzI8uo6o/S_IMCe-GkAI/AAAAAAAAAHI/_2Raq37wDtg/s400/Recalled+Dart+Gun.jpg" /></a>
<div>How does the CPSC decide which items to recall and which ones to permit to remain in the market?</div>
<div></div>
<div>The basis for a CPSC recall is found in Section 15(c) and 15(d) of the <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/cpsa.pdf">Consumer Product Safety Act</a>. The CPSC is only entitled to recall items which present a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;, defined in section 15(a) in relevant part as: &#8220;<em>a product defect which (because of the pattern of defect, the number of defective products distributed in commerce, the severity of the risk, or otherwise) creates a substantial risk of injury to the public.</em>&#8220;</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>Can the CPSC designate anything it wants as a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;? Not in my opinion, if this legal standard is to have any meaning. Some things are substantial product hazards, and some things are lesser hazards. Those lesser hazards may still be of concern to the CPSC, but the agency lacks the legal authority to order their recall. Other solutions, such as public warnings or voluntary action by the industry, can appropriately address less severe risks adequately.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>It gets tricky when there are injuries to children. [This legal dilemma has previously been parodied by The Onion - eerily anticipating the recall of dart guns pictured here.] If there are injuries or deaths, will the product <em><strong>always</strong></em> be considered a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;? What if the accidents occur because of product abuse, recklessness or age-inappropriate behavior? If injuries under those circumstances constitute a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;, will ALL similar abuses of products be considered a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;? I would think this line of reasoning would make many things, including guns, knives and even forks, suitably for urgent recall. What about broken glass &#8211; if a kid eats broken glass or ceramic, wouldn&#8217;t he/she be terribly injured? Should the CPSC now recall everything made of glass? What about newspapers &#8211; paper can burn and cause injury. Recall the Chicago Tribune? [This is my fantasy.]</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>And if you can go this far, why must the abuse or inappropriate behavior even have to take place? Why not recall items just because you can imagine an injury occurring from an abuse that may have never happened? Is that a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;? Is this pure fantasy or could recalls occur on this basis? Read on.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>When there are injuries to kids, emotions run high, and the &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221; standard expands. Add in newspaper headlines, and anything seems possible nowadays. Let&#8217;s not forget that in the last eleven years, there has been ONE death from lead, when a four year old swallowed a lead jewelry charm &#8211; and, BINGO, we were gifted the CPSIA as a result. The law gives a lot of wiggle room to the motivated regulator. Some recent recalls call into question whether the substantial product hazard&#8221; standard is being observed at all.</div>
<div></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong><br />Case 1:</strong> <em></em><strong><em>Cadmium jewelry</em>.</strong>  It is accepted that cadmium has been used in jewelry for decades, although not widely. Nevertheless, to my knowledge, there has never been a reported case of &#8220;cadmium poisoning&#8221; from jewelry. Pediatricians have virtually <a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/2010/01/cpsia-washington-post-says-cadmium.html">no awareness of cadmium poisoning</a> as a health threat. The low probability of childhood injury from cadmium in children&#8217;s products is also evidenced by the CPSC&#8217;s lack of data on the health impact of ingesting cadmium in this form &#8211; it never came up until the Associated Press sounded the &#8220;alarm&#8221;. The available data on cadmium relates only to <a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/2010/02/cpsia-icphso-update-remarks-of-mary.html">workplace exposure or airborne cadmium</a>. </div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>It is equally well-accepted that children inappropriately mouth jewelry. It is also known that children can and do swallow jewelry, which happens thousands of times each year. No child thinks jewelry is food &#8211; but these things happen.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>Cadmium is in (some) children&#8217;s jewelry. Kids are known to mouth and/or swallow jewelry. Cadmium is a dangerous metal and can be harmful if swallowed. So, does this mean that cadmium in jewelry a &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221;? Given that there has NEVER been a reported case of injury, it is hard to describe the risk of &#8220;severe&#8221; or even &#8220;substantial&#8221;. It is best described as &#8220;possible&#8221;. Yet, the CPSC has recalled cadmium jewelry three times now.