Congress is working toward passage of legislation that would expand the resources and regulatory authority of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The bill would also address the continuing problem of lead-contaminated children's products by effectively banning the heavy metal's presence in toys and other goods. Senior administration officials are working to derail the legislation.

On Oct. 30, the Senate Commerce Committee approved by voice vote the CPSC Reform Act of 2007 (S. 2045). Sens. Mark Pryor (D-AR) and Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI), chairman of the committee, are the lead sponsors of the bill.

Recent high-profile regulatory failures have highlighted the need for expansion of CPSC's authority and resources. CPSC has been the subject of media and congressional scrutiny as recalls involving lead-contaminated children's products have spiked in 2007. As of Nov. 5, CPSC has announced 78 recalls accounting for more than 15 million products. In 2006, CPSC announced only 17 recalls accounting for less than three million products.

One recall announced on Oct. 31 involved a Halloween party favor called Ugly Teeth. The product — fake teeth painted black, white, orange and brown — contains "excessive levels of lead," according to a CPSC press release.

The bill would dramatically expand the budget and staffing of CPSC. The bill would, by 2014, double the agency's budget and increase staffing levels to 500, from current levels of approximately 420. Even with these efforts, staffing levels would still fall short of the peak employment — 978 full-time employees — of the 1970s.

The bill would also expand the agency's regulatory authority by officially limiting to trace amounts the presence of lead in children's products and enabling the agency to levy stiffer civil penalties against violators of federal regulations. To ensure greater safety, the bill would require children's products to be certified by "a nongovernmental independent third party qualified to perform such tests."

The bill also includes a provision which would prohibit CPSC from issuing regulations that would preempt state or local regulations. Lawmakers included this provision in response to a recent trend in federal rulemaking in which federal regulators prohibit state or local regulators from developing rules stricter than those issued by the federal government. The federal preemption efforts often denied people the right to sue companies for damages if they were injured by faulty products. One such rule involving mattress flammability was issued by CPSC. The CPSC Reform Act would nullify the preemption provision in that rule.

Progress on the bill came despite opposition from the White House and a CPSC commissioner. CPSC's acting chair, Nancy Nord, wrote to Pryor and Inouye outlining her concerns with the legislation. One of Nord's primary concerns is that the legislation would impose too many new mandates on CPSC. CPSC's other commissioner, Thomas Moore, supports the bill.

Alan Hubbard, a leading economic advisor to President Bush, also voiced opposition to the bill on behalf of the White House. The White House has denied coordinating its lobbying efforts with Nord.

Nord's opposition to the bill caused some leading Democrats to call for her resignation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), along with members of both the House and the Senate, has publicly asked Bush to dismiss Nord. Public interest organizations such as the Campaign for America's Future and Public Citizen have also called for Nord's resignation.

Strikingly, Nord's ouster would carry unintended consequences. CPSC has been working with only two of its three commissioners since July 2006. The commission is currently conducting official business under a temporary extension of its voting quorum. If Nord were to resign, CPSC would have only one commissioner and would be unable to promulgate regulations or force mandatory recalls.

Nord and CPSC suffered another black eye on Nov. 2 when a Washington Post investigation revealed Nord and former Chair Hal Stratton have taken nearly 30 trips financed by some industries that CPSC is responsible for regulating. According to the investigation, "The airfares, hotels and meals totaled nearly $60,000, and the destinations included China, Spain, San Francisco, New Orleans and a golf resort on Hilton Head Island, S.C."

The trips may be a violation of federal regulations of government employee travel. Nord has requested that the Office of Government Ethics investigate the matter.

The Washington Post published a follow-up story on Nov. 6 indicating that nine of the industry-financed trips were paid for by companies that had business before CPSC. Moreover, the newspaper found that on at least one trip paid for by a regulated industry, the agency's ethics officer traveled with the commission chair as a guest. On another trip, the written approval for the trip came after the trip had been taken.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has indicated he will attempt to find room for floor consideration of the CPSC Reform Act this year, according to the National Journal (subscription). It is not clear how the recent revelations about industry-financed travel for CPSC decision makers might influence the legislation.

According to an Associated Press story, President Bush's Interagency Working Group on Import Safety is expected to release a report Nov. 6 that will call for enhanced CPSC recall powers for defective products and a certification program for companies with good product safety track records among its recommendations. It's unclear what effect the report might have on the CPSC legislation.

House members have introduced a companion bill, the Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act of 2007 (H.R. 4040). A subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee is scheduled to consider the bill Nov. 6. Like the Senate bill, the House version has bipartisan support and is expected to pass the chamber.