Children's books banned -- This was in my inbox this AM... This can't be for real!?

[ereks mom]

1/8/2009

 

Dear friends,

 

This information affects all homeschooling families in a very profound

way. Please read the article in my newsletter and pass this email on

to everyone you know.

 

Sincerely,

Heather Idoni

http://www.BelovedBooks. com

 

http://www.familyclassroom.net/BookBan0210.html

[Parrothead]

Yup, with the way it stands right now, it is for real.

[H.S. Burrow]

1/8/2009

 

Dear friends,

 

This information affects all homeschooling families in a very profound

way. Please read the article in my newsletter and pass this email on

to everyone you know.

 

Sincerely,

Heather Idoni

www.BelovedBooks.com

 

http://www.familyclassroom.net/BookBan0210.html

 

 

:confused: I went to the website and did not find any newsletter? Can you copy and paste the article in question?

 

 

ETA: I see the link now - I thought that was a blog link....SORRY!!!

[beansprouts]

Now this one will bother me. Many of those old books will not be republished. What will we do without them?

[HappyGrace]

It's all true.

 

The media has shockingly not gotten ahold of this very much yet. I think once they do there will be major amendments made to this. It just affects too many businesses, including charitable foundations like Goodwill, etc. It affects small and large-craigslist, ebay, etc. I really think they are going to have to make changes.

[Melissa in CA]

Good Grief. They cannot be serious. :glare:

[Jackie in NE]

I cannot imagine that this will fly. There will be some ammendments.

 

For goodness sake! Can't our legislators find something better to do with their time and our money?!

[Parrothead]

I cannot imagine that this will fly. There will be some ammendments.

 

For goodness sake! Can't our legislators find something better to do with their time and our money?!

Well, they could ban products from China and put our people back to work by making things in the US. But, sadly, I don't see that happening any time soon.

[Anne Rittenhouse]

Nevermind....

Edited January 8, 2009 by Anne Rittenhouse
Changed my mind and I am keeping my mouth shut.

[H.S. Burrow]

Just wondering out loud here, and I haven't read through the entire legal document, but...

 

Aren't there already these lead requirements in place for goods manufactured in the US?

 

Specifically, aren't books published in the US lead-free? Or at least meet the minimum requirement of less than 600ppm?

 

Isn't this legislation designed to protect US citizens from goods produced elsewhere?

 

As this forum is from a US based publishing company.....don't you think that SWB or someone from Peace Hill Press would have made some kind of announcement if their books were going to have to be pulled from the shelves and destroyed because they weren't certified as having less than 600ppm?

 

Like I said, I'm just wondering out loud here.....

 

[dragons in the flower bed]

I cannot imagine that this will fly. There will be some ammendments.

 

I'm afraid that everyone will agree with you, and because they do, they won't do anything. Considering how much people object to the idea, this should have been stopped long ago. Obviously our legislators thought this was a good thing, or it wouldn't have gotten so far. They're not going to change it without major outrage across the nation. The people need to make their voices heard now. Did you send an e-mail or sign the petition? Please, please, please do so. My family makes it's living selling used books and toys. In just a month's time, my partner and I will have to choose between risking up to five years in jail and a $100,000 fine to continue our home business, or putting the kids in public school and getting two entry level jobs.

[HappyGrace]

so more people can be flagged by it and sign it? I think that would be great.

[RoughCollie]

We own a children's bookstore with 45,000 out of print children's books in it.

 

We are not worried in the least, and neither should you be.

 

Such a ridiculous result was not intended, and from what I've read, the old books will be grandfathered in anyway.

 

If it came to pass that out of print children's books were to be banned, we, as one of the largest children's booksellers in the U.S.A., and as attorneys, would do something about it.

 

For now, don't panic and sit tight. If we were panicking, and if our customer schools and libraries were panicking, I would advise it, but we are not. We are going to check into this further and I will apprise you of our findings.

