U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

87–746 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 107–961

NOMINATION OF HAROLD D. STRATTON, JR.

TO BE COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN OF THE

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 25, 2002

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina, Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

MAX CLELAND, Georgia 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina 

JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

CONRAD BURNS, Montana 

TRENT LOTT, Mississippi 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia

KEVIN D. KAYES, Democratic Staff Director 

JEANNE BUMPUS, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on April 25, 2002 .............................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Dorgan ................................................................................. 1, 2 

Statement of Senator Fitzgerald ............................................................................ 16 

Prepared statement of Senator Hollings ................................................................ 18

Statement of Senator McCain ................................................................................. 13 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13

Statement of Senator Wyden .................................................................................. 3 

WITNESSES

Domenici, Hon. Pete, U.S. Senator from New Mexico .......................................... 1

Stratton, Harold D. Jr., Nominee to be Commissioner and Chairman of the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission .............................................................. 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

Biographical information ................................................................................. 7 

APPENDIX

Written responses to post-hearing questions from Senator Bill Nelson ............. 19 

Written responses to post-hearing questions from Senator John D. Rockefeller 

IV ........................................................................................................................... 20

Written responses to post-hearing questions from Senator John Breaux ........... 21 

Written responses to post-hearing questions from Senator George Allen .......... 21 

(1)

NOMINATION OF HAROLD D. STRATTON, JR. 

TO BE COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN OF 

THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2002

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room

SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Byron L. Dorgan, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

Senator DORGAN. Good afternoon. The Senate Commerce Committee is meeting today for a confirmation hearing to examine the 

qualifications of Mr. Harold Stratton, who has been nominated by 

the President to serve as Commissioner and Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. 

I have a very brief statement, but I think perhaps even before 

I give the statement, I will call on my colleague, Senator Domenici, 

from the state of New Mexico, who is here to introduce the nominee. 

Senator Domenici, why don’t you proceed? 

STATEMENT OF HON. PETE DOMENICI,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator DOMENICI. That’s very generous of you, Mr. Chairman 

and thank you very much, Senator Wyden. It’s a pleasure to be 

here. 

I do have a complaint, Mr. Chairman. Maybe it’s just the weight 

of my body, but these seats that you sit us in are way too low. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DOMENICI. You need to put in an order for a couple of 

more cushions. Would you do that? 

Senator DORGAN. We’d be happy to do that. 

Senator DOMENICI. We’ll join the voucher, 50-50. 

Anyhow, having said that—— Senator DORGAN. I don’t know that it’s a good strategy to start 

with a complaint, however, Senator. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DOMENICI. That’s thoroughly a Domenici complaint. 

That’s not his. He’s an all right guy. 

2

Senator DORGAN. You may proceed. 

Senator DOMENICI. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. And I’ve 

known Hal for a number of years, going back to the days that he 

served in the New Mexico House of Representatives and then as attorney general of the State of New Mexico. And clearly, Mr. Chairman and Members, if you want somebody who is active, who will 

participate, who has a lot of energy, you’ve got the right person. 

New Mexicans don’t elect Republican attorneys general very often, 

Mr. Chairman. They elected him, and I will say he was a pleasant 

surprise. He did a marvelous job and has been a rather successful 

man ever since. 

So from my standpoint, I think the President chose a person that 

is just right for the job. I think he is ready to be the Chairman and 

provide the kind of leadership that is obviously missing and necessary in this consumer-oriented institution of our national government. 

While he was serving the people of New Mexico, he attained and 

preserved and was appropriately complimented for his willingness 

to protect the interests of all New Mexicans. I have no doubt that 

he will carry this trait with him into the CPSC, this same commitment to ensuring the safety of American consumers. 

I understand that Senator Bingaman, my colleague, cannot be 

here in person. He’s trying diligently to finish the energy bill on 

the floor, on which he’s doing a very good job. But I understand he 

will communicate, if he hasn’t already, his support for the President’s nominee. 

