Archie McPhee's Will Close if Gregoire's Toy-Testing Bill Becomes Law

She approved it with several caveats. One, toy-makers and law-makers get to come back next year to make it better and clearer.

She also is working with big toy-makers to not allow it to affect the small toy businesses here in Washington.

I can't find the data, but I heard on NPR yesterday that her vetoes included a section that enabled small toy stores to be better protected.

I'm interested in Archie McPhees' response to Gregoire's approval...! Any word yet?

Whoops, looks like Gregoire signed it into law this afternoon.

I wish I had broken that story! I have some additional analysis of the story on my blog www.ballardite.blogspot.com.

This reminds me of another blanket law that was supposed to help the consumer. But often lends itself to greater pollution in America.

Several VW TDI engines that have been road tested for over a decade in Germany, which produce less waste and are safer than some of their petrol counterparts, are kept from American roads due to one simple blanket type law that makes the cost of testing/importing a new engine so prohibitive.

This inflexible law keeps many safer and cleaner cars from our streets (bio-diesel anyone?).

Making another blanket law like this is so over the top it is not even funny.

We should look to more surgical strikes rather than this shock and awe method of legislation.

First of all, create a $5,000,000 fine for any company that gets caught selling ANY household product with known harmful contents.

Secondly, invest some money into 'Consumer Reports' so they can do more testing on these types of products. They are not selling ads for the items they sell, and they are truly dedicated to the safest and most thorough screening of these products.

You can easily say, if Archie's wanted to be a team player in the community they should just grin and bear the expense of testing all these toys. However, the reality is that the cost of almost everything in the store would have to go through the roof to comply with this law AND the desired result of having no lead sold in these stores could be addressed (without the insanely expensive testing) by regular visits from the health department. They could employ one of the x-ray devices often used to detect lead in products like this.

There is more than one way to protect our kids from lead and other harmful products, let's use as much common sense as we can to do so.

I'm down for that, but some people may frown on it.

The government's job is to, in the very least, make sure the dangers associated with chemicals used in products is made clear. Hence, nutrion labels, warning labels on electronics, and countless other instances of warning and precaution.

I think there are a few organizations devoted to this... the EPA and FDA spring to mind.

This is not really that much more damaging to the industry than requiring industrial farms from not using dangerous poisons or construction firms from using asbestos.

Pretty sure I've eaten a tomato or seen a new building pop up sense tasting was run on those. The profit margin in toys and clothes is so large (mostly due to being mass-produced in countries with little to know environmental restrictions) that the impact from having to, God forbid, run safety tests is minimal.

"To reasonably permit dangerous substances without clear warning cannot be justified with economic benefits. Sorry, the State's economy will continue without Hasbro making their toys with chemicals in the paint"

Dangerous? I seem to have grown up with the toys that I had as a kid, I am still breathing.

Tragically, approximately 30 children die every year due to house hold cleaners, and an EPA study has estimated that between 1900 and 2700 children die annually of SIDS due to secondhand smoke exposure. In 2002, 130 children ages 14 and under died in bicycle-related crashes. Motor vehicles were involved in more than 180 of these deaths. In 2003, more than 373,000 children ages 14 and under were treated in hospital emergency rooms for bicycle-related injuries.

Lets face it, maybe we should put a ban on having children.

I think I remember reading a similar argument for against the cost installing unions during the meat-packing era in Chicago at the end of the 19th century.

Does not float.

To reasonably permit dangerous substances without clear warning cannot be justified with economic benefits. Sorry, the State's economy will continue without Hasbro making their toys with chemicals in the paint.

As a toy collector and afficionado, I have to add my perspectives and clear up a few "misperceptions" I have read. Yes, there have been a rash of toy recalls for safety reasons recently. And since we are close to (or in) a recession, the economy is tanking, we are at war, the housing market is folding and Americans are losing their homes in numbers not seen since the Great Depression era, and banks are ramping up interest and penalties to even customers with great payment records, our ferry system is rusting apart right before our eyes and our road and highways are crumbling down around us, I guess we need a distraction from these trivial issues with something REALLY imortant like toy safety. Children need protection from harmful materials, and I don't condone exposing children to danger, but they are exposed to way more hazards daily. Just walking down the street and getting a good blast of diesel fumes from a school or city bus, or sitting by a parent smoking, or maybe even using a cell phone exposes them to more danger than in amount of lead in the paint they are trying to reduce.

And you all do realize that if these regulations are enacted, even large toy corporations like Mattel and Hasbro will not sell to Washington state. They have already said as much. Playskool will only be able to sell about half of their items to Washington state retailers. Toys R Us, Walmart & Target won't be able to stock their shelves with most toys in Washington, let alone small Mom & Pop retailers and shops. With testing costs of $500 per item sold required every 12 months and no big manufacturers willing to provide this testing only required in 1 of 50 states, the seller (Archie McPhee in this case) would be required to do the testing themselves. With 10,000 items stocked that would need testing annually times $500, you do the math. If annual sales are $12.5 million, subtract cost of goods and transport, operating costs, new product development, and then another $5 mil on top, where is there supposed to be profit? I'm no CFO, but even I know zero profits = business closed.

