Posted on 04/30/2015 2:29:20 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine
People who are trying to do good for their families and the planet by living a simple life based on traditional skills are facing yet another assault. Artisanal soap makers say new regulations, proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine), will put them out of business. Many soap makers are rural “kitchen table” operations that rely on the income to fund their simple living lifestyle. Some use milk from goats they raise and ingredients they harvest from the land.
The Handmade Cosmetic Alliance posted this form on its website that can be used to reach out to elected representatives. http://handmadecosmeticalliance.org/Contact-Legislators.aspx?mc_cid=6c8949b41c&mc_eid=1e14f18ba4
The form includes a statement on behalf of handmade body care product makers that says, in part: “My products comply with FDA labeling requirements and the ingredients are commonly known (i.e, olive oil, oatmeal, sugar, coconut oil, etc). My best customers are in my community. I cannot afford the user fees proposed in S. 1014. Further, my business has no capacity to do the reporting requirements for each product batch (10-50 units) as it could be several hundred FDA filings per month.” Those who sell online will also be affected.*
The view of Sen. Feinstein and her corporate backers (listed below) is that the Personal Care Products Safety Act (Senate Bill S.1014) will make the world a safer place by scrutinizing “everything from shampoo and hair dye to deodorant and lotion.” She introduced the amendment to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, because of troubling negative health effects from chemicals used in personal care products. She says the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act should be more progressive like laws in Europe rather than antiquated US regulations in effect since the 1930s.
If the industries that back this law are really so concerned about safety, why don’t they voluntarily make healthy products, like the small time producers already do? I’m calling bullshit.
Problem ingredients Feinstein cites include:
Methylene glycol, (an ingredient in the popular hair smoothing treatment known as the “Brazilian Blowout”) turns into formaldehyde when heated, and exposure has been reported to result in hair loss, rashes, blistered scalps, nosebleeds, bleeding gums, shortness of breath, vomiting and increased risk of cancer.
Propyl paraben, a preservative used in a wide range of products including shampoo, conditioner and lotion, mimics the hormone estrogen and can potentially disrupt the endocrine system and cause reproductive system disorders. She then goes on to say “consumers deserve to know that the products they use every day are safe.”
Huh? She just said they’re not safe, which is why I and many women already choose to spend a few dollars more on natural products. Feinstein does not propose to ban these dangerous ingredients from soaps and cosmetics, just regulate them with tests and warning labels, fees, and recall authority. She thinks some of these products, though harmful to health, magically become “safe when used by professionals in a salon or spa setting.” My question is; after a half century of so called feminism, why are women still knuckling under to industry pressure and voluntarily paying to have these poisons applied to their bodies on a regular basis? But I digress.
It sounds like the problem could be more easily solved with an education campaign, and subsidies for the natural soap makers so they could offer their products for less and increase their market share. Why not include them on EBT cards so poor women can buy them — I mean, if you want to really be “progressive,” we need to be able to get them at the Dollar Store.
Other potentially dangerous chemicals Feinstein wants to clamp down on include:
Diazolidinyl Urea, which is used as a preservative in a wide range of products including deodorant, shampoo, conditioner, bubble bath and lotion.
Lead acetate, used as a color additive in hair dyes.
Quaternium-15, a preservative used in a wide range of products including shampoo, shaving cream, skin creams and cleansers.
The new law would require the FDA to review at least five chemicals used in personal care products each year… Wait a minute, isn’t there a revolving door between FDA, industry lobbyists, and Congress? Is this yet another example of bureaucratic job security while the small operator is forced out of business? Remember what happened last year, when the FDA wasted taxpayer (your) money on a stupid claim against Dr. Bronner?
Feinstein says her proposal is a “streamlined national system of oversight” and it won’t cost the taxpayer anything because it’s funded by industry user fees (until they pass the extra cost to the consumer, that is). Big multinational soap makers may be able to manage the increased fees and paperwork called for by Senate Bill S.1014 but the the Handmade Cosmetic Alliance says they will cripple their cottage industries. They tried to explain this to Feinstein without success.
The senator assures the new law encourages public input with many opportunities built in for consumer groups, companies, medical professionals, scientists and the public to weigh in …but according to the Handmade Cosmetic Alliance, they’re already not listening.
“The HCA had several meetings over many months with the sponsor of S. 1014 and presented information to support small business exemptions similar to those the 2011 Food Modernization Safety Act (FSMA). Sadly, a decision was made to use prescription drugs and medical device standards for small handmade cosmetic businesses. This does not make sense. My products are soaps, lotions and scrubs made largely with food-grade ingredients found in any grocery store,” according to the letter provided by HCA, that natural soap makers can send to lawmakers.