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>Unfortunately, the CPSC has chosen to respond to the stimulus of newspaper headlines and the ill-informed action of state legislatures, rather than the discipline imposed by its own statutory legal standard. By labeling this hazard &#8220;substantial&#8221;, the CPSC creates many problems that could have lasting impact on the market. It imposes high costs on the industry for something that may not matter much, dilutes the impact of recalls of more dangerous products (have you noticed that the pace of recalls has really picked up at the agency &#8211; does that help or hurt the CPSC&#8217;s mission?), and diverts the resources and attention of the CPSC staff away from larger and more pressing issues.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>Perhaps worst of all, contrary to <a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/2010/05/cpsia-new-york-times-highlights-big.html">the assertions of Inez Tenenbaum</a>, the confidence of the marketplace is being eroded by the deluge of recalls. Who can you trust anymore? Is the message that you can only trust Mother Government? If so, is Mother Government planning to take over the manufacturing of all children&#8217;s products next? No one will have enough capital to survive this style of &#8220;regulating&#8221; for much longer so they better get ready to take over. This is no market stimulus program.</div>
<div></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong><br />Case 2</strong>: <strong><em>Dart Guns</em></strong>. I am in the educational toy business and have children of my own. So I am prejudiced &#8211; I have no idea why anyone makes toys of this nature. Our company certainly doesn&#8217;t, and we never allowed them in our home either. However, in our society, guns and dart guns have a certain appeal and they apparently sell well. <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10234.html">Family Dollar Stores</a> sold 1.8 million units of a small dart gun set for $1.50 in recent years (pictured above). It looks pretty generic to me, and for $1.50, it is clearly a cheap, disposable novelty toy.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>Sadly, two boys (9 and 10 years old, respectively) died in separate incidents in which they were chewing on these darts and aspirated them. The dart suction cup blocked their airways, leading to tragedy. These terrible accidents are sad confirmation of the unnecessary risk posed by dart guns as toys. But do these circumstances meet the &#8220;substantial product hazard&#8221; standard? If they don&#8217;t, how can the CPSC recall this item?</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>My argument is that while this toy is very objectionable and apparently capable of harming children, I do not know if they rise to the level of a &#8220;substantial&#8221; product hazard just because of the two accidental deaths (especially in light of 1.8 million sets sold, plus many millions more of similar items already in the market presenting the same &#8220;risk&#8221;). The statute does not provide that deaths automatically constitute substantial product hazards. Presumably, if that&#8217;s what Congress meant, it might have said so. The tragic accidents occurred when two children were doing something they shouldn&#8217;t. They were also at an age where they were supposed to know better. That doesn&#8217;t make the loss of these boys any less painful but it does suggest that these incidents were terrible accidents rather than substantial product hazards. It may be that the families&#8217; remedies should be in the courts, not via the CPSC. In any event, if we (as a society) don&#8217;t like dart guns, that&#8217;s fine &#8211; we should ban them. Notably, the CPSC is not taking that position in this case.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>Recalls cost a lot of money, and it is naive to believe that the market will not respond to an erosion in the legal standard for recalls. Legal standards are an important part of the &#8220;rules of the road&#8221;. If the rules change, the entire game changes. In this case, if we are all exposed to the risk of a massive, multi-year recall of our legal products because of accidents and tragedies arising out of misuse, we will have to change our business models in ways very disadvantageous to consumers. No one has the profit margin to accommodate these unplanned and random expenses. We have no answer for this business problem &#8211; we are not clairvoyant.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>For small, niche businesses like ours, the erosion of expected legal protections is very scary. These recalls are a gross expansion of capricious government power, no matter how scary cadmium jewelry is or how much we might be angry at dart gun makers. With an increasingly reactive CPSC demanding recalls to meet the expectations of newspaper headlines, randomness is complicating business planning and generally demoralizing the regulated community.</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div>I may sound like a broken record, but this style of government is stoking voter anger. We have little recourse over these policies or over the intransigence of the Dems in Congress other than in the voting booth. I, for one, won&#8217;t forget all this. We need a new sheriff in town.</div>
<div><img width="1" height="1" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8811142208729284263-8117779405338079263?l=learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com" alt="" /></div>
