[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 143 (Wednesday, October 5, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 5, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
             COMMENDING THE WORK OF CPSC CHAIRMAN ANN BROWN

  Mr. BRYAN. Mr. President, 6 months ago Ann Brown appeared before the 
Senate Consumer Subcommittee, which I chair, as President Clinton's 
nominee for chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. She was 
eminently well qualified for the position, having served as a leader of 
consumer health and safety organizations for many years. The 
subcommittee and the Senate quickly approved her nomination.
  On taking office, she promptly revitalized the Commission, made it 
the national leader on product safety issues, and restored the 
visibility of the Commission to both business and consumers. I am 
pleased and proud of the work she has done.
  Recently, the New York Times and Washington Post profiled Chairman 
Brown. The articles describe how she revived the CPSC and has again 
made it an effective consumer protection agency.
  Mr. President, on September 16, 1994, Chairman Brown addressed the 
Consumer Product Safety Coalition. Her speech outlined her well 
balanced regulatory philosophy, emphasizing voluntary compliance over 
mandatory action, and her willingness to listen to all points of view. 
I commend Chairman Brown's statement to all those who are interested in 
Government regulation as an excellent model for regulation in the 
1990's.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of her speech and the text of 
the above mentioned articles be printed in the Record following my 
statement.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     Remarks by Chairman Ann Brown

       At the outset, I want to thank Sandy Trowbridge for his 
     advice and friendship. He has been a good friend and mentor 
     for many years.
       I am pleased to see so many of those who attended an 
     earlier discussion in February, shortly before my 
     confirmation by the Senate. Since I have been Chairman for 
     only a few months, we are still getting to know each other. 
     Most of you recognize, however, that I have a different 
     agenda and approach from my recent precedessors. I am action 
     oriented. I want to move the Commission to the forefront of 
     product safety. I intend to make the Commission the leader in 
     a national effort to improve product safety. I have no hidden 
     agenda. In fact my agenda could not be more open.
       Back in February, I said my three initial goals would be to 
     revitalize the Commission into an effective, proactive 
     agency, to make it a recognized player on major issues 
     involving product safety and to increase the visibility of 
     the Commission to both consumers and business.
       After six months, we are well on the way to achieving these 
     goals. In this brief time we have initiated four ANPRs, (baby 
     walkers, upholstered furniture, 5-gallon buckets and multiple 
     tube fireworks) more than the Commission issued in the 
     previous three years, conducted four press conferences 
     announcing recalls of millions of dangerous and defective 
     products (crayons, toddler beds, multiple tube fireworks and 
     rayon skirts) encouraged voluntary removal of strings from 
     outerwear and their elimination from future production of 
     these garments, and issued three commendations to companies 
     for significant advances in product safety (P&G, Hasbro and 
     Sunbeam). The Commission has been both active and productive.
       As the Commission approaches a new fiscal year, (October 1) 
     it is appropriate to look back at the principles underlying 
     the actions we have taken, and forward to the agenda for the 
     coming year.
       At my confirmation hearing, I told the Senate I would adopt 
     a balanced approach to regulation, favoring voluntary 
     compliance and standards whenever possible. I also said I 
     would not hesitate to recommend strong, mandatory action 
     whenever necessary to protect the public.
       When I came to the Commission, I vowed I would not be just 
     an information and education Chairman. A few years ago one of 
     my predecessors as Chairman said, ``If consumers are made 
     aware of reasonable risks associated with a particular 
     product, and are willing to take those risks, they should be 
     allowed to do so.'' I reject this philosophy. The flaw in 
     this approach is that often it is not the consumer who 
     suffers death or injury but innocent third parties who become 
     the victims of hazardous products.
       Unfortunately, it is still true that the marketplace does 
     not always inform consumers of the danger in certain products 
     and that some products do have hidden hazards. Moreover, 
     seemingly innocent and innocuous products can cause death and 
     injury to children and others.
       The facts are that unintentional injury is the leading 
     cause of death among people under 45 years old and is the 
     fourth leading cause of death in the nation. Of the estimated 
     96,000 annual deaths resulting from unintentional injury, 
     21,700, or nearly one-fourth, are related to consumer 
     products. Approximately 28.6 million injuries annually result 
     from consumer product use. Nonfatal injuries account for one 
     in every six hospital days. These injuries cause huge losses 
     of productivity and avoidable medical care costs. Injuries, 
     deaths, and property damage associated with consumer products 
     cost the public about $200 billion annually.
