Thursday, May 26, 2011

Is this YOUR Congressman? We need your help! A CALL TO ACTION

Cross-posted from HTA Member Milagros Boutique in Portland, OR.

The
Handmade Toy Alliance has worked three long years to get to this point. Namely, getting a change to the Consumer Product Safety Improvment Act (CPSIA) that will stem the tide of tainted toys, almost all of which are imported, without imposing a regulatory environment on small, ethical manufacturers and crafters that will literally drive them out of business with red tape.

Since the day we opened our doors, we have been a staunch promoter of our local craft industry. We have been working side by side with countless local crafters trying to improve the CPSIA so that it does not put these small enterprises out of business. Your action to help save these small business is needed now more than ever.

How can you help?

A CPSIA amendment is currently in mark up in the Committee of Energy and Commerce in the House of Representatives. This amendment should be presented for a vote in this committee soon but surprisingly, despite all the rhetoric about supporting Main Street, not a single Democrat has voiced support. If this does not change, thousands of small businesses stand to be sacrificed at the alter of partisan politics.

We NEED your help! We need bipartisan support for this legislation to have any hope of it progressing through both houses of Congress. If your Congressman is on this list below, please call them NOW! Ask them to support the CPSIA amendment known as the ECADA. Learn more about the amendment.

EVEN IF YOUR CONGRESSMAN IS NOT ON THE LIST, WE NEED YOU TO CALL NOW! Find you congressman and call BOTH their DC and local offices and urge them to support HR 1939!

Please share this post with your friends and family, post to your facebook page, tweet it, etc. If you value hand crafted goods, we need your help on this today!

Thank you!

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

HTA Letter of Support for H.R. 1939 (the ECADA)

Dear Chairman Upton and Chairwoman Bono Mack:

Thank you for your continued attention to the needs of the small business members of the Handmade Toy Alliance, (HTA). Our purpose from the beginning of our organization has always been to mitigate the costs of CPSIA mandated third party testing and to remedy the unintended consequences of the CPSIA that fall disproportionately on small batch children's product manufacturers, retailers, and importers. The preferred solution remains a legislative exemption for these small and micro-businesses.

Although H.R.1939 allows relief for our members in the area of third party testing, we remain concerned about other provisions of the CPSIA which unfairly disadvantage small businesses. These include retroactivity, labeling requirements, the 100ppm lead content standard, and lack of harmonization with the European Union. In the interest of expediency, we have chosen to focus our efforts on providing the most relief for as many of our members as possible.

In surveying our members, our analysis is that the greatest burdens we face are mandatory third party testing for lead in substrate and ASTM F-963 testing for toys, both of which are scheduled to be implemented by the end of this year. H.R.1939 proposes third party testing relief to the members of the HTA through CPSC rulemaking to specify an alternative test or exemption, with the protecting stipulations that the benefits of third party testing justify the costs and that rules impose the least possible burden. This language within H.R.1939 makes compliance more achievable for our membership and for that reason we endorse this bill.

Legislative proposals offered in the last Congress failed to go far enough in providing relief for our small business members. H.R.1939 is closer to meeting the needs of our membership. It is imperative that both the House and the Senate take action without delay to save what remains of the culture of handmade toys and children’s products in the USA.

We remain hopeful that the democratic process can prevail and that a meaningful and bipartisan reform of the CPSIA will be enacted. On behalf of the 647 small business members of the Handmade Toy Alliance, we thank you again for your attention to this important issue.

Respectfully,
The Handmade Toy Alliance Board of Directors

Saturday, May 21, 2011

The Handmade Toy Alliance Announces their 2011-2012 Board of Directors

The Handmade Toy Alliance (HTA) has announced its board of directors for the 2011-2012 year. The HTA achieved nonprofit status in 2009, and has a board of directors consisting of 9 members.

Dan Marshall, HTA founder and co-owner of Peapods Natural Toys and Baby Care in St. Paul, MN, will serve as President for the upcoming session. Dan served as Vice President during the 2010-2011 year.

Randall Hertzler, owner of euroSource, LLC, a specialty European Toys online store established in 1999 in Lancaster, PA takes on the role of Vice President

Jolie Fay continues for a second year as Secretary. Based in OR, Jolie is the owner and
designer of Skipping Hippos, vintage inspired outerwear with a modern twist.

Mary Newell continues in the role of Treasurer, which she has held since the HTA's inception. Owner of Terrapin Toys, LLC in OR, Mary is known as the maker of Mary's Softdough, established in 1988.

Continuing their service to the HTA are founding Board members Jill Chuckas, the owner of Crafty Baby (CT), known for its fun and functional accessories for children, Rob Wilson, Vice President of Challenge & Fun (MA) and founder of CPSIA-Central, a web forum devoted to discussing all aspects of the CPSIA and Cecilia Leibovitz, founder and Creative Director of leading handmade children’s toy and gift retailer Craftsbury Kids, Inc. Cecilia also served as Board President from 2009 until the present. Marianne Mullen joined the Board last year and is the founder and owner of Polkadot Patch Boutique (VT), a children’s online retail store dedicated to unique, colorful products for children.

Adam Frost joins the Board this year and is the owner of The Wooden Wagon (MA), an online store specializing in natural wood and cloth toys.

