[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 106 (Friday, July 31, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1505-E1506]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 29, 1998

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4194) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and 
     Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
     agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other 
     purposes:


  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the motion to 
recommit offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey].
  Under the version of the bill reported out of the Appropriations 
Committee, a legislative rider was attached which would prevent the 
CPSC from adopting a rule regarding flammability standards for 
upholstered furniture until an outside panel was convened to examine 
the toxicity of fire retardants that would be used to treat such 
furniture. Currently the CPSC is considering a flammability standard 
for upholstered furniture. They are doing so pursuant to a petition 
from the National Association of State Fire Marshals, who asked the 
CPSC more than four years ago to develop a mandatory safety standard 
for upholstered furniture to address the risk of fires started from 
open flames--such as lighters, matches, and candles. The Fire Marshals 
called for such a rule because the U.S. has one of the highest fire 
death rates in the world. Nearly 4,000 people died in 1995 because of 
fires that started in their homes, of which nearly 1,000 were children 
under the age of 15.
  Over the last four years the CPSC has been going through the process 
of taking public comments, conducting laboratory tests, and evaluating 
all the technical and economic issues relating to adoption of a safety 
standard in this area, including requirements relating to use of flame 
resistant chemicals to treat

[[Page E1506]]

upholstered furniture. The CPSC staff has been working with scientists 
from other agencies, such as the National Institute of Environmental 
Health Sciences and the EPA to assure that all of the significant 
public health and safety issues associated with adoption of such a rule 
would be studied.
  Now, the bill before us today contains a provision that would, in the 
words of CPSC Chairwoman Ann Brown, ``completely halt work currently 
underway . . . on a safety regulation to address the risk of fire from 
upholstered furniture'' According to Chairwoman Brown, ``more fire 
deaths result from upholstered furniture than any other product under 
the CPSC's jurisdiction.'' The proposed rules in this area could save 
hundreds of lives and hundreds of millions in societal costs every 
year, according to CPSC staff estimates. And yet, instead of allowing 
the CPSC to proceed with its process, the legislative rider that has 
been attached to this bill would add at least a year's delay by 
requiring unnecessary and costly technical review and halting 
Commission work.
  This anti-consumer rider will add additional cost and delays to an 
ongoing rulemaking process at the CPSC. It will micromanage the cost-
benefit analysis that the CPSC is already required to undertake before 
it adopts a final rule. And it does so why? Well, according to last 
Friday's Washington Post, this provision is in the bill to benefit the 
narrow economic interests of a few upholstered furniture manufacturers 
in Mississippi who are opposed to a mandatory furniture flammability 
standard. As CPSC Chairwoman Brown has noted, the furniture industry's 
``lobbyists are bringing the proper work of government to a halt.''
  I think this is wrong. We should adopt the Motion to Recommit with 
Instructions that is being offered by the Gentleman from Wisconsin and 
allow the CPSC to move forward in conjunction with the EPA to adopt a 
flammability standard for upholstered furniture that fully protects the 
public from harm. The Clinton Administration has indicated in its 
Statement of Administration policy that it is opposed to this provision 
and warned that ``efforts to block the development of a new safety 
standard represent a threat to public health.'' I agree, and I hope 
that the Members will support the Obey motion.

                          ____________________