       Accordingly, I believe the CPSC must help protect the 
     public, particularly the most vulnerable in our society: 
     children, the elderly and the differently abled from 
     unreasonable risk of injury or death from consumer products. 
     These protective actions will improve the health and safety 
     of the American people, and produce economic and social 
     dividends for the nation.
       Every dangerous product we remove from the market prevents 
     an increase in the national health care bill. Multiply each 
     of our protective actions by thousands and millions of 
     products and you can quickly see that prompt action against 
     product hazards saves the nation billions in potential health 
     care costs.
       Too often we focus on the cost of a regulation, and fail to 
     recognize its benefits. We believe the recently implemented 
     child resistant cigarette lighter rule will save 80-100 lives 
     per year and produce more than $200 million in benefits to 
     society. This rule will result in a net gain for our national 
     welfare.
       Government agencies at all levels, and their allies in the 
     private sector, must be aggressive guardians of consumer 
     health and safety. We cannot wait for deaths and injuries to 
     pile up by the score before we act. We must reach out to 
     prevent as many of these tragedies as we can. This is the 
     theme that runs through all of the actions we have taken. 
     From the ANPR on five gallon buckets, to the recall of 
     defective rayon skirts, to the voluntary removal of strings 
     from children's garments, our emphasis has been on the prompt 
     prevention of deaths and injuries from consumer products.
       In my view, regulation in the 90's must be different from 
     regulation in the 70's. Government should avoid an 
     adversarial relationship with business whenever possible. 
     Voluntary action is preferable to mandatory, when it is 
     implemented promptly and carried out effectively. That is why 
     I have told many of you I have an open door and an attentive 
     ear. I am attuned to business. As many of you know, my 
     husband taught at the Harvard Business School for several 
     years, and now teaches at universities here in Washington.
       I come from a family that successfully operated a retail 
     store in downtown Washington for decades. I strive for common 
     sense regulation and am sensitive to the burden our rules may 
     impose. So whether you represent a company, an association or 
     just yourself, I welcome your view son product safety.
       I believe the CPSC can fulfill its responsibility to 
     protect the American people from unreasonable risk of death 
     and injury from consumer products without becoming overly 
     invasive. The Commission cannot--and should not--attempt to 
     protect consumers from every possible risk of injury from 
     consumer products. There are limits to what government 
     regulation can achieve.
       Some of you have heard me talk about the triangle of 
     effective product safety regulation. I believe the 
     Commission, business and consumers each have an equal role to 
     play. Working together in partnership, we can cut the 
     terrible toil of accidents in our country.
       The Commission has adopted a balanced approach to 
     regulation, carefully weighing costs, benefits and other 
     relevant factors. For business, I believe the bottom line 
     should include a margin of safety in all its products because 
     today safety sells. It also avoids expansive private 
     litigation and government action against unsafe products. 
     Correspondingly, for their own safety, consumers should be 
     informed about the products they purchase and take reasonable 
     care in using them.
       In my view, the key to effective regulation is 
     proportionality. By that I mean the remedy should fit the 
     risk. For example, the plastic five-gallon bucket contains a 
     latent, unreasonable risk of death to small children which is 
     not apparent to them or adults who are entrusted with their 
     care. This is a perfect example of the danger not to the 
     initial consumer, but to innocent bystanders. Accordingly, it 
     was appropriate for the CPSC to issue an ANPR to consider the 
     development of a performance standard to minimize this 
     risk. Thus, the problem and the response were consistent.
       In contrast, the potential danger to the user of in-line 
     skates, roller blades to many of you, is readily apparent. 
     Most sellers of this product caution buyers on their use, and 
     urge skaters to purchase protective equipment along with 
     their skates. Therefore, I took the proper action, in 
     response to the increasing injuries associated with these 
     products, by publicly warning skaters to take care in using 
     these products and to wear protective gear at all times. 
     Since few of the skates we have examined were defectively 
     manufactured, and skaters have the ability to minimize their 
     risk of injury by taking currently available precautions, no 
     more than a public warning was called for. Thus, risk and 
     remedy coincide.