I’m pleased to be here, and I hope that you will interrogate as 

much as you need to and expeditiously report him out to the Senate for approval. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman 

Senator DORGAN. Senator Domenici, thank you very much for 

being here. We certainly appreciate your input and your strong endorsement of this nominee. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

Senator DORGAN. As I indicated, the Senate Commerce Committee is meeting on the confirmation hearing for Mr. Harold Stratton. As we know, the Consumer Product Safety Commission chairmanship is a position that’s gone vacant far too long. So long, in 

fact, that the statutory provision which allows the Consumer Product Safety Commission to operate with a quorum of two commissioners expires at the end of this month. 

With that in mind, I’d like to welcome Mr. Stratton today to the 

Committee. I’m sure that he and his family are proud to be here 

today, and when I recognize Mr. Stratton, I will ask him to recognize his family. 

Mr. Stratton is supported by the two Senators from New Mexico. 

I’d like to congratulate him on the nomination from President 

Bush. I note, Mr. Stratton, that in your many years of service, both 

as a state legislator and as New Mexico’s attorney general, you 

have experience with consumer fraud issues in a certain range of 

areas, and I’m interested in hearing from you today about how you 

expect to approach consumer product safety issues which the Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with overseeing. 

3

I expect that anyone with two young daughters, 2 and 7, already 

has a great deal of experience, first-hand experience, with child 

product safety. I certainly have experienced that, and I’m sure you 

have as well. While I appreciate your willingness to serve our country, I also want to thank your family, because public service relates 

not just to those who are serving, but their loved ones as well. 

I want to point out that this is an independent agency established by Congress in 1972 to protect the public from unreasonable 

and avoidable risks of death and injury associated with consumer 

products. Every year there are approximately 28.6 million injuries 

and 21,700 deaths associated with 15,000 different types of consumer products within the agency’s jurisdiction. 

The Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission is 

responsible for all of the executive and administrative functions of 

the Commission. The investigations, the Commission initiatives, 

the rules that it adopts, and even how staff resources are spent are 

all under the control of the Chairman. So today we will examine 

Mr. Stratton’s qualification to be Chairman of this Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and to get a sense from him about 

what direction he feels the CPSC might take under his leadership 

if he is confirmed. If he is confirmed as Chairman of the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, he will face many pressing issues and 

difficult decisions. We hope and expect, if that is the case, that he 

will confront these issues in a fair and a balanced manner. 

I know this is not one of the largest agencies in the federal government, but it is a very, very important agency. The stewardship 

and the aggressiveness by which someone assumes this responsibility on behalf of America’s consumers is very important to all 

Members of this Committee. 

Let me ask Senator Wyden if he has a statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me join you in 

welcoming Mr. Stratton, as well. And congratulations to you on 

your nomination. As far as I’m concerned, with Pete Domenici and 

Jeff Bingaman in your corner, you are running with the right 

crowd. 

Mr. STRATTON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator WYDEN. I congratulate you and your family. Let me just 

mention an area in particular that I want to explore with you, because we know of your background, and particularly that this is a 

new area, this whole area of consumer product safety and consumer safety that we’re going to be discussing today. 

You are known, of course, for your long-time interest in addressing free-market approaches to various questions in government. 

You’ve written on them. You’ve been involved in foundations that 

address areas where free-market approaches are stressed. I want 

to make it clear that I think that those are very fine and important 

principles, that free-market initiatives are critically important to 

our country. However, the Consumer Product Safety Commission 

really came into being because the free-market alone wouldn’t address many of the concerns that children, older people, and the disabled have with respect to consumer protection. So what I’d like to 

4

do is explore with you your sense of what is the proper role of the 

federal government and what are the areas where consumers have 

responsibilities. Striking that balance is especially important to me. 

I look forward to your statement and having a chance to visit 

with you a bit this afternoon as we examine your nomination. 

Again, my congratulations to you and to your family. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator DORGAN. Thank you. 

Mr. Stratton, why don’t you proceed? Your entire statement will 

be made a part of the permanent record. We would ask you to summarize your statement. We would also like to ask, if there are 

members of your family present, if you would introduce them. 

STATEMENT OF HAROLD D. STRATTON, JR., NOMINEE TO BE

COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSUMER

PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Yes, I have 

one member of my family who is present today who has been with 

me through thick and thin through all of those offices that you 

read off there, which is my wife, Theresa, who is here supporting 

me, I think. 

Senator DORGAN. Welcome. Thank you. We appreciate your being 

here. 

