Prop. 65
Re “Washington Readies a Toxic Bomb” by Al Meyerhoff, Commentary, July 23: Contrary to Meyerhoff’s assertions, the federal legislation introduced by Sen. James M. Jeffords (R-Vt.) would ensure one national, uniform system of regulation for nonprescription medicines and cosmetics.
Federal law and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration currently provide national requirements for the safety, effectiveness, labeling and packaging of these products. Permitting California or any other state to impose differing requirements would only confuse consumers, increase prices and undermine public confidence in our federal regulatory system.
The bill authorizes any state to petition the FDA for an exemption and would allow California to petition the FDA to adopt its Prop. 65 law as the federal standard.
JOSEPH K. DOSS, Senior Vice President and Director of Public Affairs, Nonprescription Drug, Manufacturers Assn., Washington
*
Meyerhoff’s piece on Prop. 65 was right to the point. This further demonstrates who elects representatives to Congress; it’s big business. How does rolling back the power of Prop. 65 serve the people? It doesn’t, it serves the special interests of big business.
RICHARD WEGMAN, Santa Monica
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