       In both of these cases, the emphasis of the Commission was 
     on prevention. This will continue, but to maximize our 
     effectiveness we need the cooperation of all manufacturers. 
     If we work together, as partners, for the public interest, we 
     can make great strides in product safety.
       That is what the Chairman's commendation is designed to 
     achieve. I want to recognize those companies and industries 
     which voluntarily make significant advances in product 
     safety. These companies brought their products to me or our 
     staff, and demonstrated their voluntary improvements in 
     product safety. I urge you to follow their path.
       When I gave the first commendation to Procter and Gamble, I 
     listed five primary criteria for the award. They are: Actions 
     that contribute to reducing hazards to children and other 
     vulnerable populations; voluntary actions that are not 
     mandated by government regulations, that anticipate 
     government regulations or that go beyond what the government 
     requires; developments that affect the safety of large 
     numbers of individuals; innovations or improvements to 
     existing products; and safety devices, packaging, warnings or 
     products that enhance consumer safety.
       I believe that manufacturers which develop important 
     contributions to product safety should be rewarded in the 
     marketplace. As you know, I cannot endorse products, but if 
     my commendation results in more sales of these products, I 
     will be delighted. So show me your safety innovations. I want 
     to give more commendations to deserving manufacturers.
       As I look back over the last six months, and ahead to the 
     coming year, one of the accomplishments of which I am most 
     proud is the increased visibility I have been able to 
     generate for the Commission. In recent years the Commission 
     almost disappeared from public view; consumers and business 
     had virtually forgotten us and our mission.
       Through my press conferences, appearances on ``Good Morning 
     America'' and articles about the revitalization of the 
     Commission in the national media, the public has reawakened 
     to the Commission and our vital work. In fact, we have had to 
     increase the capacity of our hotline to handle the avalanche 
     of incoming calls as people all over the country have 
     responded to our safety messages.
       I have heard that some among you have criticized these 
     press conferences as regulation by press release and accused 
     me of not following legal procedures. I have a one word 
     answer to that nonsense. In every instance my actions had a 
     solid factual and legal basis. The press conferences I have 
     held have been to announce corrective actions under our 
     statutes, recalls of products for violating mandatory 
     standards, voluntary actions to eliminate hazards or to 
     provide advice to consumers with no regulatory effect. 
     Moreover, I review all my actions in advance with our General 
     Counsel, Eric Rubel. He makes sure that I faithfully follow 
     due process.
       Fortunately, our statutes provide a wide variety of legal 
     and proper ways to communicate our actions to the public. It 
     is certainly in the public interest, and the interest of your 
     companies, to reach the largest possible audience for both 
     our recalls and commendations. I assure you I will continue 
     to use every appropriate means to convey my views on product 
     safety issues to both business and consumers. On the same 
     principle, I want to hear from all of you, whatever your 
     position with your company, association or firm, my door is 
     equally open to you.
       Now I want to turn to the future and tell you about my 
     agenda for the coming year. First of all, I am pleased the 
     Appropriations Committees have agreed on $42.5 million for 
     the Commission for FY 95, including $1.2 million for the 
     development of a fire safe cigarette standard, when 
     Congressman Moakley's bill is passed. This amount is not all 
     I had hoped for, but it is adequate for the coming year.
       When we allocate our resources, I will look initially at 
     the extent of the risk. I want to target those products which 
     cause the most deaths and injuries to consumers. But my 
     priorities will not be determined by statistical analysis 
     alone. I will also be influenced by the need to protect the 
     most vulnerable in our society--especially children, for 
     they are most susceptible to death and injury from 
     hazardous products. Combining these factors, in the coming 
     year the Commission will devote at least a third of its 
     resources to identify and correct hazards involving 
     childrens products.
       We will also spend considerable time and resources on two 
     other projects--residential fires and team sports injuries. 
     Residential fires are a prime cause of deaths and injuries to 
     consumers. In 1991, these fires resulted in over 3,500 
     deaths, more than 21,000 injuries and over $5.5 billion in 
     property damage.
       Recent advances in fire research have produced promising 
     developments which may lead to new fire resistance standards 
     for furniture, bedding and fabrics. We will study the results 
     of this research to determine how quickly it can be applied 
     to consumer products.
