By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
From: Paul Penders
Cass Sunstein is apparently ‘nudging’ the cosmetics industry with the “Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010.” Your first big clue here are the sponsors of the bill: Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI). What do they all have in common Johnny? Ding, ding, ding! The answer is – they are all Progressives… Working hand in hand with Sunstein, they’ll morph an anti-business nudge into a shove by regulating the industry to death.
While the bill seems harmless at first, it would actually force the cosmetic industry to adhere to a massive new regulatory structure from the FDA. Why? All in the name of the infamous precautionary principle. The so-called Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is aligning with other organizations that are pushing a bill not based on credible and established scientific principles. In fact, it throws out any notion of a proper scientific review process in favor of new regulations and bureaucracy that would far surpass any other FDA-regulated product category including food or drugs.
From the infamous creator of The Story of Stuff:
Story of Cosmetics, The Critique
A sampling of the new uber-regulations:
- Register a “description of the establishment’s activities with respect to cosmetics” (Sec. 612(c)(1)(B));
- Report “the number of workers employed at the establishment” (Sec. 612(c)(1)(C));
- Report the “gross receipts of sales” (Sec. 612(c)(1)(D));
- Report “the name and address of any company that supplies the establishment … with any ingredient (including preservatives, fragrances, or any other chemical component of a finished cosmetics product) and the name of the ingredient supplied ….” (Sec. 612(c)(1)(E));
- Some of this sensitive information provided by your company may be “subject to disclosure under section 552 of Title 5 of the United States Code.” (Sec. 612(e)(3));That’s the Freedom of Information Act in case you didn’t know.
As a small business owner, I can tell you that the above regulations will bankrupt large segments of the small business cosmetics industry. Business owners simply cannot afford all the time and expense required by these FDA regulations. Like so many other industries, the Obama administration and the FDA are putting a stranglehold on Cosmetics to siphon off profits, redistribute wealth and wield unlimited business and financial power over every move in the industry. In essence, the industry will be state-controlled and nationalized.
New start-ups will not be feasible as start-up costs will be too high. In the end, only the big boys will survive and these will be the ones with the government’s blessings. And it won’t just be makeup – this will affect soap, shampoo, deodorant, shaving cream, baby shampoo – really anything you use to keep yourself looking, feeling and smelling fresh. It creates an undue burden on the industry – if one tiny ingredient is changed, it has to be filed with the FDA and reverified all over again. Prices will skyrocket and products will be hard to get. Unemployment will also rise as employers will have to lay their employees off due to rising costs and regulation.
The politicians involved are not doing this for the people. I guarantee it is lining their coffers somewhere. You can’t put lipstick on this governmental pig.
A great article on this can be found here: The Safe Cosmetics Act 2010
The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (SCA 2010), now before the House of Representatives, is an inappropriate and seriously flawed attempt to make cosmetics safer. You can read the full text here. The thinking behind it is identical to a bill that was proposed (and defeated on March 1st this year) in Colorado (see Tunnel vision). Both are the brainchild of a group including the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (SFSC) and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) which are in turn linked to the Skin Deep database. SCA 2010 is being opposed by groups representing small businesses such as Opposesca.com, the Indie Beauty Network and Personal Care Truth which also reflects the views of many cosmetic chemists. A petition opposing SCA 2010 can be found here.
SCA 2010 is unscientific, unworkable, and if passed as is, would likely cause widespread job loss in the cosmetics industry. Far from being a step in the right direction, it would be a leap into regulatory chaos, as well as targeting small businesses and natural products.