[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 76 (Tuesday, June 11, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H3400-H3401]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONSUMER PRODUCT PROTECTION ACT OF 2002
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 2621) to amend title 18, United States Code, with
respect to consumer product protection, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 2621
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Consumer Product Protection
Act of 2002''.
SEC. 2. UNAUTHORIZED PLACEMENT OF WRITING WITH A CONSUMER
PRODUCT.
(a) In General.--Section 1365 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as (g) and (h)
respectively;
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsection:
``(f)(1) Whoever knowingly stamps, prints, places, or
inserts any writing in or on any consumer product that
affects interstate or foreign commerce, or the box, package,
or other container of any such product, prior to its sale to
any consumer, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned
not more than one year, or both.
``(2) This subsection shall not apply in any case in which
the manufacturer, retailer, or distributor of the product in
the due course of business consents to the stamping,
printing, placing, or inserting of a writing.''; and
(3) in subsection (h) (as redesignated by paragraph (1))--
(A) in paragraph (3)(D), by striking ``and'';
(B) in paragraph (4), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(C) by adding after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) the term `writing' means any form of representation
or communication (including handbills, notices, or
advertising) that contains letters, words, graphic, or
pictorial representations.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2332b(g)(3) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``1365(g)(3)'' and
inserting ``1365''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms.
Baldwin) each will be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner).
General Leave
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend
their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2621, the bill
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2621, the Consumer Product Protection Act of 2002,
would prohibit any person from knowingly stamping, printing, placing,
or inserting any writing in or on any consumer product prior to its
sale without the consent of the manufacturer, distributor, or retailer
of such product.
Under current law, tampering with a product's packaging is not
illegal, as long as it does not cause the labeling to be false or
misleading or endanger the health or safety of consumers. Consumer
protection laws, therefore, fail to address conduct which, although it
does not adulterate the actual product or alter its labeling, is still
harmful to business and consumers.
Product tampering transforms businesses' desirable products into
vehicles for undesirable messages. Businesses should be able to control
the messages associated with their products, and persons who interfere
with those products and harm the image of their company should be
prosecuted.
Recent product tampering cases have shown that adults and children
across the country have been subjected to violent, racist, gory, or
otherwise offensive materials placed between layers of packaging.
Leaflets have been found that attack African Americans, praise the
Holocaust, and encourage the killing of immigrants. This legislation
will appropriately punish those who knowingly insert these materials
into product containers by making it a criminal act.
Just one company, Kraft Foods, estimates that they have received
nearly 100 complaints in the last 5 years, but also believe many more
cases have gone unreported. The manufacturers have concluded, after
investigation, that many of these materials are placed in the packaging
once the products have left their control. Often, the products are
tampered with while in retail stores or are bought, tampered with, and
later returned.
Parents can monitor their children's television shows, the music they
listen to, and the books they read; but they cannot be expected to
anticipate that offensive materials may be found in a cereal box.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be the lead Democrat on H.R. 2621, the
Consumer Product Protection Act of 2002. I want to recognize and thank
the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart) for introducing the bill
and for her excellent work on this issue. I want to thank the chairman
and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland
Security for their help in bringing this bill to the floor; and of
course, I thank the chairman and ranking member of the full committee
for their support of this bill.
I also want to recognize the staff who have worked hard to bring this
legislation to the floor. Their work behind the scenes makes this House
function effectively. I urge my colleagues to support and pass this
legislation today.
Mr. Speaker, over the last several years, consumers have been finding
offensive materials attached to or inserted inside the packaging of a
variety of products. Most of these inserts are material that is
offensive in nature. They are racist, anti-Semitic, or anti-gay.
Finding offensive material can be shocking, but it is especially
objectionable when a child opens a box and finds offensive, even
pornographic, material inside.
Responding to customer complaints, manufacturers have sought law
enforcement help to address this problem. However, it has become clear
that law enforcement officials lack the authority to prosecute these
crimes under State or Federal law. Both the FBI's and the FDA's offices
of criminal investigations do not believe they have the current
authority to prosecute these crimes.
The Consumer Product Protection Act would address this gap in Federal
law and give authorities the tools they need to investigate and
prosecute these acts. Only two States, California and New Jersey,
currently have laws prohibiting this practice. This bill would amend
the Federal Anti-Tampering Act by making it a crime for a person to
place any writing, either on the outside of a package or the inside,
prior to its sale to a consumer.