       Team sports--football, baseball, basketball, hockey and 
     soccer--generate about 25 deaths annually and nearly two 
     million injuries to children and adults, according to our 
     NEISS data.
       Utilizing the latest in sports science--protective helmets, 
     light weight energy absorbing materials and injury minimizing 
     equipment, we hope to develop new guidelines and standards to 
     reduce the sad toll of team sports deaths and injuries.
       Another item high on my agenda is reauthorization of the 
     Commission by the Congress. It has been four years since the 
     last reauthorization. I have asked Eric Rubel, and Bob Wager, 
     the Director of Congressional Relations, to develop a 
     legislative package to present to the Congress next year. I 
     earnestly solicit your thoughts and ideas. I hope you will 
     meet with Bob and Eric to give them any proposals you have.
       As you can see, we have a full work load planned for the 
     coming year. In addition, the Commission agenda must be 
     flexible for there will always be unexpected hazards, such as 
     the imported crayons loaded with lead, which will require our 
     attention. So you can look forward to another active and 
     productive year at the Commission.
       Overall, I am very pleased with the Commission's 
     accomplishments in these first six months. We are moving in 
     the right direction. I look forward to working with all of 
     you to further strengthen the Commission and assist us in 
     carrying out our important mission effectively.
                                  ____


               [From the New York Times, Sept. 11, 1994]

 Ann Brown Has Revived an Agency That Nearly Suffocated in the Reagan 
                                  Days

                          (By Brian Steinberg)

       Rompers and drawstrings, paint cans and fruit-scented 
     crayons. Lyrics to a spoof of ``My Favorite Things''? 
     Possibly, but Julie Andrews wouldn't be singing. The voice 
     might belong, however, to Ann Brown, head of the Consumer 
     Product Safety Commission.
       And if she were singing the song, she'd be lying. Those 
     items, far from being her favorite things, have all come 
     under the commission's scrutiny recently for a variety of 
     hazards they pose.
       When Mrs. Brown announced a huge Government recall of a 
     popular but flammable two-layer chiffon and rayon skirt on 
     Aug. 12--even though there had been no known cases of 
     injuries--the commission's consumer hotline received more 
     than 20,000 calls. And that was only the latest in a series 
     of very public, and media-savvy, commission actions.
       In just a few months, Mrs. Brown has put the commission in 
     the spotlight, with frequent press conferences, a new award 
     singling out companies with consumer-friendly products, and 
     James Earl Jones' voice on the consumer hotline. She puts in 
     an appearance on ``Good Morning America'' every three weeks 
     or so, and USA Today's Life section keeps tabs on her 
     announcements.
       Suddenly, it seems, the commission has been transformed. 
     Once called ``moribund'' by consumer advocates, it now sends 
     ripples throughout pop culture. It was the commission, after 
     all, that brought to public consciousness the fact that in-
     line skates can be hazardous when used improperly or without 
     the right safety equipment. With one warning, a hip pastime 
     became a health risk.
       To be sure, there are those who raise questions about her 
     motives and her style. ``She has her own agenda,'' said Jan 
     Amundson, general counsel for the National Association of 
     Manufacturers, ``and we want to know what it is.'' And David 
     A. Miller, president of the Toy Manufacturers of America, 
     said of her flair for publicity: ``This is her style. Our 
     concerns are that this is not a way a regulator should be 
     making regulations.''
       But critics can't deny that she wields a power that is a 
     distinct novelty at the Consumer Product Safety Commission. 
     The Reagan Administration tried to weaken it in 1981, to keep 
     it out of industry's hair, and budget and staffing levels 
     decreased by the year. Mrs. Brown, who became chairwoman in 
     March, is being hailed by consumer advocates like Ralph Nader 
     as a ``fresh breeze.'' ``She's resuscitating it,'' said Mr. 
     Nader. ``The C.S.P.C. has been dormant for 15 years.''
       Mrs. Brown showed this new attitude clearly at some recent 
     meetings. An admitted ``cheerleader'' with more energy than 
     one might think could reside in her diminutive body, she 
     demands action. Even while simply hearing reports, she urges 
     advisers to make points quickly, and she constantly asks how 
     the commission can best get results.
