Yesterday, the House passed an appropriations bill which would fund the Consumer Product Safety Commission at a level $3.6 million above President Bush's request, according to the National Journal (subscription required).

In February, Reg•Watch derided President Bush for proposing cuts in the budget of the independent agency which regulates and forces recalls of common household items such as toys, clothes and electronics. Bush's budget request would result in the lowest staffing levels in agency history.

The Senate should follow suit in restoring CPSC's budget and allowing the agency to fully carry out its duties.

Two stories today illustrate a dangerous trend which will likely get worse before it gets better: the importation of dangerous products from China.

Much like America during the Industrial Revolution, China's economy is making great strides and the global economy is benefiting. But, also much like America, China's economic growth is outpacing government regulation and oversight.

The difference is — because rapid globalization is eroding trade barriers — dangerous products are easily spilling onto foreign shores.

One story indicates China is on an improving path toward regulatory responsibility. The lede in a New York Times article claims Chinese regulators have "recently closed 180 food plants and that inspectors had uncovered more than 23,000 food safety violations."

However, the other story, also covered by the Times, shows how far away the end of the path may be. A Chinese tire manufacturer pawned off hundreds of thousands of defective tires on an American importer. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is now aware of the defect, and the importer — which deserves its own share of the blame — will recall the tires.

If this trend continues, safety may grow as a commodity on the world market. Industry lobbyists who claim American businesses cannot afford federal regulation will begin to find their argument holds even less water than it does currently.

For the most part, America's advanced regulatory system ensures safe and reliable consumer products. America can't match the cheapness or enormity of the Chinese workforce, but we can be a leader in safety. Ultimately, American business can't afford not to have a strong and responsive regulatory system.

Last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved a bill to reform certain drug regulation practices at FDA and renew the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA). The full Senate approved a similar bill in May. (For a detailed analysis of the Senate version, click here.

The Pharmalot blog has a good summary of some of the drug safety provisions in the House bill which go beyond what the Senate approved.

The user fee program, the other half of the bill, is a double-edged sword. While it is an important source of funding for the agency, it comes with strings attached and allows drug companies to call the shots during the approval process.

A provision in the House bill demonstrates this dichotomy. The bill would reduce the amount of fees paid by industry if federal appropriations increase. This is encouraging, because many public health and safety advocates believe the federal government, not the drug industry, should be responsible for ensuring FDA has enough resources to perform its regulatory duties.

However, there is a danger this may lead to lower funding for FDA in the long-run. If this appropriations process turns into a zero-sum game where both sides are jockeying to see who can pay less, it would ultimately force FDA to do its job for less money.

FDA is already under-funded. The House should take this provision but also force a steady rise in the drug safety budget. That would allow appropriators and the drug industry to haggle over their respective responsibility in a more productive way. It would be in industry's best interest to lobby for increased funding. Republicans would be in favor of giving industry a break, and Democrats (if they understood the problems with user fees, which they appear not to) could get behind no-strings-attached funding and a bigger role for government.