There are exceptions in this bill for promotional and sales purposes
if allowed by the manufacturer, distributor, or retailer. To address
some concerns about the appropriateness of punishments, the committee
and subcommittee modified the original legislation to make the crime a
misdemeanor instead of a felony.
I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of this bill and strongly
urge the House to pass this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H3401]]
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume
to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart), the author of this
bill.
Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support, obviously, of the
Consumer Product Protection Act of 2002. I am pleased that the
committee has chosen to take action on it so quickly.
Protecting consumers has always been an important issue for the
Congress. It is also an issue I worked on as a State senator. I am
pleased today to continue that important work.
This act addresses an issue that is a result of a shortfall of the
current Federal anti-tampering act. Under that act, it is a crime for
an individual to alter the label of a product or harm the safety of a
consumer. It is not, however, a crime to place an unwanted item in or
on a product without causing harm to that product.
{time} 1630
For example, a message on a piece of paper placed inside a cereal box
but outside of that product's inner bag is not a violation of current
law. Someone could walk into your local market, slip pornographic
material into the packaging of a food product without actually opening
that package, and not be charged with a crime. To any consumer, the
package would look perfectly fine without any evidence of tampering.
The fact that this is not a crime seems ludicrous. That is why we are
here today, to close this loophole in the law.
Imagine opening a box of cake mix, finding a piece of literature with
hate-filled messages and racial slurs; even worse, imagine if your
child opened the package, finding such material. That is just the story
we heard in our hearings from Tracey Weaver about her 10-year-old son.
The flyer in the box that he opened read that he had won a free
vacation, but on the back it contained racial hate material.
Incidents such as this happen all too often. Kraft Foods, for
example, had stated that there had been more than 100 reported
incidents in the past 5 years. This accounts for only one company and
only the incidents that were reported. Perhaps the greatest injustice
here is that when consumers such as Mrs. Weaver contact those
manufacturers, the manufacturers as well as law enforcement were unable
to respond in any way because it was not against the law. The
authorities could not trace the source of the problem because they had
no authority to do so under the Federal Anti-Tampering Act because it
was not a crime, again, to place such material in a box.
This bill would criminalize those actions. It clearly states that
placing unauthorized material in or on a product is a crime under the
Anti-Tampering Act. The legislation accomplishes three things: First,
it ensures that law enforcement has the ability to pursue and prosecute
the perpetrator by designating this activity as criminal under the
statute. Second, it empowers the offended manufacturer to address the
complaints and concerns of their customers and regain the confidence of
those consumers which they could lose through no fault of their own.
And finally, it provides for punishment for those who commit these acts
and puts others on notice that this type of behavior will not be
tolerated.
I again thank my colleagues, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms.
Baldwin), for joining me in sponsoring this important legislation, and
especially the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) for helping
us bring it to the floor. I urge my colleagues to support it as well.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 2621,
Consumer Product Protection Act. Current consumer protection
legislation was enacted in response to the imbalances in the
marketplace, which concerned consumers. Consumers now have greater
access to a variety of goods and services. A consumer who learns how to
protect himself is less likely to be harmed.
Taking into account the needs of consumers and recognizing that
consumers often face imbalances, consumers have the right of access to
non-hazardous products. We should develop, strengthen and maintain a
strong consumer protection policy. We should provide or maintain
adequate infrastructure to develop, implement and monitor consumer
protection policies and laws.
Consumers participate in competitive retail markets. Consumers'
ability to choose among uniform disclosures of terms of service,
prices, and relevant attributes of consumer products. Vigilant
enforcement against unfair or deceptive business practices is critical
to ensure that consumers obtain the benefits of competition. H.R. 2621
Consumer Product Protection Act of 2002, amends the Federal criminal
code to prohibit the placement of a writing in or on a consumer product
prior to its sale to any consumer without the consent of the product
manufacturer, distributor, or retailer. Subjects violators to a fine,
imprisonment of up to one year, or both. Therefore, I urge my
colleagues to support this bill.
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dan Miller of Florida). The question is
on the motion offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R.
2621, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________