Hoehn-Saric Argues CPSC's Independence Bars Undue Influence

An independent CPSC is necessary as a barrier to unwarranted influence against regulation and enforcement, fired-Commissioner Alexander Hoehn-Saric asserted March 6. His opinion was in The Regulatory Review. He wrote (bit.ly/3MURF2k):

"When I was chair of the CPSC, I found the independence of the agency crucial to achieving its mission of preventing consumer product-related injuries and deaths. The buck stopped with me and my fellow commissioners."

"I never worried that the White House could countermand a decision by a majority of commissioners to recall a defective product, to establish a strong safety standard, or to take enforcement action against a particular company. Companies knew that they could not get special treatment by being close to the President or administration officials."

"During my tenure, the commissioners participated in CPSC's decisions, providing their own perspectives and, at times, dissents against majority decisions. I strove for unanimity, and whenever possible, worked across the aisle to develop enforcement and regulatory approaches that every commissioner could support. The diversity of views helped guide the CPSC, and bipartisan leadership provided a level of transparency into its actions that is absent from a non-independent agency. As a health and safety organization, such real-time checks and balances are particularly critical to the public welfare."

Hoehn-Saric warned that such factors are especially important if a president, White House officials, or their family members have financial ties to companies that sell products regulated by CPSC as is currently the case.

His essay followed one by fired-Commissioner Richard Trumka (PSL, 3/9/26) under a series titled In Defense of Regulatory Independence (bit.ly/4bj0Xxc).