Sign up to receive email updates, action alerts, health tips, promotions to support our work and more from EWG. You can opt-out at any time. [Privacy]

 

Hatch Cosmetics Legislation Fails to Protect Consumers From Toxic Ingredients

Hatch Cosmetics Legislation Fails to Protect Consumers From Toxic Ingredients

Thursday, October 26, 2017

WASHINGTON – Yesterday, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, introduced legislation that fails to protect families from dangerous chemical ingredients in personal care products.

EWG instead urged senators to support bipartisan cosmetics reform legislation introduced by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Susan Collins, R-Maine.

The following is the statement of Scott Faber, EWG’s senior vice president for government affairs:

While we agree with Senator Hatch that the time to reform cosmetics law is long overdue, we are strongly opposed to the bill he introduced yesterday. In particular, the Hatch bill would not require FDA reviews of cosmetics chemicals, instead allowing third parties to review chemicals. It would not require the industry to substantiate the safety of its own chemicals, would create a weak and untested safety standard, and would fail to provide the FDA with any resources to oversee a $60 billion industry that impacts the health of every American.

Most troubling is a provision to block state action on dangerous chemicals if they simply appear on a Trump administration list.

By contrast, bipartisan legislation introduced by Senator Feinstein and Senator Collins would require five chemical reviews a year, would require cosmetics companies to demonstrate their products are safe, would include the same safety standard long applied to food and pesticides, would provide the FDA $20 million in annual funding, and would preserve a role for the states.

The Feinstein-Collins bill is broadly supported by cosmetics companies, large and small, and by public health groups. For legislators hoping to finally modernize cosmetics law after 80 years of failure, the choice between the two bills is very clear.”