We urge this committee to consider favorably the proposal which we place before you today, and obviously we will provide any assistance that we can. Again, I would like to thank you and the other members of the committee for allowing us to testify, and Dr. Harmison and I would be available to answer any questions. [The prepared statement of Mr. McCann follows:] STATEMENT OF S. ANTHONY MCCANN Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee: My name is Anthony McCann. I am the Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Accompanying me is Dr. Lowell Harmison, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health of the Public Health Service. We are here today to present the Administration's proposal to place the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in our Department in conjunction with the Subcommittee's consideration of the reauthorization of CPSC. The proposal would move the CPSC to the Public Health Service (PHS) of the Department of Health and Human Services. Within the PHS we propose that CPSC would have a single administrator, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, would retain its current statutory functions and mission. The proposed authorization levels are $34.4 million for fiscal year 1988, and such sums as necessary for fiscal year 1989 and fiscal year 1990. The Administration is proposing this change for two main reasons: -to better coordinate the public safety activities of the Agency with those of relevant PHS programs with which it shares many mutual interests, -to improve management of the Agency through proper executive oversight, at the same time continuing its important rulemaking and other functions. I will discuss these issues in more detail later in my statement. The Consumer Product Safety Commission The origins of CPSC lie within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the Public Health Service. Specifically, product safety functions were expanded in 1968 when FDA became a part of the Consumer Protection Environmental Health Services (CPEHS) within the Public Health Service. In 1970, CPEHS was abolished and FDA created the Bureau of Product Safety. In June 1970, the National Commission on Product Safety recommended the establishment of a separate consumer product safety Agency. Thereafter, in October 1972, the Consumer Product Safety Commission was formally established and was activated in May 1973. At that time, FDA transferred resources associated with those products covered by the Consumer Product Safety Act of 1972. Currently, the Consumer Product Safety Commission is an independent Agency of the Federal Government, directed statutorily by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. CPSC's mission is to protect consumers from unreasonable risks of injury associated with approximately 15,000 everyday products. Examples of these products are lawnmowers, toys, fireworks, household chemicals, heaters, and hair dryers. The risks include amputation, fire, electrocutior urns, asphyxiation and cancer. The Public Health Service The Public Health Service is an operating division of the Department of Health and Human Services. The PHS is led by the Assistant Secretary for Health and is composed of six agencies: the Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration; the Centers for Disease Control; the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; the Food and Drug Administration; the Health Resources and Services Administration; and the National Institutes of Health. The origins of the PHS go back to the establishment of the Marine Hospital Service in 1798. The mission of the PHS is: Protection and advancement of the Nation's physical and mental health, Support and conduct of medical, biomedical, and health services research, Administration of grant and contract support for the development of health services resources, Prevention and control of diseases and of alcohol and drug abuse, and Enforcement of laws which assure the safety and efficacy of drugs, protection against impure and unsafe foods, cosmetics, medical devices, and radiation-producing products. Rationale for Administration Proposal During the past several years, our definition of public health has been expanding. We have begun to view death and disability caused by violence and injury as a public health issue-subject to the same types of scientific inquiry as we give the more traditional diseases. Injury is the leading cause of disability for children and young adults and of premature death in this country. And as we have conducted epidemiological studies on injury, we have found that there are behavioral, biomedical, environmental and product related precursors to injury-factors subject to prevention and intervention. As our definition of public health has broadened, the respective roles of the PHS and the CPSC have grown closer. The PHS has become more interested in accident prevention and injury control through product safety. This merging of interests has created a need for closer coordination between the two organizations. The PHS has a long history of providing effective public health services to this Nation. During its almost 200 year lifetime, it has shown great compassion for the health and safety of our people. I believe that the PHS is a proper location for the CPSC. It will provide the proper emphasis on safety and public health while assuring consistency of mission and enhanced coordination for both organizations. The merger will result in providing better product safety and public health to all Ameri cans. The General Accounting Office (GAO) has concluded in its recent report that the CPSC could benefit from changing to a single administrator. Not only could resources now used to provide staff support to five Commissioners be used for CPSC programmatic activities, but management could be improved. The GAO found that "all of the major studies over the past 50 years, including the Hoover Commission and the Ash Council reports, have indicated significant problems with the Commission administrative structure." Further, seven of the other eight health and safety regulatory agencies reviewed by the GAO were headed by a single administrator. Additional Considerations The Administration is mindful that it is not an every day occurrence to change the status of an independent Agency. However, as the ĞAO's report has aptly conveyed, there are clear advantages, as well as a growing consensus, that CPSC's mission can be better served as part of an existing executive branch Agency. No budget or staff reductions are being sought. No budget savings are being sought. Should savings accrue by reducing the number of Commissioners, these funds will stay within the CPSC program. Continuity would be maintained through retention of current CPSC staff. The Administration is confident that placing CPSC in PHS will enhance, rather than hamper or delay efforts to address product safety hazards. The PHS is a strong team, with very visible parts and a long tradition of protecting the public health. As part of this team, CPSC will have the executive oversight necessary to insure impartiality and continued program improvements, while also giving the CPSC the flexibility necessary to address product safety hazards. Far more effective interaction with CDC and FDA will be one immediate advantage. Moreover, CPSC would have the Assistant Secretary for Health and the Secretary of Health and Human Services as spokespersons for the Agency with Congress and the President. Under such a system, CPSC will probably have greater access to