Tougher consumer protections opposed by agency chair.
Nancy A. Nord, President Bush’s acting chairwoman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, “has asked Congress in recent days to reject legislation that would strengthen the agency that polices thousands of consumer goods, from toys to tools.” The New York Times reports:
On the eve of an important Senate committee meeting to consider the legislation, Nancy A. Nord, the acting chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has asked lawmakers in two letters not to approve the bulk of legislation that would increase the agency’s authority, double its budget and sharply increase its dwindling staff. […]
Ms. Nord, who before joining the agency had been a lawyer at Eastman Kodak and an official at the United States Chamber of Commerce, criticized the measure in letters sent late last week and this afternoon to the Democratic leaders of the committee. She was critical, for instance, of a provision to ban lead from all toys. […]
She opposed making it easier to bring criminal prosecutions of companies that knowingly sell defective products and also criticized a measure that would make it easier for the commission to publicly disclose reports of faulty products.
White House spokesman Tony Fratto insisted the White House did not coordinated with Nord on her complaints, but nevertheless, the White House “shared many of her concerns.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
59 Responses to “Tougher consumer protections opposed by agency chair.”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
conflict of interest much? jeeeez
what the hell is wrong with protecting people against dangerous products? these bushies have no souls…
October 29th, 2007 at 10:14 pmIs the job this woman has one for which Senate confirmation is required? If so, how could someone who used to be an official in the US Chamber of Commerce (an organization dedicated to the protection of the interests of businesses over the interests of consumers) in charge of the federal agency rsponsible for protecting consumers?
Bush supporters: He has NOT “faithfully execute[d] the office of President of the United States”. This is just one of many examples. Instead of appointing someone to head an agency clearly intended to protect consumers, he puts someone in charge whose career goals used to be antithetical to the office she’s now in. Why do you insist he’s so great, when he’s clearly such a fraud?
Get over him. Get rid of him. He’s no good for you or your country. Impeach him. Convict him. Remove him. It will hurt, I know. I understand. But guess what? We will help you get through it. Trust me. It’s what we do. We care about our fellow human beings. And that includes you. Help us to help you live a better life, a safer life, and a more meaningful life. Bush and Cheney must go. Now.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:21 pmin fact she added, more lead should be put into toys for children because as a republican, we hate america.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:31 pmFrom Nord’s bio:
“Nancy A. Nord was nominated by President George W. Bush to be a commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) for a term that expires in October of 2012. The CPSC protects the public against unreasonable risks of injury and death associated with consumer products. She was confirmed by the Senate for that position on April 29, 2005 and was sworn into office on May 5, 2005. ”
Looks like something else the next President has to clean up.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:32 pmAnother fox guarding the chicken coop.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:38 pmFirst order of business for the next Pres: Confiscate the passports of anyone having anything to do with the BA. Why? Because while we are “cleaning up” after them, plenty of criminality will be exposed. What justification will be used to confiscate the passports? Preemptive strike against the potential escape of possible criminal elements and/or National Security.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:48 pmSince the US doesn’t manufacture anything anymore and it all comes from China, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc.—we had better beg them to make products that are safe for consumers.
A republican administration will always have a pro-corporate, anti-consumer person in charge of product safety. And then be opposed to litigation for damages.
Jay Leno said we got a shipment of lead from China and it had toys in it!
October 29th, 2007 at 10:59 pmLooks like she’s doing the job she was hired to do.
October 29th, 2007 at 10:59 pmHey Zooey. Like the Leno joke?
October 29th, 2007 at 11:03 pmKeith, Leno?
October 29th, 2007 at 11:06 pmIn other news , Tom Delay was recess appointed as Attorney General and Karl Rove replaces Steven K. Galson as acting Surgeon General ……………
October 29th, 2007 at 11:08 pmJay Leno said we got a shipment of lead from China and it had toys in it!
October 29th, 2007 at 11:08 pmThe free market nutty nut nut theorists put profit over childrens and consumers health and safety. Their God is surely Mammon.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pmIt comes down to the simple fact that Republicans cannot run an effective government. You can’t run what you hate.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pmRon Paul doesn’t think we should be regulating these businesses either.
A “protection agency”? Well, that’s downright EVIL! The companies will do the right thing, you just have to take the rules away, and they’ll straighten right up!
October 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pmSaying that arsnic or sianied (SP?) is OK to have in food???
Comment by RemoveBush — October 29, 2007 @ 10:13 pm
Arsenic & Cyanide…
(Could be a right wing comedy team, huh?)
October 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pmYou can never have too much lead.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pmGasoline has to be unleaded but not toys from china..WTF?
