Today, as promised, President Bush signed into law the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (H.R. 4040). You can read a summary of the bill's major provisions here.

Kudos to the president and to Congress for creating far-reaching reforms that are protective of consumers and will empower the Consumer Product Safety Commission to adequately police the marketplace.

While news surrounding the act is finished (thank goodness, after an excruciatingly long debate and congressional gestation), government officials must take many more steps before the intended changes are realized. Congress must follow through on its pledge to increase agency resources by passing appropriations bills, and the Executive Branch must write and enforce the new rules the act requires.

Reg•Watch has been blogging about Congress's recent passage of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, particularly the provision that bans certain phthalates — a class of chemicals commonly found in plastic and, subsequently, the human body.

There are many other provisions in the bill which will keep consumers safe from harmful products and empower the Consumer Product Safety Commission to better regulate a market dominated by cheap imports. OMB Watch has prepared a list of some of the most important aspects of the bill and how they differ from the status quo.

Click here for a list of changes made by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.

The Food and Drug Administration has finalized guidelines it contends will improve the independence of the expert panels it uses to receive advice on pending decisions for both food and drug policy. But the final guidelines are weaker than the proposed version first unveiled in March 2007.

The guidelines define new FDA policies for financial conflicts of interest. If a potential member of an advisory committee has a financial interest in the issue the panel is considering — for example, ties to a pharmaceutical industry which has a new drug under review — that person's objectivity is compromised.

Under the March 2007 proposal, potential members with a financial conflict totaling more than $50,000 would be prohibited from serving on panels except in the rarest of cases. That part of the guidance has gone unchanged.

But potential members with a conflict of less than $50,000 will potentially have more influence under the final guidance than they would have under the proposed version. Originally, persons with a financial interest less than $50,000 would have been allowed to serve but prohibited from voting. FDA decided to strip the voting prohibition in the final version.

Allowing members with a financial conflict to cast deciding votes could have real consequences, especially in the area of drug approval. A 2006 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association finds "the overall amount of conflict in a meeting could have an influence on overall voting behavior." The study finds, in hearings held on specific drugs where the advisory committee contains members with a financial interest in the approval of the drug, the committee is likely to recommend approval.

Moreover, even the strict $50,000 cutoff won't have much impact on the number of conflicted panel members providing the agency with advice. An investigation by the Center for Science in the Public Interest found the $50,000 threshold "would eliminate just one of every ten panelists who currently gets a waiver" to serve despite a financial conflict.

Last night, the Senate passed a bill to reform the Consumer Product Safety Commission which would also mandate new safety standards for consumer products and toys. Like the House, which approved the bill Wednesday, the Senate passed the legislation with overwhelming bipartisan support, 89-3.

Also yesterday, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said President Bush would sign the bill, despite some objections. That's great news for the beleaguered CPSC and for consumers.

One important provision in the bill would ban certain phthalates, a chemical used in plastics, pending further study of their toxicity. This safety-first approach is a revolutionary concept for the federal government. OMB Watch has released a statement applauding the phthalate ban.

Read more

Posted by Matt Madia, 10:30:15 AM