Here it comes again

[Scented]

Another Safe Cosemetic act that will cause problems down the line. If you can't read it at HMSG then you can at Essential U. Both are blogs.

http://www.soapguild.org/blog/2010/07/from-the-president-safe-cosmetics-act-of-2010/

or

http://www.essentialu.typepad.com/

The horn is sounding now, because if you didn't listen to some of the ridiculous testimony during Colorado's fight in the spring, you missed out and later will be screaming, especially since you now have to pay very careful attention of what can and cannot be sent into Calif. Don't be left behind.

Read the 47 pages of the new bill and get educated quickly because you may not be in business much longer ... and maybe you are, but you might be shackled to the wall.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Scented

[rebeccajo99]

Thanks Scented for posting this. Did not hear about this one. Got a headache reading the actual bill with the way it is written, so I didn't get finished, but it sounds like it would put a lot of us out of business.

Do you know how we can fight this? I'm all for safe products, but this seems overkill.

[LuminousBoutique]

*sigh* gotta read when I'm not sick... too fizzy in the head to get it straight right now.

I'm for safe products, of course... but I am sick of things like this popping up (CPSIA being another example...) where it seems like big business just keeps doing things as normal, paying fines... never changing their ways.. and small business gets shut out and shut down because we cant afford or manage the changes.

Of course I havent read it all yet... but I hope its not AS BAD as it looks, and I hope there is a way we can fight it if it oversteps its bounds.

[LovelyLathers]

I have not read all the pages but it will certainly close my store down. The labeling of products is insane! Did you see the list for water alone? lol. We will need a label 10 feet long just to list ingredients, never mind any adverse effects of each ingredient. The testing of each ingredient alone will cost a fortune. In the Essential U statement she said something to the effect Isn't this a free country with privacy laws, etc, well it certainly doesn't look like it to me if we have to list all suppliers we use and where everything we use comes from. I could go on and on about this. Even the "Big Guys" will have to go up in price just to comply with it. I have to laugh at there will be no fee for those making under a milloin $$ a year, that;s becuse they won't be in business any longer! I know there needs to be something in place but this certainly is not what is needed!

[josie1091]

Hopefully there will be a new administration soon who will have some sense. Our current lawmakers don't have a clue how the real world lives.

[Scented]

Josie, I wonder if anyone has a clue.

My suggestion is to keep on top of those two blogs as they'll be passing on info and I imagine the same people will be going forward to Washington again, BUT ... in the meantime start hitting up your senators and representatives and letting them know now where you stand.

True, it would be nice if the bigger companies could change some of their practices, BUT ... the bigger companies aren't that much of the culprit here that I can tell. It's all of us who have bent perception just to make a buck. The Colorado hearing was phenomenally wonderful. There are trace elements in everything that kept under control still come up as a trace, but there are still people freaking out about what's in drinking water ...

Start educating your people too. It's important that they start understanding that several of these minerals and etc. are already found in everyday things we use.

What probably should be regulated is what comes out of China. Actually maybe imports in general.

I will say that I imagine Estee Lauder will have their scientists back on board. I sure hope so, because one of them was fascinating to listen to and easy to follow.

However, don't let others be your voice. Join them and make their voice stronger/louder/heard.

I know there are elections this year. I'm somehow thinking that the ones contemplating this board may not be up for getting ushered out.

I'm not opposed to regulations but let's be sensible about them. Bigger companies, IMO, aren't trying to shoo us to the door. And some of these companies we need, because they have the scientific backing.

Like I said before, start contacting your Washington peeps and let them know uh uh. State your case, your situations and what a bill like this will do to wipe out the smaller businesses. It wasn't just the fees that people screamed about earlier.

As for labeling, I'm not opposed to it, but I am opposed to having to list my supplier and expanding on a label that's already too tight. People want to buy a product ... not a library. I still think that labeling needs to be accurate and on all products regardless, because our environment and the plasticized world we live in has encouraged additional allergins to be known etc.

