An article published this week in the online magazine Slate makes a compelling case that the Consumer Product Safety Commission, an organization many of us think of as an important guardian of Americans’ safety and rights, could do a lot more to make its own workings transparent.
The article begins with a simple example: “Sometime before October 2011, an unknown child was injured by an unknown product that was produced by an unknown manufacturer. The Consumer Product Safety Commission published a report of the injury in its online database of safety complaints.” It also notes that the unnamed company has so far been able to contest what it views as inaccurate charges that its product is unsafe by filing a secret lawsuit against the CPSC, all the while keeping its name, its product and the allegations against it from being identified in the CPSC database.
Perhaps even more shocking is the revelation that when a federal court in Maryland allowed the secret suit to go forward, accepting the company’s argument that letting people know it was being sued might be bad for business, the government opted not to appeal that decision. According to Slate three consumer-advocate groups have since then been “granted permission to intervene by the court in October (and) are pressing on” with the appeal that the federal government refused to lodge.