senior executive branch policy officials than at present as a small independent Agency. Upon the enactment of our proposal, CPSC would be moved intact to PHS, where the support services and staff functions of HHS would be made available. The Administration is cognizant that some organizational details will still need to be worked out by the mandated transition date of January 1989. However, as a matter of principle, we are committed to sufficient resources being made available to assure a smooth transition to PHS, and we are committed to retaining the confidence of the American people and of Congress in the CPSC's mission of consumer protection. Conclusion In summary, the Administration is proposing changes in the CPSC which we believe will improve the organization's current and future ability to achieve its mission. As a new member of the PHS team, led by a single administrator, the proposed organization would be better able to pursue its important mission to protect the safety and health of our Nation's consumers. We urge the subcommittee to consider favorably the proposal we have placed before you today. We will soon be submitting legislation to implement this proposal. In addition, we offer our assistance and support as you continue your discussion of this issue. I appreciate the opportunity to testify, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Harmison and I would be pleased to answer any questions. Mr. FLORIO. Thank you very much. I am not sure if you have been here through the course of the whole day, but, as you may or may not know, nobody has been supportive of the suggestion that you are making. Each of the Commissioners can't agree on anything, but that was the one thing that they agreed on, which is instructive. As I understand it, there was no such proposal in the budget submission to the Congress. Is this something, therefore, that has just come onto the line recently? And why? Mr. MCCANN. I suspect that in the budget preparations, the issue in the department certainly was not raised. I believe that within the administration generally, the reauthorization raised the issue to us, and as we considered it, it seemed to make a great deal of sense to consolidate it within a public health Agency. Mr. FLORIO. Is this a recommendation that has come from OMB? Mr. MCCANN. It was initiated by OMB. Mr. FLORIO. OK. So, it was initiated by OMB. Let me ask you, when you say this proposal you are submitting today, do we have a legislative proposal? Mr. MCCANN. No, sir. We should have a legislative proposal for you soon. Mr. FLORIO. Can you give me some time frame? We have got to work on this reauthorization. If we are going to treat this as a serious proposal, we would like to have a specific legislative proposal within the next 2 weeks, if that is at all possible. Mr. MCCANN. We can certainly try to do that, sir. Mr. FLORIO. I appreciate that very much. To our other witnesses, we certainly appreciate their participation today. To our one witness, I had the pleasure of reading the report, I was there when the report was made public, and think the report contains very important information. And as I suspect you appreciate, many of the recommendations are ones that some of us would feel very comfortable about. Specifically, the question about voluntary standards. Your recitation of the swimming pool cover experience is extremely instructive, how, unfortunately, delay gets reinforced. And I think there is some legitimacy for us attempting to modify the existing law. So, voluntary standards, certainly, if they meet the qualifications or meet the standards that are spelled out, they should be deferred to. But we should not defer to potential, undefined voluntary standards at some point down the line. So, the proposal that you have made seems to me as one that is deserving of some serious consideration, and you may rest assured that we will provide that consideration. The gentleman from Utah. Mr. NIELSON. Yes, I just have a couple of questions. I believe the Chairman indicated no one was for a single Commissioner. I believe Ms. Steorts indicated she did prefer a single ad ministrator, but maybe not the exact form. She did say that one was better than three or five. Mr. FLORIO. I think that is correct, if the gentleman would yield, but I think she also said she wanted to preserve independence, and I think that is really the heart of the issue that we are talking about. Mr. NIELSON. As to the single administrator, though, she felt that would have some merit. Mr. Pittle took a very strong exception to having a single administrator, and he used OSHA and NHTSA as horrible examples. I happen to disagree with his OSHA example. I am not so familiar with the other one. But how do you feel about that? A single administrator, if you get the wrong guy, is that disastrous? Or can you always have the ability to remove such a person under your proposal? Mr. MCCANN. You do. As the departmental management executive, my own feeling is that it is probably better to have a single executive. At least you have one individual you can hold responsible. Whether you hold that individual responsible is another issue. Mr. NIELSON. Let me ask just a general question to Ms. Fise. I like your statement, I think it is very good. I did have a couple of questions. Would you submit for the record some of the statistics to go along with the examples you mentioned? For example, you indicated it is not an exhaustive list, but you talked about the baby gate deaths, the V or diamond shaped gates, and the swimming pool covers, and so forth. Do you have any idea, or could you supply how many- you made some statement about there are 15 million or so of those baby gates. Could you give us some information as to how many of these gates were in existence or how many swimming pool covers were and what the proportion was on these deaths, this type of thing? Could you supply that, do you think? Ms. FISE. In our report, we list deaths and injuries where we were able to obtain them. And we also listed numbers of products on the market, where we were able to obtain that information. In all of our statistics, almost all of them are from the Consumer Product Safety Commission's own documents. Mr. NIELSON. If you could get further information on what percentage we are talking about there, I would appreciate it. [The following information was submitted for the record:] CFA Consumer Federation of America July 8, 1987 The Honorable Howard C. Nielson Dear Congressman Nielson: This letter responds to your request for information during the June 4, 1987 Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) reauthorization hearing before the House Commerce, Consumer Protection and Competitiveness Subcommittee. The information below, which we submit for the record, has been obtained from the CPSC. According to the most recent data available from the CPSC, there were estimated to be as many as 11 million accordionstyle baby gates in use as of the end of 1984. As of the end of 1986, CPSC was aware of 8 deaths associated with these babygates. According to the most recent data available from the CPSC, there have been 59 incidents involving swimming pool and spa covers, in the period from July 1973 to June 1987. Forty (40) of these incidents were fatal and of these 40 fatalities, 23 were children under five years of age. The most recent CPSC estimate of the number of pool covers in the marketplace is contained in a December 11, 1984 CPSC memorandum which we have attached. 1424 16th Street. N.W.. Suite C04 • Washington. D. 20035 (202) 387-6121 |