It's amazing that any of us are alive today given the absence of this law when we were children.

As many parents, and ultimately manufacturers, learned the hard way, the Bush administration did not make the safety of toys and other products a priority. That led to the recall of millions of toys — some because of lead paint, others because of hazards such as small and powerful magnets that children swallowed.

Once again, the NY Times displays an astonishing illogic and lack of understanding.

Doesn't the fact that there were recalls of "millions" of toys were recalled illustrate that the safety regime under the Bush administration worked as planned -- private industry identified and recalled dangerous goods.

Further, the costs of such recalls should encourage manufacturers to make safer goods in the first place -- and avoid these costs. Thus the "manufacturers learned the hard way."

Is there something in the Obama plan that will work better?

The delay has caused confusion and allowed opponents to foment needless fears that the law could injure smaller enterprises like libraries, resale shops and handmade toy businesses.

Translation: Such fears are needless because these smaller enterprises don’t use union labor or buy ads in the NYT. Shutting them down is a feature, not a bug.

I am sure that children will soon be banned from libraries all across the country. Hysteria to what one imagines could be the consequences of this unimplemented law is definitely the only rational response.

Instead of banning toys and books in libraries and thrift shops, it seems a more effective approach is to ban children. We need to get at root causes. A side benefit is the elimination of troublesome issues like abortion, and various aspects of illegal immigration. As I understand it, some countries in Western Europe have initiated efforts along these lines.

thank goodness for the eleventh-hour moratorium that staved off disaster

Eh? Disaster hasn't been staved off. Books are being thrown out. Many small companies are going out of business. Many others are having trouble because retailers won't buy their products without the necessary testing - regardless of what the Commission promises about enforcement (partly because of inertia - these policies were generally set late last year - and partly because, as SSFC points out, state attorneys general can still bring charges and the retailers don't want to risk it). The basic problems - of the cost of testing, the effective ban on one-of-a-kind or short-run items because of the need for destructive testing of the finished item, the difficulty getting testing from an approved lab at all - still remain.

The only benefit is that some of these problems have been put off until August - unless, of course, you happen to come to the attention of a state attorney general who either has some reason to dislike you and your business or who needs a campaign issue. (And that's assuming the moratorium isn't lifted immediately by whoever is appointed to the Commission, which I would not lay odds against. "Obama appointees reverse industry-friendly decision by lame-duck Bushies" has got to be a tempting narrative.) A last-minute, partial and temporary moratorium on enforcement from one of the agencies that can bring charges under the law doesn't eliminate the effect of the law.

Have since implementation day, Feb. 10, talked to 5 owners of impacted businesses. Without exception they hadn't heard of the law. Isn't that what the media are for, getting out the news?
Fat chance.

I think what is truly needed to protect the public is a requirement that all new front page articles in newspapers be certified by a neutral three member board before publication. This board would certify that the facts given in the article are in fact true and that all of the relevant facts are included. The board would also scrutinize the article for obvious bias and remove it.
Board approvals can be given a number and posted on the internet. The approval number must be posted at the end of each article in order to be published on the front page of any newspaper.
This is essential so that our children get the truth so that they may learn and make proper life decisions. With proper enlightened leadership we may rid the world of all of the articles with blasphemous right wing content.
True this requirement may lead to blank front pages, but you know? It's for the children.

Bored Lawyer:"private industry identified and recalled dangerous goods."

I think that's rather generous. In reality, I'd imagine it was something like private industry weighed the cost of a recall against the cost of a class-action lawsuit, plus damages, and took the cheaper route

D.A. -- you may or may not be right (there were no govt. ordered recalls in the Bush Administration?), but from where I sit, your comment is irrelevant. The issue isnot whether we are awarding Boy Scout merit badges to the captains of the toy industry. The issue is what is the most efficacious and cost-efficient way of ensuring safe products and minimizing injuries.

My point is that under the Bush administration, which presumably had a more free-market approach, the costs of a recall (whether govt. ordered, or to avoid the still more costly prospect of paying injury damages) encourage safer designs. That there are recalls is not a reason why that system doesn't work, it is a reason why it works.

Is there any evidence that requiring expensive testing beforehand produces safer products in the long run? Or more to the point, avoids injuries more than a relatively free market approach which results in an occassional recall?