October 29th, 2007 at 11:12 pmGood lord — the string of incompetent Bush officials never ends. Nancy sounds like the twin of insane Lorita Doan who heads the GSA. If we survive these crooks, we will be very lucky.
Today, we found out that the FEMA impostor supposedly won’t get his promotion — thanks to a massive outcry. But beware, Bush crooks have a way of showing up again and again. We learned yesterday that Gen. BeTrayUS has named Ahmad Chalabi — the crook of all time — as a central figure in Iraq.
Will it ever end? My head hurts from trying to keep up with all the Bush scandals. I weep for our country and the damage done by Bush, Cheney and all corrupt underlings. Before today, I hadn’t heard of Nancy Nord, but we can add her name to the list of incompetent arrogance in the White House. Here’s a rousing salute to: Heckuva Job, Nancy!
October 29th, 2007 at 11:14 pmJay Leno said we got a shipment of lead from China and it had toys in it!
Comment by Keith — October 29, 2007 @ 11:08 pm
Heh. Good one.
I can’t remember the last time I watched any of the late shows.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:14 pmIt all makes sense, you see the Roman empire had lead pipes and they leaders went insane. The pipes in the white house, obviously, need checking.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:19 pmI think someone might be cooking meth in the Oval Office loo.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:21 pmBig companies’ interests are not going to be touched by the BUSHit gang!!!
October 29th, 2007 at 11:32 pm“Tony Fratto insisted the White House did not coordinated with Nord on her complaints”
Right. The head of an agency in the executive branch makes statements to Congress without talking to the WH first. Sure.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:37 pmCan you show me where? I recently read some things Paul wrote. I’m a dyed in the wool liberal/progressive (not necessarily a Democrat), but some of his opinions were ultra reasonable and pragmatic. I had begun to think that a split ticket w/Paul as the VP might be a good thing. I understand that he is a social conservative, but we don’t need his opinions in those areas. The man seems to be honest about economics, and we are going to be in serious (and I can’t emphasize the word ’serious’ enough) need of some economic brains and integrity here, shortly.
If you can link me to the dirt, I’d appreciate it.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:53 pmFox: “We have been guarding the chicken coop and we do not think more fences are a good idea. They are too expensive and keep us from eating the chickens. . . I mean, they are unnecessary and they actually make the chickens nervous. Urp.”
It’s actually useful, I think, to see such blatant statements of greed and the desperate attempts of the Bushies to retain the astonishing access they have enjoyed over the last few years and their naked desire to gut any sort of regulations intended to protect the American public.
It will take years, if not generations, to recover some of the control it took much of the 20th century to create after the depredations of the criminals in this administration.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:56 pmTCDON IS NOT A CHRISTIAN
Stop judging, that you may not be judged.
For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.
Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?
How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye?
You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:59 pmOK troll if you were man enough to show up, lets debate my last post.
October 30th, 2007 at 12:00 amTCDon is also a coward
October 30th, 2007 at 12:03 amBueller Bueller Bueller
October 30th, 2007 at 12:04 amI am shocked, the troll did not show up to debate man on man.
October 30th, 2007 at 12:06 amI am shocked, the troll did not show up to debate man on man.
Comment by troll buster — October 30, 2007 @ 12:06 am
There is only 1 way the horseshit GOP and their backers do “man on man” …….
In public restrooms .
October 30th, 2007 at 12:11 ambut nevertheless, the White House “shared many of her concerns.â€
Wow, the Whitehouse shares her concerns that we might actually be doing something to protect consumers. Like #1 said, I didn’t think they could possibly get any worse…then they have to go and prove us wrong.
October 30th, 2007 at 12:40 amThere are crazy teeth toys here for halloween, the kind kids put in there mouth that have lead in them. As of today they have not yet been recalled. Unbelievable.
October 30th, 2007 at 12:43 amJust another example of the Corprofascists at work.
I’m beginning to like that name. It fits them to a T. Corporate fascists, that’s who is running this country. The wonderful United Corporations of America.
October 30th, 2007 at 12:45 amNo, folks, I disagree. Nancy may be incompetent, but she is FAR more sinister than that.
She was appointed in the Nixon tradition. She was hired and is paid a hefty salary to MAKE SURE the Consumer Product Safety Commission does NOT perform its lawful current function and to fight tooth and painted toenail to PERSUADE Congress NOT to do ANYTHING that would INCONVENIENCE the global conglomerates that BOUGHT the current corrupt, criminal administration into office.
THAT part of her job, Nancy is doing very WELL!