<p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Cpsia/~4/LG7Vt8Ipmbw" height="1" width="1" /></p>
<p>Read more here:<br /><a href="http://learningresourcesinc.blogspot.com/" title="CPSIA - What is a &quot;Substantial Product Hazard&quot;?">CPSIA &#8211; What is a &quot;Substantial Product Hazard&quot;?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://amendthecpsia.com/2010/05/cpsia-what-is-a-substantial-product-hazard/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPSIA &#8211; Crain&#8217;s Says We&#8217;re About to Get Sued</title>
		<link>http://amendthecpsia.com/2009/09/cpsia-crains-says-were-about-to-get-sued/</link>
		<comments>http://amendthecpsia.com/2009/09/cpsia-crains-says-were-about-to-get-sued/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Woldenberg, Chairman, Learning Resources, Inc.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BLOG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008-requires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[asbestos-as-the]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chicago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[great-unknowns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news reports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pending-against]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[starting-with]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state ags]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[years-or-more]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amendthecpsia.com/2009/09/cpsia-crains-says-were-about-to-get-sued/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this week's Crain's Chicago Business, the news periodical speculate on which mass tort action could succeed asbestos as the next gravy train for plaintiff's attorneys. And guess who makes a guest appearance??? Asbestos and the legal black hole By: Steven R. Strahler September 28, 2009 Asbestos has lived up to its Greek origin — "inextinguishable" — on legal and medical landscapes alike: Mass tort actions involving asbestos have bankrupted more than 60 makers and users of the once-widespread insulating material, starting with Johns-Manville Corp. in 1982 and claiming Chicago's USG Corp. in 2001. Odds are, corporate defendants won't see another mass tort topic like it: more than 700,000 claims pending against 8,000-plus defendants and estimated costs exceeding $250 billion. Because asbestos-related symptoms can take 30 years or more to manifest, the litigation is expected to last until mid-century. . . . . "No, there is no asbestos-like gravy train pulling up in front of the American Bar Assn.," says Robert Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute. Still, he says, "there are great unknowns, like climate change and latent manifestation of occupational disease." Among the most likely post-asbestos targets for plaintiffs' attorneys: . . . . Product liability The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 requires independent testing of children's products, including cribs and metal jewelry, empowers state attorneys general to file federal actions and increases penalties, all of which will boost opportunities for mass-tort suits. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In this week&#8217;s Crain&#8217;s Chicago Business, the news periodical speculate on which mass tort action could succeed asbestos as the next gravy train for plaintiff&#8217;s attorneys. And guess who makes a guest appearance??? Asbestos and the legal black hole By: Steven R. Strahler September 28, 2009 Asbestos has lived up to its Greek origin — &#8220;inextinguishable&#8221; — on legal and medical landscapes alike: Mass tort actions involving asbestos have bankrupted more than 60 makers and users of the once-widespread insulating material, starting with Johns-Manville Corp. in 1982 and claiming Chicago&#8217;s USG Corp. in 2001. Odds are, corporate defendants won&#8217;t see another mass tort topic like it: more than 700,000 claims pending against 8,000-plus defendants and estimated costs exceeding $250 billion. Because asbestos-related symptoms can take 30 years or more to manifest, the litigation is expected to last until mid-century. . . . . &#8220;No, there is no asbestos-like gravy train pulling up in front of the American Bar Assn.,&#8221; says Robert Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute. Still, he says, &#8220;there are great unknowns, like climate change and latent manifestation of occupational disease.&#8221; Among the most likely post-asbestos targets for plaintiffs&#8217; attorneys: . . . . Product liability The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 requires independent testing of children&#8217;s products, including cribs and metal jewelry, empowers state attorneys general to file federal actions and increases penalties, all of which will boost opportunities for mass-tort suits. </p>
<p>See the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Cpsia/~3/cg7KJGZMRBQ/cpsia-crains-says-were-about-to-get.html" title="CPSIA - Crain's Says We're About to Get Sued">CPSIA &#8211; Crain&#8217;s Says We&#8217;re About to Get Sued</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://amendthecpsia.com/2009/09/cpsia-crains-says-were-about-to-get-sued/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