       At meetings, she darts from topic to topic--calling for a 
     new warning to be issued, pushing for a press conference on 
     the dangers of products like mace and pepper gas containers, 
     giving pep talks about the commission being an ``activist 
     agency.'' Mrs. Brown speaks in upbeat sound bites--``We are a 
     voice for the voiceless'' or ``I hate those blankety-blank 
     bath seats!'' (and often, in fact, recycles those same sound 
     bites in appearance after appearance).
       She likes to avoid dead ends and delays, radiating an image 
     normally alien to Government officials: a guerrilla, although 
     one very much aware of the rules of the game.
       The drive for consumer action despite obstacles and red 
     tape is nothing new for Ann Winkleman Brown. Born in 
     Philadelphia in 1937, she moved to Washington when she was 2. 
     Her father owned a women's clothing store, where she would do 
     her homework in the evenings after taking three different 
     buses from school. Her father, she said, ``believed in 
     treating the consumer with utmost fairness,'' even having his 
     salespeople pretend to be customers returning purchases. 
     ``Treat them as if they were buying the dress,'' her father 
     urged.
       ``I was fascinated with the process of people buying and 
     selling things, the consumer transaction,'' she recalled. 
     ``It was always a major interest of mine, maintaining a sense 
     of indignation at consumer injustice.''
       She graduated from George Washington University in 1959, 
     but her move to consumer activism did not come immediately. A 
     stint for The New York Post, first as a ``gal Friday,'' then 
     as a Washington correspondent, helped her with ``writing and 
     learning the way of Washington.'' She had married while in 
     college, and now had two daughters. Her husband, Donald, a 
     former professor at Harvard Business School, is now a lawyer 
     and developer in Washington and also teaches real estate.
       Mrs. Brown soon decided to start a grassroots consumer 
     group serving Washington. She said she ``did the gamut'' of 
     consumer activism in the 1970's, boycotting iceberg lettuce 
     doing a price survey of toys, helping found the Consumer 
     Protection Office.
       Her daughters, now 29 and 32, recall that this activist 
     life once led them to a near-melee at a boycott held in front 
     of a Washington supermarket to protest high meat prices. A 
     bus full of farmers' wives arrived to counter-protest just as 
     Mrs. Brown began to make a speech, and they tried to drown 
     her out.
       The children did not eat sugary cereals, did not get BB 
     guns for Christmas. And they assisted their mother with a 
     project that would gain her some fame, a Christmas toy-safety 
     survey whose results Mrs. Brown announced on television or at 
     press conferences, tossing what she called unsafe toys into a 
     garbage can. She once set a Mickey Mouse doll on fire to show 
     its flammability.
       Before arriving at the safety commission, Mrs. Brown was a 
     vice-president at the Consumer Federation of America and, 
     since 1983, was chairman of the Board of Public Voice, a 
     health and nutrition consumer advocacy group. She also served 
     as local chairman of the Consumer Affairs Committee of 
     Americans for Democratic Action, under whose auspices she 
     performed the toy survey. None of these were paid positions. 
     Mrs. Brown also spent time raising money for Democratic 
     candidates.
       Mrs. Brown now finds herself holding the reins of an agency 
     whose inaction she had long criticized. ``Laughable'' was how 
     she once characterized the commission--its efforts, she said, 
     were akin to ``trying to scoop up sand with a teaspoon.''
       One big change: While Mrs. Brown once sought out hazardous 
     products, they now come to her--brought to her attention 
     through consumer complaints and a variety of other channels, 
     including reports from coroners and emergency room personnel. 
     Staff members often join her for ``show and tell'' briefings 
     on products, like portable camping equipment that causes 
     carbon monoxide equipment that causes carbon monoxide 
     poisoning.
       She portrays herself as ``a regulator for the 90's,'' 
     trying to bring industry, Government and the consumer 
     together in a harmonious triangle. When clothing makers like 
     Levi's, Nike and L.L. Bean all agreed to remove drawstrings--
     which can catch on doors and swings and choke a child--from 
     sweatshirt hoods and the like, Mrs. Brown could not have been 
     happier. The commission had just removed a potential hazard 
     to children at little cost to itself.