Newly elected President, Dan Marshall commented on the election results, “We are very fortunate to have such a dedicated group of talented people make up our Board. Each one of these board members brings a diverse set of knowledge and skill to the vision of the Handmade Toy Alliance."

Monday, May 9, 2011

HTA Responses to House Commerce Committee Followup Questions on CPSIA Reform

Questions for the Record from the April 7 Hearing on Reform of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA)


The Honorable G. K. Butterfield

1. During your oral testimony you stated that the Handmade Toy Alliance endorsed the Republican discussion draft “because of the relief it provides to our members.” You went on to suggest that the draft provides your members an exemption from third-party testing or that your members would be allowed to follow alternative testing procedures. My understanding, based on the advice of lawyers on my staff, and on Chairman Bono Mack’s opening statement, is that the draft does not provide any relief to your members from the mandatory third-party requirements for five specific products or hazards: (1) lead paint; (2) lead in children’s metal jewelry; (3) small parts; (4) compliance with crib standards; and (5) compliance with pacifier standards. Relief is only available to your members from any additional testing requirements that CPSC might require in the future through the rulemaking process outlined in the draft. Small crafters will still have to have their children’s products third-party tested for lead in metal jewelry, small parts, and compliance with the crib standards. In addition, ASTM F-963 will remain a mandatory standard, so your members will still have to comply with all of ASTM F-963 and certify that they have done so.

a. Assuming my understanding is accurate, do you and your members still support the Republican discussion draft even though it does not provide full relief from compliance with CPSIA? If so, please explain why.

First and foremost, we wish to restate that our primary goal is the passage of meaningful CPSIA reform as soon as possible. Although the discussion draft would provide relief for our members in key areas, we remain concerned about many other provisions of the CPSIA which unfairly disadvantage small businesses. These include retroactivity, labeling requirements, the 100ppm lead content standard, lack of harmonization with the European Union, and testing requirements for small parts and lead in paint. In the interest of expediency, we have chosen to focus our efforts on providing the most relief for as many of our members as possible.

Our ideal solution to the unintended consequences of the CPSIA is outlined in our platform. The discussion draft proposes relief through CPSC rulemaking as you indicate, but with the protecting stipulations that the benefits of third party testing justify the costs; that rules impose the least possible burden; and that an exemption is provided by default in the absence of rulemaking. These stipulations make compliance achievable for our membership. However, our preference remains a legislative exemption for micro-businesses.

Our purpose from the beginning of our organization has always been to mitigate the costs of third party testing on small batch children's product manufacturers. The CPSIA established requirements for many types of tests for many different types of products. In speaking with our members, our analysis is that the greatest burdens we face are mandatory third party testing for lead in substrate and ASTM F-963 testing for toys, both of which are scheduled to be implemented by the end of this year. We are not seeking exemptions from the standards themselves, but from the third party testing requirements. In both cases, we believe that small batch manufacturers should be allowed to self-certify based on a reasonable testing program. The discussion draft would make this possible.

We are not pursuing exemptions from testing requirements for lead in paint, metal jewelry, or crib standards. In the case of the lead in paint and metal jewelry standards, we recognize two realities. First, these were the two areas which caused the majority of product safety concerns prior to the enactment of the CPSIA. Second, although we disagree with the need for testing American and European products for lead in paint violations because lead paint has been outlawed in those countries for over 30 years, we recognize that the damage to these companies has already been done. The lead in paint testing requirement has been in place for almost a year and a half. Several respected companies have already ceased operations as a result. The damage has already been done. We hope that component-based testing will mitigate the cost of lead in paint testing in the future.

We are not at this time concerned with the crib standard. None of our members manufacturer cribs.

As for the small parts testing requirement, we believe that the CPSC can and should develop alternative testing methods which would allow small-batch manufacturers to self-certify. This standard is very straightforward and relatively easy to test for. In a perfect bill, the small parts standard would not be excluded from the exemptions available to small batch manufacturers.

Once again, we urge the House and the Senate to work together to mitigate the overwhelmingly negative impact of the CPSIA on small businesses.


Here's the unedited video from the April 7, 2011 Hearing. It includes all the breaks for floor votes, so it's a full 7 hours long. HTA's testimony is at 5:19.




The Honorable John Dingell

1. The draft legislation amends section 101(b) of CPSIA to exempt components of children’s products from the Act’s lead limits if such components do not cause a child to ingest more than a de minimus amount of lead. The legislation would require the Commission to specify procedures for manufacturers to test and estimate this de minimus amount. Do you believe small manufacturers and handcrafters will be able to afford and/or carry out such test procedures?

No. We do not believe that small batch manufacturers will be able to avail themselves of the de minimus exemption process. The costs involved in meeting the requirements of this process would be beyond the reach of our members. However, we hope that the CPSC will rule on de minimus applications made by larger companies in such a way that smaller businesses may benefit as well. For example, if the CPSC rules that a given company's leaded crystal rhinestones meet the de minimus standards, we hope that it will make its ruling categorically, so that all manufacturers which use leaded crystals may also benefit. We would hope that committee report language would communicate the expectation that de minimus rulings should be made as generally as possible and not limited to only a specific product made by a specific manufacturer.