The toy industry will basically vanish from Washington and new toys will be few and hard to come by here, all because of knee-jerk, over-reactionary legislation & regulation. This is not just the case of one purveyor of pop culture, Archie McPhee not being able to operate, it will affect all toy and novelty retailers.

I guess that's what's best for the children, eh Burgermeister Meisterburger? No more toy makers to the King, at least in Washington state. I guess they will be VERY safe with no toys to play with. And I'm sure the local economy will be fine if we lose revenue from most toy and novelty retailers closing. Our state economy is just PEACHY already.

Plus, with all of the other environmental issues, poisons, toxins and pharmaceuticals dumped into our water sources (and the annual water reports mailed to consumers aren't even required to list non-regulated chemicals and pharmaceutical in public water sources, like say female hormones or anibiotics that help breed antibiotic resistant bacteria, germs and viruses), antibiotics in meats and cloned meats, growth hormones and other additives in our foods, pesticides, etc. is this really the most important issue relating to children's health? Oh, and CIGARETTES & TOBACCO, KNOWN CARCINOGENS THAT CAUSE ILLNESS AND DEATH, ARE STILL LEGAL TO BUY AND SMOKE. THESE ARE KNOWN TO CAUSE ILLNESS AND DEATH, NOT JUST "THOUGHT TO" OR "BELIEVED TO" CAUSE HEALTH ISSUES.

Oh, and the substance that they want to replace phthalates with hasn't been tested AT ALL for toxins or other harmful effects. Where is the sense in replacing something that has been standard in the industry for 50 YEARS with something untested that may wind up being more toxic than it's predecessor?

And why is it OK to have actual lead solder in video game consoles like Wii, Playstaion and X-Box, whose makers will receive an exemption from this bill, but not in other electronic toys. If lead is hazardous in electronic toys, it's hazardous in electronic video games too.

C'mon people, let's all calm down and use our common sense. Let's not let the Burgermeister Meisterburgers of this state win...

I think Jeremy's two comments helped to clarify any issues I had. Excuse me, I'm going to go buy a rubber ducky.

So some outfit that sells nothing but useless shit that ends up in a drawer or closet a couple days after everyone gets their giggles may go out of business because of a safety issue.

Simply put, who cares.

Perhaps the company could re-locate to Portland, along with all of the other hipsters who routinely grouse about how Seattle is losing it's character. Good, fine, go away. It will keep rents down.

Archie McPhee can join Sunset Bowl and Denny's as two institutions whose disappearance matter one iota in the big picture.

I've been asked to add a couple other points:

(1) The standard of 600 ppm applies only to paint on the toys, not the plastic or other components.

(2) Accoutrements, a Mukilteo-based company operating under the name "Archie McPhee's", has annual sales of $12.5 million and has 45 or less employees, qualifying as a small business in the state of Washington. As such, the law requires a small-business impact survey to determine if the law places an undue burden on small businesses like Archie McPhee's and to help mitigate to the best extent possible those impacts.

(3) As sben points out above, there is legitimate concern for parents here, as I also pointed out above. This is about preventing lead and arsenic from being an easily ingestible part of your children's toys.

My guess is that in reality, Archie McPhee's (if they're half the community member everyone gives them credit for) is just as concerned about the health of Seattle's and Washington's children as everyone else. It's simply premature and alarmist to issue statements like, "You're going to drive us out of business" if you do this; there's no reason that, if they're a good community partner and a responsible business, they can't continue to operate and even thrive in the new environment.

On the other hand, if they're just a friendly face on a low-budget manufacturing concern that's selling the cheapest possible Chinese manufactured goods, then in reality, they're decidedly part of the problem. (Such has been suggested to me by the less charitable out there; personally, I tend to hope and believe that the prior scenario is the more accurate.)

I like the sticker idea. Only if it can use the word "shit" though.

Maybe we should just ban Chinese things all together. Although... MSG is mighty tasty.

"Unless Archie McPhee's also manufactures toys"

Actually, they do, and they sell wholesale via their parent company. www.accoutrements.com

Too bad the law doesn't allow for slapping a big red "has not been tested for lead or other toxic shit" label on toys that haven't been tested for lead or other toxic shit.

But as a new-ish parent, I find myself far less sympathetic to Archie McPhee's position than I would have been three or four years ago, as a carefree yuppie.

This seems pretty misleading, actually. Where does that $5 million come from? The law regulates and requires testing by the manufacturer of the product, not the store. Unless Archie McPhee's also manufactures toys, they wouldn't have to pay anything except across the board wholesale price increases which just get passed on to the consumer. And to make light of this issue by appealing to the "we're a Seattle institution" is patently unfair. This is a substantially different issue from overly zealous regulation like banning trans-fats or goose liver from restaurants; this is a much more pernicious and far-reaching issue or passing a latte-tax. The components of children's toys are increasingly dangerous due to globalization which undermines pre-existing regulatory efforts. As recent issues with Chinese cat food and blood thinner manufacture make patently clear, these can have far more direct and real world consequences. I loathe the people who screan "but what about the children? Won't someone think of the children!" all the time, but in this case, aggessive regulation is important and the right thing to do.