       With a budget that has increased only slightly from the 
     1970's (Mrs. Brown estimates that overall her agency will 
     have a little more than $41 million for the fiscal year), 
     it's no surprise that she gravitates towards cost-efficient 
     ways to make her point like free publicity. As such, she 
     said, the agency prefers using mandatory regulations as ``a 
     court of last resort.'' The voluntary route is much easier, 
     she noted, as is steady barrage of public reminders and 
     informative announcements.
       Make no mistake, however. This is a woman who likes to see 
     definite achievement and steady progress. ``When I first came 
     to this agency,'' she noted, ``I found all bun and no beef. 
     They never took an action on something. I want to know, and I 
     ask myself all the time, and they're used to me now: What are 
     the actions we can take'' to protect consumers and be ``an 
     activist agency.''
       While consumer advocates praise her, others, while 
     applauding her spate of activity, hold up signs of caution. 
     In April, the commission recalled crayons that contained 
     traces of lead that could poison children. Although many 
     crayons contained less than .06 percent lead, the legal 
     standard, some manufacturers felt intimidated by the 
     commission to join in the recall, said Mr. Miller of the toy 
     group. ``Chairwoman Brown has a great talent for press 
     coverage,'' he said, saying she had been ``a friendly 
     adversary'' for more than 20 years. While conceding that part 
     of her approach is constructive, he said the way she handled 
     the crayon situation was ``a dangerous precedent.''
       But Mrs. Brown said: ``The other crayons, we felt, added 
     enough to the lead level that they should be withdrawn, and 
     the companies agreed to withdraw them. I think their knowing 
     we can get good press encourages them to go along with us, 
     but we're not legislating by press release.''
       Mrs. Brown has gotten substantial support from the agency's 
     two other commissioners, Jacqueline Jones-Smith and Mary 
     Sheila Gall, both Republican appointees, and there have been 
     numerous 3-0 votes. Both Mrs. Brown and Ms. Jones-Smith 
     portray the commissioners' relationship as ``collegial.'' 
     ``If we differ on issues, we respect the differences,'' said 
     Ms. Jones-Smith. One of Mrs. Brown's setbacks involved a 2-1 
     loss over whether to initiate formal rulemaking proceedings 
     on baby bath seats. The chairwoman felt the seats encouraged 
     a false sense of security, leading to parents leaving infants 
     unattended in the bathtub, sometimes with tragic results.
       The issue begs the question of how much government can or 
     should do, particularly when it is consumers' actions that 
     are at fault rather than a product itself. ``You just can't 
     assume that people understand'' all the different risks, she 
     told staff members. ``There are just so many things coming at 
     them in their lives. I don't think we can say, `Ah, stupid 
     consumers!' Nobody told us we were the Smart Consumer Product 
     Commission. We're the agency for all consumers.''
       Still, she admits, even the agency has limits. ``If people 
     are going to be so dumb as to be on in-line skates, hold onto 
     a car, and do wheelies and get killed, our hearts go out to 
     them, but you've got to know not to hold onto a car going 70 
     miles an hour.''
       Part of her focus for the commission centers on breaking 
     through to ``vulnerable populations'' that include children, 
     the elderly, those who don't speak English, and those from 
     low socioeconomic levels, she said. The commission will also 
     be focusing on flammability and sporting equipment in the 
     near future, she added, and will be making efforts to take 
     whatever action is needed for a particular product, whether 
     it be education, labeling, voluntary or mandatory recalls or 
     publicity. The tactics are designed to get the most attention 
     and results with the least amount of difficulty--and the 
     fewest dollars.
       Still, despite the Federal trappings, the activist spirit 
     lingers. ``This is not a time for big Government. This is a 
     time for us to make people understand: Here is a little 
     agency, and every time they hear us or see us, they should 
     think, `These are some Feds who are doing something that's 
     useful in my life, and they're doing it on not a lot of 
     money.'''
                                  ____


      CPSC's Ann Brown Is Pragmatic, Persistent on Product Safety

       When Ann Brown, chairman of the Consumer Product Safety 
     Commission, was a 12-year-old Washington schoolgirl in 1949, 
     she took her homework to Erlebachers', her parents' F Street 
     NW clothing store, instead of going directly home.
       ``I learned there how small business should work,'' Brown 
     told me last week. Her father, Jules Winkleman, would 
     demonstrate for his sales staff how to be as concerned in 
     dealing with a customer who brought in a return, as in making 
     the original sale.
