In a few minutes, members of the House and Senate are set to meet to work on sorting out differences between their respective versions of consumer product safety legislation. Both versions of the bill would expand the budget and authority of the beleaguered Consumer Product Safety Commission, but other provisions have proved contentious. Congress Daily (subscription) reports: The House passed its CPSC reauthorization in December and the Senate approved its version in March. Conferees first met last month, when they agreed on 21 items. They left the more troublesome measures for today. Among them, a ban on phthalates in children's products, which is included in the Senate version but not the House's. Studies have shown phthalate exposure to cause developmental abnormalities, particularly in fetuses and infants. The European Union and the state of California have already announced restrictions on phthalates. The creation of a publicly accessible consumer complaint database, another Senate invention, has also stoked debate. Critics of the database say it would be too expensive, according to Congress Daily. The Senate version also includes protection for whistleblowers who report dangerous products from their perches at private firms. (Read more on the whistleblower issue here.) Both bills include a provision that would preclude CPSC from establishing rules that preempt state and local law — an issue that has angered industry trade groups. The Bush administration has a penchant for including language in federal rules saying that if a product maker complies with federal regulation, the product maker is not liable under state common law. This legal doctrine, known as preemption, prevents consumers from seeking damages, or tort, claims after being injured by a product. Hopefully, the provision in the CPSC bill will survive the House/Senate conference. CPSC is in dire need of reform after more than a year of product safety debacles. In 2007, CPSC was in the news for all the wrong reasons. Recalls of lead-contaminated children's products reached all-time highs. A long-term vacancy in the commission left it without a quorum, preventing it from conducting official business. President Bush nominated a product industry lobbyist to fill the vacancy, but the conflict of interest of a lobbyist regulating his former cronies was too much for Congress and the public to swallow, and the nomination was pulled. Finally, the acting commissioner, Nancy Nord, was caught taking lavish trips funded by the consumer product industry. Mostly due to the outrage over lead in toys, Congress had hoped to finalize the legislation by Christmas 2007. After that convenient PR deadline passed, Democratic leadership let the bill slide down its list of priorities. Four months after passage of the Senate version, a conference of House and Senate leaders is only now working out the controversial aspects of the bill. Reg•Watch Update: "On Consumer Product Bill, More Work Remains"