Could some libraries actually pull children’s books off of the shelves because of a new federal law meant to keep new toys containing lead from ending up in the hands of America’s tots? 

The American Library Association, a nationwide library advocacy organization, fears such bans are the only option left available by a new federal lead-testing law that takes effect Feb. 10.

Toys are the main target of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act approved by Congress last August as a way to protect children from toxic playthings on store shelves.

Secondary targets include children’s clothing, electronics, furniture and, as determined weeks ago in a federal memo, books.

Seems ridiculous, which means it actually could happen. 

At least one librarian seems to be afraid enough of Uncle Sam’s compliance police to do just that:

“Unless I hear a ruling in the next 10 days … I am going to recommend to my membership that they either remove [children’s books] from shelves, or bar children 12 and under from coming into the library,” ALA Associate Director Emily Sheketoff told the Bristol Herald Courier on Tuesday. The alternative, she said, could mean flouting federal law and risking hefty fines.

Way to take a stand for literacy, Ms. Sheketoff.  Very impressive!

I’ve also read a number of articles about second-hand clothing stores being concerned about their ability to re-sell used clothing for children and understand that this element of the vaguely written law won’t be enforced.

Obviously keeping lead army men out of the mouths of America’s toddlers is a worthy objective.  Questions abound, however.  Is this situation worth creating a new law to deal with?  If so, wouldn’t it make more sense to apply it going forward only?  Either way, would it be too much to ask to have it written concisely enough for business owners to understand their compliance risk?

The resale concern is paramount in my mind because of the law’s retroactive nature.  Libraries are not at risk because they are not commercial operations, according to the CPSC.  Notably in danger, however, are second-hand books stores, a major secondary source of children’s books, particularly to the economically challenged. 

These stores are mostly small businesses that have invested a lot in their inventory.  For the government to say that they cannot sell these items is grossly unfair and could lead to some stores closing up, which is hardly a service to anyone.  Then there are the poor children who won’t be able to read the books that these shops would have sold them… 

So long Winnie the Pooh, goodbye Pollyanna.  We’ll miss you, Frank and Joe Hardy, after the feds make us burn you.

Typical government interference, if you ask me, with typical results.  This is why so many people don’t trust the federales to run important programs like Social Security and health care.

Now, we’ll know it’s a liberal conspiracy when the CPSC tests an array of books and finds that it’s primarily traditional conservative classics like the Bible, Atlas Shrugged, etc., that are high in lead content.

That’s a joke.    I think.

h/t Chuck