October 30th, 2007 at 1:11 amMarcus Aurelius, just google Ron Paul. You will find plenty of information about his extreme brand of libertarianism. Rest assured that Paul would like to eliminate nearly all government functions. His goal is to eliminate the income tax and most other taxes, which would prevent the government from performing any meaningful oversight or regulatory functions.
I am sick and tired of the Ron Paul brigade that shows up at every progressive web site to claim (falsely) that Paul is somehow a progressive. I see it here less than I used to, but lately they have been flooding the Washington Post comment areas. Paul’s political goals are anything but progressive, and his beliefs border on prehistoric.
October 30th, 2007 at 1:54 amThe notion of Ron Paul as a Democratic VP candidate is nonsensical. It makes no more sense than Pat Buchanon.
October 30th, 2007 at 1:55 amI am sick and tired of the Ron Paul brigade that shows up at every progressive web site to claim (falsely) that Paul is somehow a progressive. I see it here less than I used to, but lately they have been flooding the Washington Post comment areas. Paul’s political goals are anything but progressive, and his beliefs border on prehistoric.
Comment by VerbalKint — October 30, 2007 @ 1:54 am
I can personally vouch for that…….
I got into an extended argument with some arrogant gal on Crooks and Liars who claimed to be a lawyer (Constitutional , I believe) , and bragged about the papers she wrote and blah blah blah , who claimed a Kucinich/Paul ticket would be wonderful.
Maybe on her home planet it would ; just not here on Earth though …….
October 30th, 2007 at 2:25 amFirst, relying on the Government that you all recognize is broken and poorly run to “protect us” from these things with giant bureaucracy is ridiculous. That’s not what the Federal Government was created to do. You can whine all you want, but it’s just not the case. Whether extensive regulation is needed is questionable, of course state-based criminal prosecution and civil suits would likely take care of these problems without a giant money-pit of a bureaucracy.
Second, the part about being critical of banning lead is ridiculous. If it’s harmful it should be illegal to use, or it could be handled by suits. Being critical of things is never wrong, no matter how “sacred” the issue, however in this case the person does come off as a tad ludicrous.
However the last part is a great criticism. “She opposed making it easier to bring criminal prosecutions of companies that knowingly sell defective products and also criticized a measure that would make it easier for the commission to publicly disclose reports of faulty products.” That could cause a lot of trouble, and is loosely defined, so I could see why that would be cause to not support this piece of legislation. How can it be decided that company A released defective products on purpose, while company B released defective products on accident? It seems to create a large bureaucratic blackhole that can just be handled with suits.
Finally, I don’t understand why a lot of self-proclaimed “progressives” are so against Ron Paul. He’s for liberty, the Constitution, protecting our rights, stopping the imperialism that will tear down the country, etc. etc. He has some economic policies that you all disagree on for sure, but that’s all for debate and discussion. The one thing the President has direct power over is the military and he is the only one who will correct the mistakes of this branch of Government. His other policies would have to be debated and discussed with Congress - he’s not running for dictator like some of these other hacks.
I just subscribe to this blog’s RSS feed so I likely won’t ever see this particular article again if you feel like responding. I’m not sure if there is a private message system here or not…
October 30th, 2007 at 2:46 am.
This is taking the phrase, “Get the lead out…” to new extremes… NO?
.
October 30th, 2007 at 4:07 amLet’s just put this in perspective folks. There are stock holders and board members of corporations that have been loyal and paid big bucks to have the government look the other way and the administration is letting Nancy Nord know that she will have a job in the after life of service to Dear Leader. Just like Barbara Mikulski, my fine patriot Senator, will have a job, at Booze Allen Hamilton, waiting for her fine consultation when she gracefully retires from the senate. Ever wonder why the raids on these meat packing plants to root out illegal immigrants were done at Privately held companies? I don’t, it’s all about the stock holders.
October 30th, 2007 at 7:38 amSince the US doesn’t manufacture anything anymore and it all comes from China, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc.—we had better beg them to make products that are safe for consumers.
Comment by Keith — October 29, 2007 @ 10:59 pm
Beg? I think we can do more than that.
Nobody is forcing us to buy their products. Nobody is forcing Sam Walton to put them on the shelves. We may not have the right to habeas corpus or representative government anymore, but we do still have the power of the purse.
We can quit buying Chinese products that are produced with toxic substances, or Indian products produced by child labor, or Cambodian products produced by people unable to organize for better working conditions, or Brazilian products produced on former rainforests.
We can tell our stores to stop stocking these products. We can demand it, in fact.
