‘California’s A Problem,’ But Prop 65 Preemption For Cosmetics Could Be Out Of Reach
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
California is the poster child for regulation in excess of federal requirements, but the biggest challenges it poses to cosmetics companies will be difficult – if not impossible – to resolve via “national uniformity” provisions in legislation before Congress.
You may also be interested in...
Rep. Pallone’s Discussion Draft For Cosmetics Reform Closely Mirrors Reintroduced Feinstein/Collins Bill
A bipartisan proposal from new House Energy & Commerce chair Frank Pallone and Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., is a near-facsimile of the reintroduced Personal Care Products Safety Act in the Senate. This could set the stage for simultaneous consideration and expeditious movement in both chambers of Congress.
With Democrats in control of the House and New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone in line for chair of the Energy & Commerce Committee, cosmetics regulatory reform legislation could receive even more attention in the 116th Congress than in the current session. The new climate could test how serious big business is about embracing large-scale changes as well as lawmakers’ openness to federal preemption.
“We’re closer than ever” has become a familiar refrain among cosmetics reform legislation stakeholders, including the Environmental Working Group. The NGO is still hopeful that 2018 could be the year for a much-needed update, following the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act’s 80th anniversary in June.