Companies and brands that support the bill: Johnson & Johnson, brands include Neutrogena, Aveeno, Clean & Clear, Lubriderm, Johnson’s baby products. Procter & Gamble, including Pantene, Head & Shoulders, Clairol, Herbal Essences, Secret, Dolce & Gabbana, Gucci, Ivory, CoverGirl, Olay, Sebastian Professional, Vidal Sassoon. Revlon, brands include Revlon, Almay, Mitchum Esteee Lauder, brands include Esteee Lauder, Clinique, Origins, Tommy Hilfiger, MAC, La Mer, Bobbi Brown, Donna Karan, Aveda, Michael Kors. Unilever, brands include Dove, Tresemme, Lever, St. Ives, Noxzema, Nexxus, Pond’s, Suave, Sunsilk, Vaseline, Degree. L’Oreeal, brands include L’Oreeal Paris, Lancome, Giorgio Armani, Yves Saint Laurent, Kiehl’s, Essie, Garnier, Maybelline-New York, Vichy, La Roche-Posay, The Body Shop, Redken. *** S. 1014 [Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 57 (Monday, April 20, 2015)] [Senate] [Pages S2274-S2275] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] *”As more consumers choose to shop online, it is of growing importance that they have access to the same product information they would see in a store. This bill requires all personal care products sold online to include information that is on the label. Consumers will be able to see all ingredients listed, along with any product warnings and other important information on use.”
I forgot to post the link.
Are they getting people too clean?
Related article:
FDA puts anti-bacterial soaps under scrutiny [Keep the Feds out of my bathroom!]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3102539/posts
17DEC2013
I hate tyrants!
Did basically the same thing to kids clothing and toy makers. There are so many relatively new regulations, tagging requirements, registration, documentation,etc that small home businesses have a hard time keeping up with. It doesn’t just effect people trying to sell handmade items through a business. You cannot gift or donate even one handmade item intended for use by children under 12 without the item meeting all the new regulations. Or you could face a fine of $14,000 per incident.
Her husband exports a bunch of work over seas. Guess he cant stand others getting a higher profit than him.
Hey Di I am buying another assault rifle so I can teach my son how to build it from parts.
Do you know why Venezuela has shortages of basic necessities? Because of government interference with businesses. Shortages will eventually afflict us for the same reason.
one way to fix this. add all the junk that the big pharmaceuticals put in their stuff and ban them./s now i feel safer. and i list every ingredient on my web site.
Let me guess that Procter & Gamble contributes to both of those Congress members
Of course, HE was joking ...
We already regularly buy trisodium phosphate at the local hardward store because so much of the household soaps we use no longer have a real cleaning or sudsing ability. Unbelievable.
The reason that 17A effectively repealed the whole Constitution, imo, is the following. The Founding States had not only established the federal Senate, but had given the power to vote for federal senators uniquely to state lawmakers. The idea was that senators would protect their states in Congress by killing bills that not only stole 10th Amendment-protected state powers, but also stole state revenues associated with those powers.
However, the safety net for protecting the constitutional republic which the Senate provided was removed when citizens, spooked by the Progressive Movement, successfully twisted the arms of their state lawmakers to ratify 17A, foolishly giving up the voices of state lawmakers in Congress by doing so.
Regarding how the 17th Amendment helps misguided senators like Feinstein get away with making bills which blatantly ignore the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers, please consider the following. Regardless what FDR’s thug justices had wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers when they decided Wickard v. Filburn in Congress’s favor in 1942, previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate either intrastate commerce or agriculture. This is evidenced by the following excerpts.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
The reason that 17A is a large part of the problem concerning Feinstein’s unconstitutional proposal is this imo. When low-information voters go home after voting for their favorite federal senators, they watch football, clueless to the major problem that corrupt senators like Feinstein are working in cahoots with the corrupt House to pass unconstitutional, but vote-winning bills like her proposal to regulate intrastate commerce and agriculture, issues which the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to address as evidenced by the excerpts above.
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear and senators like Feinstein along with it.
When I learned that anti-bacterial soap was initially developed for people with AIDS to use I stopped buying it.
As much as this bill is a bad idea and unnecessary to protect public health it does not include soap makers. Soap (as defined in FDA rules) is exempt from FDA regulations provided no medical or cosmetic claims are made. So this proposed legislation does not crack down on soap makers.
Here is the definition, (think cold process or hot process soap)
“The bulk of the nonvolatile matter in the product consists of an alkali salt of fatty acids and the product’s detergent properties are due to the alkali-fatty acid compounds, and
the product is labeled, sold, and represented solely as soap”
So if you take a solution of lye and water and add it to oils you do not fall under FDA regulations unless you make medical or cosmetic claims.
So sell the handmade item for kids under 12 to an adult parent or guardian as a “collectable” and have that in writing...
how will citizens survive without government bureaucrats and hyper-regulation? Amazing we’re all alive now without our big brother telescreens we can’t turn off.
big companies are paying off politicians to restrict their small competition
Maybe. I was thinking more like govt wants more revenue from these companies any way they can get it.
Doesn’t work that way. If the item reasonably looks like a child would use it then it must meet the regulations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.