 

RC

Edited January 8, 2009 by RoughCollie

[HappyGrace]

things like clothing and toys-that whole industry including the secondhand industry that's supported by it would take a MAJOR hit from this.

[texascamps]

I think the whole "Chidlren's books Banned" heading is a little uncalled for. I hate that kind of sensationalism and drama.

 

As it is the bill has bee approved overwhelmingly. I finally saw an article about this on hotair.com this morning. However, I also read the bill and you can too. Just google HR4040 and follow the links. It is vague and I don't see how it addresses used or previously manufactured toys and clothes. If someone else can read it, see what you think and post whatever portions of it you think will apply to used items.

 

Once again, it seems like a good idea was poorly written and there were few dissenters....I imagine the dissenting reps and senators actually have staffers who read the legislation. I also bet those dissenters got hell for months after they voted NO against it for being against children. Geesh!!

 

But, now it is in the public eye and seems to really be an issue that causes hardship. If you know of any real journalists (not internet readers/regurgitators, email them about this.)

 

 

Now that it is in the public eye, maybe something can be done to have it written better. However, It was signed and agreed to back in August. Where was the press then? Too busy with the election I guess.

[Word Nerd]

I've been following this story and have some genuine concerns about the CPSIA, but the alarmist and manipulative wording in this otherwise informative article hurts the cause rather than helping.

[HappyGrace]

IS a reason to panic-in the sense of "let's get off our butts and get the message out there and change this." The media is just now, in the last couple of days, starting to get the ball rolling on this. We need to make some noise on this to bring attention to the issue!

 

Our family gets over 85% of our nonfood goods from used sources. It is the only way we are able to homeschool. Not to mention the devastating effect on the economy this could have. As well as the charitable institutions, and on and on.

[ereks mom]

I think the whole "Chidlren's books Banned" heading is a little uncalled for. I hate that kind of sensationalism and drama.

 

 

 

The following was the subject line in my inbox this morning --copied and pasted exactly as it appeared:

 

Subject: All Children's Books to be Banned as of 2/10

 

 

Please note that in my heading I also asked if this was for real because it sounded incredible to me as well.

[Word Nerd]

IS a reason to panic-in the sense of "let's get off our butts and get the message out there and change this." The media is just now, in the last couple of days, starting to get the ball rolling on this. We need to make some noise on this to bring attention to the issue!

 

I agree, but couching the issues in terms of book banning and using absurdly false statements ["Effective February 10th, in the United States, the sale of all children's books (books intended for children ages 12 and under) is to be PROHIBITED."] is not the way to go about it.

[Matryoshka]

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lead7-2009jan07,0,6917858.story

 

I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist just yet, either. It looks like they've already begun the process of making changes and exceptions to the rule. I agree it should have been thought out more logically, but I also don't think there's a need to panic and start hoarding old books, toys, or clothes.

 

I'm not usually an alarmist, and the ramifications of this law as currently written are so far-reaching and utterly ridiculous that it is tempting to just think that it can't possibly be enforced. But techinically, in just one short month, it will be in effect unless we do get our knickers in a twist. Even if they can't enforce it, the punishment *per item* is $100,000 and FIVE YEARS IN JAIL, :eek: and who wants to be the one singled out. And that's not for an item proven to have lead, but just one that hasn't been properly tested and certified.

 

None of those exemptions in the article you linked would do anything to solve the problems of used books, or 99% of used clothing, or solve any of the problems of small mom & pop operations making small or individual batches of toys or clothing for sale. Also, exemptions for clothing made of natural material? Even if the material is 100% cotton, with no poly or other blend, what about the buttons? And yes, they're worried about that - the one case of lead poisoning from clothing I know of was from a kid who swallowed some little thingy off a sneaker.

 

The exemptions that need to be made are for:

 

* Small businesses who can't possibly afford third-party testing

* Used items and goods manufactured before the law takes effect

 

Books are definitely included (this from the CPSC's own website FAQ)

 

Does the new requirement for total lead on children's products apply to children's books, cassettes and CD's, printed game boards, posters and other printed goods used for children's education?