No one is making a call to arms right now and I imagine the bill still sits in committee, BUT ... lawmakers know each other and nows the time to start hounding ... even if they are up for re-election.

And remember, just because it isn't happening in your state (when these laws start coming forward) it will eventually affect you greatly. Do we say thank you California now or later? Amen Colorado now or later? I believe there are several states considering their own bans on products.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Scented

[LuminousBoutique]

heres a petition I found... some info from it... its just one persons take on it so until I've read the whole thing I'm only taking their word for it..

H.R. 5786, the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010, was introduced into Congress on July 21, 2020, by Reps. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc. As of the publication of this petition, the bill is new co-sponsored by Reps. John Conyers, D-Mi, Diane DeGette, D-Co, Alcee Hastings, D-Fl, Barbara Lee, D-Ca and James Moran, D-Va.

The bill was written with robust consultation with a private coalition of people claiming to represent the interests of consumers.

The sponsors of this petition are the men and women who manufacture cosmetics on a small scale in the country, and their customers and other people who support America's small business owners.

Safe Cosmetics

While we are unquestionably in favor of safe cosmetics, this bill contains a number of unnecessary provisions that would decimate our nation's small scale cosmetics manufacturers without any benefit at all to consumers.

This bill treats a company making 100 bottles of lotion each year the same way it treats a multi-billion dollar, multi-national company making 100 bottles of lotion each second. It is grossly unfair, unduly burdensome, intrusive and unnecessary in a number of aways, among them the following:

Point 1.

1. HR 5786 is unnecessary. Small cosmetics companies have a history of producing safe cosmetics pursuant to current laws that require companies to clearly identify the products they sell, provide all manufacturer contact information and truthfully label products with ingredients.

Point 2.

2. HR 5786 contains onerous registration requirements. HR 5786 contains intrusive and unnecessary requirements that would force small companies to disclose to the federal government information that the government does not need, which is unduly burdensome for small companies to provide and which does nothing to protect consumers from unsafe cosmetics. Specifically, in addition to having to register their company name and location, small companies would also have to file with the federal government product descriptions, product ingredients, trace ingredient in products, gross sales numbers, the name and contact information of the suppliers of the ingredients used in their cosmetics and their number of employees.

Point 3.

3. HR 5786 contains unnecessary labeling requirements. Current cosmetics laws already require small companies to list ingredients on labels. HR 5786 expands labeling requirements to include trace elements found inside those ingredients. For example, a product containing water (or any other natural ingredient), would have to contain a label listing the water and also every other trace element inside that water. (Water contains a number of chemicals, including nickel, lead, copper, silver and dozens more -- depending on the water source.) Requiring small companies to include such a list on each label is onerous and unnecessary.

Point 4.

4. HR 5786 requires small companies to conduct unnecessary scientific testing. Under the bill as drafted, small companies would be required to test all of the products they make, and be in a position to produce data to the federal government about the ingredients, components of ingredients, and also, components that may be produced when known ingredients are combined. Those are impossible (and unnecessary) standards.

Point 5.

5. HR 5786 is anti-American. At a time when our Congressional representatives should be seeking to revitalize the American economy, especially where manufacturing is concerned, HR 5786 would eliminate it in cites and towns in every state across this nation.

Point 6.

6. HR 5786 specifically allows all 50 states to pass stricter requirements. Even with the sweeping nature of HR 5786, it specifically states that each state can pass additional laws as it sees fit. This provision is Congressional permission for each state to pass whatever laws it wants, creating a patchwork quilt of laws that no small company can comply with. If Texas adds labeling or manufacturing requirements that are different from HR 5786, and also different from other states, then no company will be able to sell so much as a quarter-ounce tube of lip balm without first checking to make sure they are not in violation of 51 separate cosmetics laws. No small company can do that (and most large ones can't either).

Point 7.

