FDA Tag

A recent report analyzing the regulatory climate under the Obama Administration shows that it is a lush and healthy environment... for bureaucrats.

A recent report by Sam Batkins of the American Action Forum brings the regulatory overreach of the Obama administration into focus. In nearly eight years, the Obama administration has issued 600 major regulations, which, again, are regulations with an annual economic impact of $100 million or more. Unfortunately, even with President Obama's time in office slowly coming to a close, the number of major regulations issued on his watch may exceed 650.

As if there weren't more important things to be concerned about... Lawmakers are considering legislation that would further regulate cosmetics including handmade soap. The Personal Care Products Safety Act was introduced by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Cal) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) last month. The bill is currently rattling around in the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The stated purpose of the bill is to, "protect consumers and streamline industry compliance by strengthening the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) authority to regulate the ingredients in personal care products. While the personal care products industry is projected to exceed $60 billion in U.S. revenue this year, federal regulations on these products have not been updated in 75 years." Essentially, the Personal Care Products Safety Act is another venture in big government glut that would expand the FDA's jurisdiction thereby creating more bureaucracy, wasting taxpayer money, and hindering small business growth. More specifically though, the bill would impose fees, and add ridiculous reporting and labeling requirements. Sen. Feinstein boasts support from just about every big cosmetic industry player including:

• Personal Care Products Council (a trade association representing more than 600 companies in the industry)
• Johnson & Johnson (brands include Neutrogena, Aveeno, Clean & Clear, Lubriderm, Johnson’s baby products)
• Procter & Gamble (brands include Pantene, Head & Shoulders, Clairol, Herbal Essences, Secret, Dolce & Gabbana,
• Gucci, Ivory, Cover Girl, Olay, Sebastian Professional, Vidal Sassoon)
• Revlon (brands include Revlon, Almay, Mitchum)
• Estee Lauder (brands include Estée Lauder, Clinique, Origins, Tommy Hilfiger, MAC, La Mer, Bobbi Brown, Donna Karan, Aveda, Michael Kors)
• Unilever (brands include Dove, Tresemme, Lever, St. Ives, Noxzema, Nexxus, Pond’s, Suave, Sunsilk, Vaseline, Degree)
• L’Oreal (brands include L’Oréal Paris, Lancome, Giorgio Armani, Yves Saint Laurent, Kiehl’s, Essie, Garnier, Maybelline-New York, Vichy, La Roche-Posay, The Body Shop, Redken)

But what about the independent cosmetic purveyor?

The same monstrous federal agency that brought us food pyramids, plate graphics, and encourages America to eat vegan is after health food bar maker, KIND. Recently, KIND received a love letter from the FDA citing multiple labeling violations. "However, none of your products listed above meet the requirements for use of the nutrient content claim “healthy,”" wrote the self-appointed arbiter of healthy declarations. The FDA letter to KIND is a fantastic example of how the federal bureaucracy is a vacuous waste of money. Tax money is spent paying people to sit in offices (where they're forbidden from watching porn) while they stress over 1.5 g of saturated fat in a nut bar. Four of KIND's health food bars received FDA scrutiny. In order for KIND to properly utilize the healthy designation, their health food bars cannot contain more than 1 g of saturated fat per Reference Amount Customarily Consumed (RACC). The Fruit & Nut Almond & Apricot and Peanut Butter Dark Chocolate + Protein bars contain 3.5 g, Fruit & Nut Almond & Coconut clocks in at 5 g, and the Dark Chocolate Cherry Cashew + Antioxidants contains a whopping 2.5 g of saturated fat, said the FDA. KIND's health food bars are made largely without preservatives or other fillers and fake food stuffs found in similar products. They're also exceptionally tasty. But a regulation is a regulation.