Public Enemy #1
This rubber stamp may be America’s new Public Enemy #1 (among others).
I’m not really sure. I’m still trying to get a handle on the CPSIA thing. (Michelle?)
It kind of sounds like anything that is intended to be used by or even might possibly look to be used by a child under the age of 13 must undergo expensive testing for lead before it can go on the market.
Mind you, I don’t know of any cases of lead poisoning caused by rubber stamps. Then again, I haven’t heard of any cases of lead poisoning caused by second-hand clothes or hand-made toys or baby blankets knitted by loving grandmothers, but all these things could be considered hazardous materials come February 10th of this year.
Of course, what caused politicians to hurry this legislation through (it passed last year) was lead being found in cheap toys imported from, ahem, China. You know, the sensible thing to do would have been to address the problem by requiring that products imported from overseas meet the same requirements as domestically made goods. I am not aware of any major incidents of lead poisoning caused by American made products, are you?
But, you know the politicians, why solve a simple problem when you can create more problems instead?
Will I have to test rubber stamps? I don’t know. I’m trying to find out. And, testing isn’t cheap. The unicorn stamp, shown above, sells for $6.09. By some estimates of the costs of testing, if I were to pass along the costs to the consumer, I may have to sell that stamp for perhaps $166.09 (or more). No one is going to pay that much for a rubber stamp!
It’s frustrating. Read this post. It kind of summarizes what I’m feeling right now.
At any rate, I’ve got try to find something out, you know, pretty darn quick. If I have to have a close-out sale, I’m going to have to do it before February 10th, otherwise, I’ll be sitting on a bunch of inventory that will be considered hazardous goods (even though they may not have any lead in them, which they probably don’t).
As if the economy wasn’t bad enough, now this. Thanks a bunch, Congress!
Thank you so much for posting on this, and for linking to my rant.
I’ve covered more of the consumer end of this fiasco, but I’ve been all-the-while mindful of the millions of small business owners who will be negatively affected (that’s putting it lightly) by this law.
If you don’t mind, I’d like to blog about your rubber stamp business and how the CPSIA will affect you and your livelihood.
Keep up the good fight. This is one that’s winnable. I’ve been into politics since I was a little kid (literally) and I can honestly say that I’ve never seen an issue like this that can get some real power behind it, simply because it goes beyond political parties. Never. This affects WAY too many average Americans to be ignored.
But we all need to call and write our elected asses and let ‘em have it. That’s the only way this train crash will be diverted.
Keep fighting. There are millions standing with you.
No problem on the link. Your post saved me the time of putting together a long rant of my own.
I’d like to know more about which and how different small businesses will be affected. Because, when I write to my elected officials, I don’t want to just send a letter, but I want to have a report assembled that will show the different ways that it will be harmful.
You can blog about mine if you want. I’m just still trying to figure things out. I’ve contacted some of my suppliers, and they don’t even know about it. From my reading of it, it doesn’t sound like it will be sufficient to say that the products are not intended for use by children under the age of 13. It sounds like if a product is viewed to be targeted to children, in some bureaucrat’s assessment, then it has to be tested, even if children might be a minority user of a product. And, even if such a warning were sufficient, encouraging families to engage in activities such as rubber stamping would probably undermine such a warning.
So, I don’t see a way around being forced to test, or to either get out of the rubber stamping business or change my product line dramatically and be less family-friendly and perhaps be more adult.
But testing would be not be economically feasible. I’ve seen estimates that testing could cost anywhere from $100 to several thousand dollars per product. In many cases, especially towards the higher end of the cost spectrum, the cost of testing could far exceed the cost of production.
It may be more affordable for larger companies that produce stamps in larger quantities, but it does not appear as though it will be very affordable for smaller companies that produce smaller quantities. And, I’d bet there are a lot of crafters and rubber stampers out there that buy a good portion of their stamps from small, independent stamp makers.
So, the effect could be driving small companies out of business, or forcing them out of “family-friendly” markets.
And, then too, you’ve got to think about the crafters that use rubber stamps to make cards and other items to sell or distribute. What of the parent that helps their child make Valentine’s day cards for school? Or birthday cards for a birthday party? Will all those items need to be tested?
And, why such extensive testing, especially if items are not known to or are unlikely to contain lead? Why does each batch of a specific product need to be tested? If the same materials are being used, why wouldn’t it be sufficient to test those materials once? I mean, whether I make a unicorn stamp or a flower stamp, the same materials are being used. Why the necessity to test one of each and double the expense? There is no logical, scientific or rational sense behind some of the things they are asking.
I would hope this would be winnable, but my concern is that I’m in such a minority that I and other stamp manufacturers won’t be a large enough segment for politicians to care about. Plus, in reading some media articles, you can see that there is already an attitude that anyone opposing testing must be in favor of poisoning children.
@Pheisty I agree with you about elected asses. And true, there is more then million standing with you @dcr.
Till