7. HR 5786 does not contain an exemption for small business owners. Many laws in this country exempt small companies because compliance would put them out of business without any real benefit to society. The same is true in this case. HR 5786 treats the smallest company making 50 products a day the same way it treats our nation's multi-million dollar companies. While there is an exemption from the annual payment of fees, the testing and paperwork requirements in this bill place burdens on very small businesses that are unfair, overreaching, unnecessary, offensive and intrusive.

America's Small Businesses

Our nation's small cosmetics companies are in large part launched by men and women who want to create alternatives to products that can be purchased at "Big Box" stores. They use a high proportion of naturally occurring ingredients when compared to larger companies, and they are not producing cosmetics on a large scale at all. And that's why their customers love their products, and that's why Congress must make sure that it passes no law that puts them out of business without any benefit to consumers. This is one such law.

Summary

Small companies are the backbone of our nation's economy. In fact, today, they are sustaining it almost single-handedly. As unemployment figures continue to rise, small companies are hiring employees, contractors, vendors and other small scale service providers to help their businesses grow.

Consumer Choice

At farmer's markets, locally owned spas and boutiques and in the retail stores that small cosmetics manufacturers are opening everywhere, consumers are able to choose to buy a wide and appealing variety of cosmetics to suit their personal needs. They can choose from products made by big companies and they can choose from products made by smaller companies. That choice will be removed if HR 5786 becomes law. if that happens, consumers will be left with a small selection of products sold only by our nation's largest retail chains.

America is filled with talented innovators and entrepreneurs who don't need a big bank loan or a huge line of credit to manage a profitable business.

Small cosmetics companies can continue to do their share to carry this nation, but not if HR 5786 passes.

It is the duty of our Congressional representatives to pass laws that are carefully tailored to deal with specific problems that need to be addressed on a national scale. HR 5786 is not carefully tailored to help anyone.

If HR 5786 as drafted becomes law, it will close multiple thousands of small companies immediately and in one fell swoop.

Oppose HR 5786

[chuck_35550]

This is not about politicians but rather about attorneys. They have created a litgious society that delights in suing over the slightest of damages. If you are a hand crafter who is producing a poorly made product that creates complaints on a state or local level; well thanks a lot. We live in a different world that has little respect for the little guy. Politicians are merely the knee that jerks to the strings pulled by a complaining public that on one hand demands the government to protect and on the other to stop meddling. Apparently, it is not enough to carry insurance and kitchens and basements are not appropriate for free enterprise.

[inherowndominion]

I'm completely against this bill as well....I've been telling everyone to sign the petition because it will put most of us out of business. I won't rehash all my opinions because it looks like most of you are in agreement. I'll just say I'm steaming mad, because this bill does little about anything to actually protect the consumer and more is just pushing us little guys out the door...

I was wondering though, someone made mention of being careful what you ship to CA? Anyone have more info on this or a link or something that outlines it clearly. I ship to CA all the time, and also I notice that CA is generally the "leader" in things to come in this country, when something passes there, it generally gets passed nationwide at some point...

[Scented]

Hey everyone,

Sign the petition. They are looking for 2,000 signatures and you can be one of them and voice a concern too.

Most of you are probably already aware of it, but the Safe Cosmetics Act of

2010 was introduced into Congress last Wednesday. Whether you are a

manufacturer or you just enjoy using handmade products, this bill affects

everyone in the US!

Please take a few minutes to read and respond to the petition which opposes

this bill. Thanks!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/oppose-hr-5786-safe-cosmetics-act-of-2010

[Scented]

I have to look for the Calif. info. Their bill that passed was similar to what Colorado people tried to pass.

[rebeccajo99]

wow, I was looking for this post so I could pass the link onto some friends who want to sign it too (they don't make any B&B items, but want to support fellow small business owners since they own business themselves). I just noticed that Michigan Rep is supporting this bill. Now I just need to get them all written.

Is anybody willing to share what they wrote to thier reps. I will make it my own, but need a good starting outline.