 

 

In general, yes. CPSIA defines children’s products as those products intended primarily for use by children 12 and under. Accordingly, these products would be subject to the lead limit for paint and surface coatings at 16 CFR part 1303 (and the 90 ppm lead paint limit effective August 14, 2009) as well as the new lead limits for children’s products containing lead (600 ppm lead limit effective February 10, 2009, and 300 ppm lead limit effective August 14, 2009). If the children’s products use printing inks or materials which actually become a part of the substrate, such as the pigment in a plastic article, or those materials which are actually bonded to the substrate, such as by electroplating or ceramic glazing, they would be excluded from the lead paint limit. However, these products are still considered to be lead containing products irrespective of whether such products are excluded from the lead paint limit and are subject to the lead limits for children’s products containing lead. For lead containing children’s products, CPSIA specifically provides that paint, coatings, or electroplating may

not

be considered a barrier that would render lead in the substrate inaccessible to a child.

Here's a copy of the CPSC memorandum saying that the rules are retroactive - meaning they apply to goods manufactured before the law took effect - no more used books for us (and even if they change the law later, what about the stuff that may get tossed as companies don't want to keep things in inventory that they can't sell)

 

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/advisory/317.pdf

[Matryoshka]

While I know that blogs are far from the ultimate source of reliable info, I do think that the people directly affected by this new law have been reading it more closely than any of us have had time for. Excerpted below a part of this blog - about unintended consequences of the law if actually enforced as written (and again, even if they don't enforce it, who wants all the libraries to be peddling illegal goods??)

 

Excerpt follows:

***************

 

The major unintended consequence of the law is that all products legally made prior to November, 2008, will be assumed "hazardous" unless they were tested and the manufacturer can produce a GCC to prove it.

 

The CPSC's "Falvey Opinion" interprets the CPSIA to mean that the law with respect to lead is retroactive. This means unless a person or retailer can prove through testing that their child's item has less than 600 ppm lead as of February 10, 2009, it will be illegal to sell. Then in August, items legally made to contain less than 600 ppm of lead will be illegal to sell as the standard will be reduced to 300 ppm. This mass illegalization of children's products will again occur in August of 2011 when the standard changes to 100 ppm.

 

 

This will affect as examples only (not all inclusive):

 

• All hand-crafters, work at home manufacturers, and small run manufacturers who will not be able to afford testing, which is estimated to cost between $150-$4000 per component tested, with an average cost of $500. As an example, a cloth diaper may have three components: inner fleece, outer lining, and velcro. At a cost of $500 per component, that would cost $1500 for one batch of cloth diapers using the same materials. Change the color or start on a new bolt of material and testing is required again.
  
• Daycare providers as they are required by law to provide "safe" items for the children they care for as defined by the CPSC. As the CPSC's interpretation of the law is that untested items are unsafe unless proven by testing as safe, daycare providers will either need to obtain proof of testing from the manufacturer, test their items, or buy new items. However, they'll be forced to go through this again each time the law reduces the allowable level as the GCC provided doesn't say what the level is.
  
• Thrifts, Consignments, and Charities that sell used items will not be able to resell used items without the GCC.
  
• You will not be legally allowed to sell your own items on eBay, Craiglist (or any other site), or even hold a yard sale without providing a GCC to the buyer to prove their children's items are in compliance. You will not even be legally allowed to donate or give away these items, even to foreign countries as it is explicitly forbidden to "export" items not proven safe.
  
• Hotels, hospitals, and any public play area will have to ensure all their child-related items are tested or replace them as they are provided to the public.
  
• Libraries will have to ensure their children's books have been tested or replace them.
  New & Used book stores will likewise have to ensure their books for children are safe or discard them.
  