       ``My father would play out the role of the customer. He 
     wanted to make sure his sales force understood that consumer 
     satisfaction came first,'' Brown recalled. And well ahead of 
     his time, Winkleman encouraged his daughter to think of a 
     business career. ``He told me a woman could go ahead and do 
     anything a man could do.''
       It was an easy progression for Brown to become a consumer 
     activist by profession and--by her own evaluation--one who 
     was an aggressive advocate who viewed most business people as 
     too focused ``on short-term profits'' and not enough on 
     consumer needs or safety.
       Now, at 57 in her first-ever government job, she finds that 
     ``times have changed and I have changed.'' She sees her role 
     as ``a regulator for the '90s,'' who can work with industry 
     groups for compromises that pay off. Business, too, has 
     changed, she believes, because ``many large and small 
     companies have had to update and upgrade their own missions 
     and strategic marketing plans.''
       Brown has gotten across her message that however tough an 
     activist she was in her private incarnation, she has no 
     horns; rather, she portrays, herself as a pragmatist willing 
     to work things out with private industry.
       A case in point relates to drawstrings in the hood and neck 
     portions of children's garments, long a hazard for small 
     children. Yet, in 1993, 12 children were strangled and 
     another 27 were injured by such drawstrings, easily 
     replaceable by buttons, snaps or velcro. One of the first 
     things Brown did as chairman was to get the industry to agree 
     voluntarily to redesign 200 million garments to eliminate 
     this hazard by next year.
       Industry leaders agree that safety in children's garments 
     must become a priority focus. Brown has started a national 
     award program for a company's commitment to safety first, 
     with the first coveted honor going to Procter & Gamble Co. 
     for developing safety caps for drugs that are both child-
     resistant and easy for seniors to open.
       For more than two decades, Brown had been a recognized 
     leader in lobbying for consumer safety and consumer rights. 
     From 1979 until this year, she was vice president of the 
     Consumer Federation of America. From 1983 to 1994 she had 
     also been chairman of Public Voice, a pro-consumer lobby 
     aimed at improving consumer health and nutrition. In 
     addition, from 1972 until joining the Clinton administration, 
     Brown headed consumer affairs for Americans for Democratic 
     Action.
       In her Bethesda office, chock-full of consumer products--
     notably children's toys and garments--that have been modified 
     to make them safe, Brown says: ``I'm not trying to be a cop. 
     I don't believe that you can regulate everything that moves, 
     or that you can make every product absolutely safe.'' But she 
     also knows that not even the most dedicated parents or most 
     conscientious consumers can always guarantee their 
     children's or their own safety.
       As government agencies go, you could skip right over the 
     CPSC in the federal budget unless you were using a magnifying 
     glass. Before Bill Clinton appointed Brown in March 10 1994 
     to chair the CPSC, it had become a moribund and almost 
     disowned backwater under presidents Reagan and Bush. David 
     Stockman, as director of the Office of Management and Budget, 
     wanted to junk it altogether, but never quite succeeded. It 
     dwindled under the Reagan-Bush years from 978 to 487 
     employees; Brown's budget for fiscal 1995 will be $41.3 
     million, down $1 million from 1994.
       Occasionally, a startling event makes the headlines, as did 
     the recent untimely death of tennis star Vitas Gerulaitis of 
     carbon monoxide poisoning from a faulty heater. CSPC has 
     accelerated its efforts to make carbon monoxide detectors as 
     common in homes as smoke detectors.
       All told, more than 15,000 consumer products come under 
     CPSC's jurisdiction, excluding most forms of transportation 
     or workplace-related equipment. A rising concern is sports-
     related injuries. For example, roller-blading accidents 
     zoomed form 38,000 in 1993 to an estimated 83,000 in 1994.
       In a recent pep talk to employees, Brown recalled an old 
     Washington Post article that referred to the three-member 
     commission as ``the little agency that can't.'' Under her 
     guidance, Brown pledged, the agency will become ``the little 
     agency that could.''
       ``Its's still a dangerous world out there,'' Brown says 
     with conviction. ``Unintentional injury is the leading cause 
     of death in the nation.'' One-fourth of those 96,000 deaths 
     annually are related to consumer products. With industry's 
     help, Brown intends to get that number down.

                          ____________________