Mr. STRATTON. My 7-year-old daughter, I believe, is in school in 

Albuquerque. She’d better be in school in Albuquerque today. And 

our 2—— [Laughter.] 

Senator DORGAN. She is supporting this nomination, I assume. 

Mr. STRATTON. It depends on whether she gets a dog, Senator. 

Senator DORGAN. All right. 

Mr. STRATTON. She has made it clear to me that if we have to 

move, she wants a dog. So we’re having to do those kind of things. 

Our 21⁄2 year old is in Sante Fe today with her grandmother, and 

we checked on her this morning. She’s doing fine. She’s having a 

great time. They love to have a little break from the parents. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it’s an honor to 

appear here before you today as the President’s nominee to be a 

member and Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. I welcome the opportunity to have this discussion with the 

Committee and respond to your questions. 

So that you might know me a little better, I’d like to tell you a 

little bit about myself. I was born in Muskogee, Oklahoma, and 

reared in Oklahoma City. My father served in World War II as a 

B-17 pilot and subsequently practiced law in Oklahoma for over 35 

years. My mother and sister and her family continue to live in Tahlequah, Oklahoma, which is the capital of the Cherokee Nation, of 

which I am an enrolled member. 

I attended the University of Oklahoma, where I received degrees 

in geology and law. Subsequent to graduating from law school, I 

served my Army ROTC committment in the United States Army. 

Thereafter, in early 1977, I permanently moved to Albuquerque to 

practice law. 

In 1978, I was elected to the New Mexico House of Representatives where I served four terms. Among other positions, I served as 

5

Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Vice Chairman of Energy 

and Natural Resources Committee, and one term on the Transportation Committee. 

In 1986, I was elected to the office of attorney general of New 

Mexico. There, in addition to acting as the attorney for New Mexico 

State government, I oversaw the state’s only dedicated consumerprotection agency and the state’s largest white-collar crime prosecution unit. Since I was limited to serving one term as attorney 

general by the New Mexico constitution, I re-entered the practice 

of law in Albuquerque in 1991, where I have practiced until the 

present. 

In my career, I’ve been honored to argue and handle many cases 

in many courts, including the United States Supreme Court. 

In each of the capacities in which I have served, my highest priority has been to work and serve with honesty, integrity, impartiality, and fairness toward my staff and employees, other State 

Executive and Legislative officials, my colleagues in the legal community, and the people I’ve served and represented. It is my sincere commitment, should I be confirmed, to continue these priorities as Chairman of the CPSC. 

My service in both the executive and legislative branches of government, I believe, provides a helpful perspective from which to appreciate the importance of each branch of government’s unique responsibilities. As a result, I understand that this Committee is an 

important stakeholder in the success of the Commission and its 

mission to protect consumers. If confirmed, I will welcome a continuing dialog with this Committee. 

Finally, I would not purport to be an expert on all issues currently pending before the Commission, nor have I formed any preconceived positions on any pending or potential matters there. I 

would like, however, to suggest to the Committee three general topics that I believe are important to the future success of the Commission’s mission. 

First, I’d like to explore ways in which the Commission could improve its performance and increase its efficiencies through various 

methods, including improved interagency consultation and information sharing. Improved coordination with other agencies could 

maximize the Commission’s budgetary and related resources. 

Second, the Commission’s consumer education outreach programs 

and consumer notification procedures are critical to protecting consumers and should be strengthened and enhanced to the maximum 

extent possible. I believe this effort to be particularly important in 

relation to our most vulnerable and hard-to-reach consumers, 

which includes seniors, consumers who are less fortunate economically, and those of our citizens who do not speak English as their 

first language. 

Third, I believe it would be useful to continue to enhance the 

Commission’s oversight of imported products in light of the increasing number of consumer products imported from foreign countries. 

The Commission’s responsibility in this area is substantial. 

Mr. Chairman, should you and the Senate decide to confirm me 

for this very important position, I look forward to carrying out this 

very important mission of the CPSC. 

6

Once again, it’s a great honor to be here today, and I’ll be 

pleased to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr. 

Stratton follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HAROLD D. STRATTON, JR., NOMINEE TO BE COMMISSIONER

AND CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it is an honor to appear here before you today as the President’s nominee as a Member and Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). I welcome the opportunity to have this 

discussion with the Committee and respond to your questions. 