• Schools will have to examine all their child-related items and supplies from books, to science equipment, to paper clips if they are to be used by children 12 and younger. Items not proven tested, will, by CPSC's interpretation of the law, have to be tossed as well.
  
• PTA fundraisers that involve handmade crafts for kids will be forbidden.
  
• Holiday craft bazaars by your local church will likewise be forbidden for children's products.
  
• Trade shows for vintage Barbies, Star Wars Figures, Hotwheels, among others will be illegal.
  
• Families looking to save money or be environmental friendly by reusing and recycling children's items will no longer be able to.
  

Does this sound extreme? Perhaps, but (as the fine for violations is $100,000 per offense and up to 5 years in jail) I am not willing to risk it and neither should you. As ignorance of the law is not often a good defense, it is vital that the word about this law and the CPSC interpretation of the retroactivity of it be spread far and wide to ensure it is fixed before more irrepairable harm is done.

 

A brief review of the internet by Googling "CPSIA" will show that 1000's of people are already making decisions to liquidate inventory, stop production, and file for bankruptcy.

[fivetails]

While I know that blogs are far from the ultimate source of reliable info, I do think that the people directly affected by this new law have been reading it more closely than any of us have had time for. Excerpted below a part of this blog - about unintended consequences of the law if actually enforced as written (and again, even if they don't enforce it, who wants all the libraries to be peddling illegal goods??)

 

Excerpt follows:

***************

 

The major unintended consequence of the law is that all products legally made prior to November, 2008, will be assumed "hazardous" unless they were tested and the manufacturer can produce a GCC to prove it.

 

The CPSC's "Falvey Opinion" interprets the CPSIA to mean that the law with respect to lead is retroactive. This means unless a person or retailer can prove through testing that their child's item has less than 600 ppm lead as of February 10, 2009, it will be illegal to sell. Then in August, items legally made to contain less than 600 ppm of lead will be illegal to sell as the standard will be reduced to 300 ppm. This mass illegalization of children's products will again occur in August of 2011 when the standard changes to 100 ppm.

 

 

This will affect as examples only (not all inclusive):

 

• All hand-crafters, work at home manufacturers, and small run manufacturers who will not be able to afford testing, which is estimated to cost between $150-$4000 per component tested, with an average cost of $500. As an example, a cloth diaper may have three components: inner fleece, outer lining, and velcro. At a cost of $500 per component, that would cost $1500 for one batch of cloth diapers using the same materials. Change the color or start on a new bolt of material and testing is required again.

• Daycare providers as they are required by law to provide "safe" items for the children they care for as defined by the CPSC. As the CPSC's interpretation of the law is that untested items are unsafe unless proven by testing as safe, daycare providers will either need to obtain proof of testing from the manufacturer, test their items, or buy new items. However, they'll be forced to go through this again each time the law reduces the allowable level as the GCC provided doesn't say what the level is.

• Thrifts, Consignments, and Charities that sell used items will not be able to resell used items without the GCC.

• You will not be legally allowed to sell your own items on eBay, Craiglist (or any other site), or even hold a yard sale without providing a GCC to the buyer to prove their children's items are in compliance. You will not even be legally allowed to donate or give away these items, even to foreign countries as it is explicitly forbidden to "export" items not proven safe.

• Hotels, hospitals, and any public play area will have to ensure all their child-related items are tested or replace them as they are provided to the public.

• Libraries will have to ensure their children's books have been tested or replace them.

  New & Used book stores will likewise have to ensure their books for children are safe or discard them.

• Schools will have to examine all their child-related items and supplies from books, to science equipment, to paper clips if they are to be used by children 12 and younger. Items not proven tested, will, by CPSC's interpretation of the law, have to be tossed as well.

• PTA fundraisers that involve handmade crafts for kids will be forbidden.

• Holiday craft bazaars by your local church will likewise be forbidden for children's products.

• Trade shows for vintage Barbies, Star Wars Figures, Hotwheels, among others will be illegal.