October 30th, 2007 at 7:40 amEver wonder why the raids on these meat packing plants to root out illegal immigrants were done at Privately held companies? I don’t, it’s all about the stock holders.
Comment by The Fly-Man — October 30, 2007 @ 7:38 am
Wow. I had not heard this before. It makes perfect sense, of course, but I hadn’t yet connected the dots. Thank you!
October 30th, 2007 at 7:48 amIt bears repeating: If you elect people that run under the premise that government is bad, they will do everything possible to prove their point. And, if they can make a quick few billion bucks while doing so, it is a win-win for them. This is NOT incompetence–far from it–they are doing exactly what they have always intended to do. They are cunning and evil.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:12 amwow, lead laden toys must cool with her, what a sweetheart.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:39 am“She opposed making it easier to bring criminal prosecutions of companies that knowingly sell defective products…”
vs.
“Today, the AP provides further evidence of the administration’s efforts to shield the firm, reporting that the State Department “promised†legal immunity to Blackwater guards after the shooting incident…”
Well, this f—g administration is consistent, if nothing else.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:40 amI wonder if she was a lawyer at Eastman Kodak when they were sued by Polaroid for patent infringement on the instant film cameras? It seems that the lawyers for EK really screwed that situation up by not properly ensuring that the company could go forward with that product.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:51 amComment by TCDon — October 30, 2007 @ 8:53 am
Perhaps he’s decided that you don’t dictate his schedule as well…
October 30th, 2007 at 8:56 amWhether extensive regulation is needed is questionable, of course state-based criminal prosecution and civil suits would likely take care of these problems without a giant money-pit of a bureaucracy.
So your solution is that people die because of defective products and sue the company to make them do the right thing. That’s pretty sick. How about people not die in the first place. Besides, as the auto industry and others have proven, an awful lot of people need to die and sue the company before it is financially feasable for them to do the right thing. Since we have become the United Corporations of America, the least we can do is to have our government be a layer of protection between us and the greedy corporations who put profits before human lives.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:09 amComment by bilbobaggins — October 30, 2007 @ 9:09 am
To oppose a ban on lead in all toys, and then refuse to explain yourself (the chairwoman refused to comment about this per the NYT article), is criminal, IMO, especially when so many children are at risk.
What was it we were saying about the Bush administration being concerned about children only from conception to birth?
October 30th, 2007 at 9:50 amregulation is needed. It’s not going to come from the companies whose goal is profit. We the people, in order to form a more perfect union have decided that regulation is needed. Where we fail is when we don’t stay active in the process and allow the ones in power to play a shell game with our money and get drunk on the power that we gave them.
Democracy is not having a microwave dinner while watching American Idol and downloading music from iTunes. It’s active participation, demanding accountability.
Our roads, our boarders, our schools, our water, our sanitation and more is regulated because we see the need for standards for the common good of all people.
For this lady to oppose tougher consumer protections is partisan and not in the publics interests.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:01 amEveryone in this administration is an ex CEO of some kind or another. This is whay we get when they run the government like a business.
Remove Pelosi, Impeach Cheney
How to Declare the Speaker Seat Vacant.
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/ 2007/ 10/ 29/ how-to-declare-the-speaker-seat-vacant/
October 30th, 2007 at 10:19 amNancy A. Nord, lobbyist and political hack, is a poison pill planted by the current corrupt, criminal administration with the intent of thwarting the mission of the Consumer Product Safety Commission and of fighting off any Congressional attempts to hold the global conglomerates accountable for their reckless and destructive actions.
The criminals currently in charge of our government (you remember OUR government, the one OF the PEOPLE, BY the PEOPLE, FOR the PEOPLE) have appointed such poison pills in EVERY federal agency that might hold those who control the wealth in this country from EVER being held accountable for ANYTHING they do to harm the rest of the people in the country.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:20 amNew G.O.P. campaign slogan:
“Lead, The Other White Meat”
October 30th, 2007 at 10:34 amThis news just adds to the suspicion that this government was actively involved in 9/11 is some way, shape or form. there is ample proof out there with appointments like this one that this administration has no regard for human life; even the lives of American children are for sale, and the lives of innocents in Iraq are given less than no value.
October 30th, 2007 at 11:07 amand just in sept. Nord said this……
“Our small agency has been ignored by the Congress and the public for way too long,” said the acting chairman, Nancy A. Nord. “Our laboratory desperately needs to be modernized.”
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3626045
October 30th, 2007 at 11:11 amNord running Consumer Protection is a travesty. To paraphrase Kanye West, George Bush hates the American people.
October 30th, 2007 at 11:34 amIMMUNITY!!!
October 30th, 2007 at 11:36 am