Now That's a Headline

"Efforts to crack down on lead paint thwarted by China, Bush Administration" by Kevin G. Hall of, naturally, McClatchey Newspapers. Hall explains that "The Bush administration has hindered regulation on two fronts." First, "It stalled efforts to press for greater inspections of imported children’s products" and second, "it altered the focus of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), moving it from aggressive protection of consumers to a more manufacturer-friendly approach."

Now that this is in the news, of course, the administration is ordering the government to look into ways to keep kids safe from lead toys, "but as recently as last December, the Sierra Club sued the Bush administration after the Environmental Protection Agency rebuffed a petition to require health and safety studies for companies that use lead in children’s products." There's more in the article, so read the whole thing.

Comments

amazing: in a slightly later post, matthew has a throwaway line about whether, in foreign policy matters, glen greenwald is to the left of matthew, and it attracts 26 (out of 28) commenters to carry on quite foolishly.

meanwhile, here is a fascinating example of how the bush administration does its dirty work, and no one has anything to say.

so i'll at least note that matthew's throwaway word in this posting ("naturally," regarding mcclatchy's actually doing journalism) is a sadly revealing note of the state of our media: naturally, it wasn't the ny times, the wapo, the ap, cnn, or anyone else who even looked into this story.

naturally.

Posted by howard | August 21, 2007 11:35 AM

McClatchey's on a tear as of late! Terrific work - and, echoing Howard's comment, this is indeed fascinating stuff.

Relatedly: If I'm John Edwards' (or even another Dem candidate's) campaign manager, I'm trying to make some hay with this. The dangerous-Chinese-products meme isn't going anyway anytime soon - I think it will only deepen - and it provides an opportunity to not only talk about an important trade issue that dovetails nicely with Edwards' concerns, but also to connect with an audience that might not otherwise be attuned to the horserace's daily battles.

Posted by Will | August 21, 2007 11:53 AM

Why does the Bush administration hate children? Maybe they're just counting down the days you can squeeze crude oil from an orphan.

Posted by Reality Man | August 21, 2007 12:51 PM

But if you take the lead out of the toys, we might have to pay more for the toys. That gal from CNBC pointed that out. And she's on TV.

First the kids are going to demand safe toys -- next it's medical coverage from SCHIP. Then its socialism.

Posted by Klein's Tiny Left Nut | August 21, 2007 8:27 PM