• Families looking to save money or be environmental friendly by reusing and recycling children's items will no longer be able to.

 

Does this sound extreme? Perhaps, but (as the fine for violations is $100,000 per offense and up to 5 years in jail) I am not willing to risk it and neither should you. As ignorance of the law is not often a good defense, it is vital that the word about this law and the CPSC interpretation of the retroactivity of it be spread far and wide to ensure it is fixed before more irrepairable harm is done.

 

A brief review of the internet by Googling "CPSIA" will show that 1000's of people are already making decisions to liquidate inventory, stop production, and file for bankruptcy.

 

"Does this sound extreme?"

 

Yep. So extreme as to be completely impossible to enforce. What are they gonna do, build brand new jails all over the place to fill with Mums and Dads and Nannies and Librarians and Teachers and little old ladies who knit booties for babies? ;)

 

I don't know a whole lot about this (other than what I read here) I figure they'll fix it. They're not gonna put millions of people out of business, run charities into the ground, all that sorta stuff. That would be nuts and people would never stand for it anyway.

[Zelda]

"Does this sound extreme?"

 

Yep. So extreme as to be completely impossible to enforce. What are they gonna do, build brand new jails all over the place to fill with Mums and Dads and Nannies and Librarians and Teachers and little old ladies who knit booties for babies? ;)

 

I don't know a whole lot about this (other than what I read here) I figure they'll fix it. They're not gonna put millions of people out of business, run charities into the ground, all that sorta stuff. That would be nuts and people would never stand for it anyway.

 

Sure, nothing crazy and unspeakable has ever happened while the rest of the world watched and said, "That could never happen. Who would allow it?"

[RoughCollie]

I just wrote to Senator Kennedy and asked him if the Act applies to used children's books and clothing.

 

Meanwhile, here's an interesting blog:

http://news.bookweb.org/news/5695.html

Edited January 8, 2009 by RoughCollie

[Kate CA]

I'm afraid that everyone will agree with you, and because they do, they won't do anything. Considering how much people object to the idea, this should have been stopped long ago. Obviously our legislators thought this was a good thing, or it wouldn't have gotten so far. They're not going to change it without major outrage across the nation. The people need to make their voices heard now. Did you send an e-mail or sign the petition? Please, please, please do so. My family makes it's living selling used books and toys. In just a month's time, my partner and I will have to choose between risking up to five years in jail and a $100,000 fine to continue our home business, or putting the kids in public school and getting two entry level jobs.

 

I have sent letters to all three of my representatives. I hope it helps - for your sake and for ours.

[Jackie in NE]

Sure, nothing crazy and unspeakable has ever happened while the rest of the world watched and said, "That could never happen. Who would allow it?"

 

I don't believe that she was saying "nothing crazy and unspeakable has ever happened..... " etc.

 

I think she was just saying that the law as currently written is unenforceable, and that the unintended consequences of this poorly thought out legislation are too dire and far-reaching for our legislators to stand by it.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, Fivetails.

 

Unfortunately, the short-sightedness and laziness of our law-makers will end up costing all of us more time and money as we take on this fight which could have been easily avoided.

[Matryoshka]

"Does this sound extreme?"

 

Yep. So extreme as to be completely impossible to enforce. What are they gonna do, build brand new jails all over the place to fill with Mums and Dads and Nannies and Librarians and Teachers and little old ladies who knit booties for babies? ;)

 

I don't know a whole lot about this (other than what I read here) I figure they'll fix it. They're not gonna put millions of people out of business, run charities into the ground, all that sorta stuff. That would be nuts and people would never stand for it anyway.

 

No, they can't enforce it wholesale. It is nuts. But do you want to volunteer to be the one person they decide to enforce it on to make an example of? Five years in jail? $100,000? Yeesh! Some businesses are already shutting down - they don't want to take the risk.

 

There are lots of instances where it takes some extreme case like someone getting fined or put out of business or jailed for basically no good reason before people actually realize what's going on - then it gets fixed. I don't think we should wait till that wake-up call.