Thanks

[Scented]

Did I post the Soap Queen's link?

I pretty much formed mine around that and explained how that would have an impact on sinking me as a small business owner who was spent x years trying to establish my business with a two person crew.

I also asked how people like me who use distilled water in their soaps were going to be able to label it when the only thing sellers have to list is the process, who sold it to who and where I bought it.

I did mention that I felt labels are products were a good thing, but that this bill is by far too excessive and the paperwork alone would sink anyone from being able to start a business, much less run one. I also wondered why we had to share our formulas with the government when places like KFC and Famous Daves are tight lipped about their items ... I mean hey, we eat that crap or maybe it's more dangerous to put something on your skin than in your mouth. (I didn't say that last part ha)

I did wonder why were weren't more focused on the safety of imported items and mentioned something about if everything had to be tested that was ever made, there'd be no products on the market even if a person wasn't selling the item or the formula but just trying to tweak one.

Releasing vendors and products ... now that's just utter bs.

I realize we live in a paranoid society and maybe bills would be better aimed or suited for our country if the people behind them had some form of an education that was substantiated by fact and not fiction thus suggesting they take a closer look at false advertising and the way people are bending reality to make a buck.

Just tackle the points that are made at all these sites and let your people know how they affect you or would impact your business etc.

[ProudMarineMom]

A question for anyone who has read the entire bill? I would like your opinion on one of the Sections. I'm trying to put together a summary letter that I can send to the Representatives. Most of the issues or questions I found are already mentioned by Scented, Luminous and the various websites and blog links provided. I just haven’t seen this mentioned and not sure if I’m reading it correctly. This would be a bullet point for the excess reporting and documentation requirements of the bill. And, maybe the vague wording.

Specifically, I’m looking at Sec. 3 Worker Issues starting on Page 44. Looks like an OSHA standard will be implemented that will require ‘manufacturers’ to create an extended Material Safety Data Sheet for each product you produce that contains a hazardous material. I don’t make CP/HP soap, but the lye that is used immediately comes to mind. If I read the text correctly you would have to write a MSDS for say your soap and have it available for any person that works for you as well as any establishment that sells your product. And, it must be available in foreign languages if requested. I don’t know how the ingredients are listed on a product label for CP/HP soap so this may not be an issue for someone who sells your product. But, you would still have to write it if you have anyone that helps make your soap. Maybe you already do this...

The section seems a bit broad to me. Not sure if they are making reference to materials that I would call hazmat materials, like lye, or those that would be maintained by the agencies that were listed earlier in the bill (the EPA, International Agency for Research on Cancer, etc.) But, in that section, it states that if any cosmetic or ingredient is on the list from those agencies, they would be considered unsafe by definition.

Am I reading too much into this and it really doesn’t matter. Or, does it make sense to those of you that use hazardous chemicals. What do you think?

J

[Scented]

The Soap Queen link to the issue (earlier question)

http://soap-queen.blogspot.com/2010/07/safe-cosmetics-act-not-so-safe-for_24.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FJuVj+%28Soap+and+the+Finer+Things+in+Life%29&utm_content=Yahoo%21+Mail

I think you're reading it correctly. I don't sell abroad, but I would have to do all that and I'm not fluently bilingual. I sure couldn't much of a sentence together after Hola como estas? or Bonjour, comment allez-vous? Translation probably can't be made via a software program either, because that's something too simple (and not that correct either).

Probably the gist of this section (which really picks on salons lol) is so that someone can blame someone else because they have cancer or some other toxic and horrible disease. What it still boils down to is that there are elements or traces of toxic ingredients in everything that are already regulated and as long as a person wasn't trying to use say 700 tubes of lipstick at one time or rubbing their skin with lye or using any number of essential oils for any number of reasons ... the list allows people to blame others I think.

Honestly, every product should have a label. I do believe in that, but let's be reasonable about what should be on that label. My label isn't going to be able to hold a list of what ingredients make up each ingredient that I use in some cases.