The recall of millions of toys has shined a light on the ineffectual regulatory body charged with keeping unsafe, substandard products out of American homes. How can we feel safe when China and other “backward” nations continue to allow shipments of toys, toothpaste and other things that don’t meet basic safety standards? How can we be secure in the knowledge that they won’t do as we say, not as we do?

It’s one thing for the United States to ship defective products overseas, but it’s quite insulting to be on the receiving end. Maybe you haven’t heard that we’re also guilty of this, what with all the posturing from political leaders who vow to protect Americans from dangerous imports.

U.S. companies notified the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission 97 times last year that they were going to export products that didn’t meet U.S. standards, according to a Sept. 1 Washington Post article. Among the items shipped to Belgium, Ireland, New Zealand, Colombia, the Czech Republic and the Philippines were toys, lighters, fireworks, clothing, chemicals, carpets and pacifiers.

All the CPSC can do is alert those countries. Imagine the reaction if the Chinese government responded this way: “We told you that toys laden with lead were coming. What else do you want from us?”

CPSC Commissioner Thomas Moore told the Post: “Our export policy is based on a desire to see U.S. manufacturers be able to compete in foreign countries in terms of price and marketability, not safety.”

That’s China’s desire, too. Until the various reform proposals include crackdowns on our exports, we will have a difficult time persuading other countries to change.

Wailing and Nashing

“Here’s a good rule of thumb: Too clever is dumb.” I think of that Ogden Nash line as I sift through the election results in the Spokane mayor’s race.

When the Hession camp unleashed its ads, my immediate thought was that they were far too slick and cynical for a mayoral race in an unpretentious city. They looked like something you might see from a statewide initiative sponsored by deep-pocket interests or one of those “concerned citizen” groups, like the Swift Boat campaign against John Kerry in 2004.

Such over-the-top tactics don’t work well on smaller-scale campaigns. I’m not sure why, but maybe it’s because the candidates themselves can’t invoke plausible deniability. It does appear that some voters held the mayor directly responsible for taking advice that was, well, un-Hession-like.

Future candidates, take note of another line from Nash: “Professional men, they have no cares; whatever happens, they get theirs.”