 

My kids have been reading over my shoulder and decided to write our representatives (civics lesson :)). I will be doing the same.

[H0MEFree]

As far as it closing down homeschool businesses and booksellers,

 

I would like to see the HSLDA respond to this.

 

What do they say? I could not find a response on their site.

[angela in ohio]

I recieved the same email. I think Heather was being a bit overdramatic, but I do think it is cause for concern. Some people (myself included) will feel a need to follow the law even if it is not well-enforced.

 

BTW, Heather's bookstore is fantastic, if anyone is ever in mid-Michigan.

Edited January 8, 2009 by angela in ohio

[Parrothead]

As far as it closing down homeschool businesses and booksellers,

 

I would like to see the HSLDA respond to this.

 

What do they say? I could not find a response on their site.

:iagree:I was wondering about that too. I'm surprised it got by them when the legislation was being voted on.

[RoughCollie]

Issued today: Used children's products exempted from certification, but still must comply with the laws against selling items containing more lead than legally allowed.

 

Also: The American Library Association is on this like white on rice.

 

Also: There may be a required form that must accompany used items which are imported to or exported from the U.S.A. No info on that yet.

 

NEWS from CPSC

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Office of Information and Public Affairs Washington, DC 20207

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 8, 2009

Release #09-086

 

CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772

CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908

 

CPSC Clarifies Requirements of New Children’s Product Safety Laws Taking Effect in February

Guidance Intended for Resellers of Children’s Products, Thrift and Consignment Stores

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. - In February 2009, new requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) take effect. Manufacturers, importers and retailers are expected to comply with the new Congressionally-mandated laws. Beginning February 10, 2009, children’s products cannot be sold if they contain more than 600 parts per million (ppm) total lead. Certain children’s products manufactured on or after February 10, 2009 cannot be sold if they contain more that 0.1% of certain specific phthalates or if they fail to meet new mandatory standards for toys.

 

Under the new law, children’s products with more than 600 ppm total lead cannot lawfully be sold in the United States on or after February 10, 2009, even if they were manufactured before that date. The total lead limit drops to 300 ppm on August 14, 2009.

 

The new law requires that domestic manufacturers and importers certify that children’s products made after February 10 meet all the new safety standards and the lead ban. Sellers of used children’s products, such as thrift stores and consignment stores [RC note: "such as" means including, but not limited to], are not required to certify that those products meet the new lead limits, phthalates standard or new toy standards.

 

The new safety law does not require resellers to test children’s products in inventory for compliance with the lead limit before they are sold. However, resellers cannot sell children’s products that exceed the lead limit and therefore should avoid products that are likely to have lead content, unless they have testing or other information to indicate the products being sold have less than the new limit. Those resellers that do sell products in violation of the new limits could face civil and/or criminal penalties.

When the CPSIA was signed into law on August 14, 2008, it became unlawful to sell recalled products. All resellers should check the CPSC Web site (http://www.cpsc.gov'>http://www.cpsc.gov'>http://www.cpsc.gov'>http://www.cpsc.gov) for information on recalled products before taking into inventory or selling a product. The selling of recalled products also could carry civil and/or criminal penalties.

 

The agency intends to focus its enforcement efforts on products of greatest risk and largest exposure. While CPSC expects every company to comply fully with the new laws resellers should pay special attention to certain product categories. Among these are recalled children’s products, particularly cribs and play yards; children’s products that may contain lead, such as children’s jewelry and painted wooden or metal toys; flimsily made toys that are easily breakable into small parts; toys that lack the required age warnings; and dolls and stuffed toys that have buttons, eyes, noses or other small parts that are not securely fastened and could present a choking hazard for young children.

 

The agency has underway a number of rulemaking proposals intended to provide guidance on the new lead limit requirements. Please visit the CPSC website at http://www.cpsc.gov for more information.

Edited January 8, 2009 by RoughCollie

[Matryoshka]

Issued today: used children's books and clothes exempted from certification, but still must comply with the laws against selling items containing more lead than legally allowed.

 

 

Well, that is a huge relief. Wanna bet they got a ton of response on this today and finally decided they had to get their act together (I get a feeling this has suddenly hit critical mass on the web).

 

I hope they now make another exemption for small business owners making small-batch or homemade items like wooden toys, clothing, and cloth diapers.

[whitestavern]

I haven't read through all of the replies to see if someone has posted this yet, but all resellers are EXEMPT from this law. Here's the link to the article stating this fact:

 

http://www.abc2news.com/news/local/story/Consignment-Shops-Clear-In-New-Lead-Law/1WIzvvszFk2vHvO77QfXfA.cspx?rss=702

 

Not sure if this is a change to the law as it was written or just a clarification, but good news no matter what.

Gayle

[Ginger]

I'm thinking it might be a good idea to contact the local news stations. I'm sure if the media was aware of it, there'd be a lot more attention to it.

[tricia]

Now come on ladies. They are only trying in various forms to ensure we are all under their thumbs and very well controlled in every form. Hahahahaha

 

Seriously, though. (I've kicked my husband off the computer seat so I can post. That's his above)

 

What to do other than make a huge fit publicly about it and hope the media catches on fast. Amazing how much the media can control the polls. So if we all ban together and start yelling hopefully it will be amended.

[lighthouseacademy]

For all those who don't believe this would apply to books, why would the American Library Association be lobbying congress over this if it didn't apply!?

http://www.wo.ala.org/districtdispatch/?p=1322

[TraceyS/FL]

For all those who don't believe this would apply to books, why would the American Library Association be lobbying congress over this if it didn't apply!?

http://www.wo.ala.org/districtdispatch/?p=1322

 

Here is another one from them:

 

This is from a very reliable source on the subject: the Washington

office of the American Library Association. This has more epistemic

authority than personal blogs and news articles.

 

http://www.wo.ala.org/districtdispatch/?p=1349

 

It says:

 

"Within the last few days, ALA and others in the 'book' community

(other librarians, publishers, teachers, booksellers, etc.) became

extremely concerned after seeing that the CPSC intended to include

books in the definition of 'products to children' that would need to

be certified as safe. This concern was heightened by a letter from

the General Counsel of the CPSC – a letter that states that books are

not exempt from the law.

 

However, ALA has been in discussion with attorneys, other associations

and the sponsors of the original bill. Our analysis is that neither

the law nor the legislative history indicates any Congressional

intention to include books and even textbooks in the law."

[cbollin]

I didn't see anyone put up these links and information and wanted to share them.

 

The Printing Industry of Minnesota seems to have good information out there regarding books. Read their letter to customers. Go to their home page (in link below), read the letter on the top left.

http://www.pimn.org/about/CPSIA.htm

 

 

This next one is from the American Publishers Association.

They are pushing and pressing the CPSC to issue an advisory regarding books.

http://www.rrd.com/wwwCPSIA/Docs/LetterToTheCPSC.pdf

 

 

Here is the American Booksellers Association's reaction and they have Julie

Vallese's comments. (she's from CPSC) Older products on shelf must fall within acceptable safety standards but do not need to be accompanied by a Certificate.

http://news.bookweb.org/6515.html

 

Hope some of that information helps a bit.

 

-crystal

[seanda]

The library associations are concerned because older books were sometimes printed before the limits were in place... AND because the new limits are stricter than the old limits... and will be stricter still later as it is a stepped approach.

 

Anything with dyes or inks is suspect. Our library says they expect that the law will be amended but they are watching the situation very carefully.

[lighthouseacademy]

Here is another one from them:

 

I think the ALA is right, that the intention was not to ban books, but the CPSIA website FAQs specifically mentions books as falling under regulation. Therefore, it is of concern, as mentioned by the ALA's petition to congress;.