I am joined here today by my wife, Theresa Rivera Stratton, who I would like to 

introduce at this time. We have two young daughters who are not with us today. 

Our older daughter, Alexandra, is 7 and in the first grade. She is in school today 

in Albuquerque. Our younger daughter, Claire, who is 21⁄2, is with her grandmother 

in Santa Fe today. 

So that you might know me a little better, I would like to tell you a bit about 

myself. 

I was born in Muskogee, Oklahoma and reared in Oklahoma City. My father 

served as a B-17 pilot in the Army Air Corp in World War II as a member of the 

8th Air Force, and subsequently practiced law back in Oklahoma for over 35 years. 

My mother, sister and her family, continue to live in Tahlequah, Oklahoma, which 

is the capital of the Cherokee Nation, of which my daughter, Alexandra and I are 

enrolled members. 

I attended the University of Oklahoma where I received a Bachelor’s Degree in 

Geology and Juris Doctor degree in Law. Subsequent to graduating from law school, 

I served my Army ROTC commitment on active duty in the United States Army. 

Thereafter, in early 1977, I permanently moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico to 

begin my career in the private practice of law and live in the varied and diverse 

culture and environment that is New Mexico. 

In 1978, I was elected to the New Mexico House of Representatives where I served 

four terms. Among other positions, I served as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Vice Chariman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and one 

term on the Transportation Committee. I also served terms on the New Mexico Judicial Council and the Commission on Uniform State Laws. 

In 1986, I was elected to the office of Attorney General of New Mexico. There, in 

addition to acting as the attorney for New Mexico State government, I oversaw the 

state’s only dedicated, consumer protection agency and the state’s largest white collar crime prosecution unit. While serving as Attorney General, I presided over and 

managed not only the day-to-day activities of the Consumer Protection Division, 

where we handled between one and two hundred consumer inquiries a day, but also 

oversaw a number of significant consumer actions and white collar crime prosecutions. 

Since I was limited to serving one term as Attorney General by the New Mexico 

constitution, I re-entered the private practice of law in Albuquerque in 1991 where 

I have practiced until the present. Since that time, my practice has consisted primarily of complex and commercial litigation, administrative and governmental law 

and, more recently, consulting and lobbying. 

In my career I have been honored to argue and handle cases in the United States 

Supreme Court, several U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals, numerous U.S. District 

Courts, the New Mexico and Oklahoma Supreme Courts and Courts of Appeals and 

many other courts of lesser jurisdiction. 

I am admitted to the practice of law in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Colorado and 

Texas, as well as in numerous other Federal jurisdictions including the U.S. Supreme Court. 

In each of the capacities in which I have served, my highest priority has been to 

work and serve with honesty, integrity, impartiality and fairness, toward my staff 

and employees, other state executive and legislative officials, my colleagues in the 

legal community and the people I have served and represented. 

It is my sincere commitment, should I be confirmed, to continue these priorities 

and to serve on the CPSC with integrity, fairness, and with independent, unbiased 

judgment as chairman of this very important independent Commission. 

Congress has provided the Commission with the power to undertake actions, 

which have the potential to affect the safety of every consumer in America, and particularly those consumers who are most vulnerable and hard to reach, such as the 

elderly and our children. The Commission’s jurisdiction over safety aspects of conVerDate Apr 24 2002 09:46 Jul 24, 2003 Jkt 087746 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\87746.TXT SCOM1 PsN: CAROLT
7

sumer products is broad and far-reaching. The Commission’s actions have saved 

many lives and prevented many injuries, substantially improved the safety of countless consumer products, and heightened the public’s awareness and knowledge of 

consumer product safety. 

My tenure in both the executive and legislative branches of government, I believe, 

provides a helpful perspective from which to appreciate the importance of each 

branch of government’s unique responsibilities and duties. As a result, I understand 

that this Committee is an important stakeholder in the success of the Commission 

and its mission to protect consumers. If confirmed, I will welcome a continuing dialog with this Committee. Since the Commission’s chairman is responsible for enforcing the laws as passed by the Congress, frequent dialog with this Committee will 

ensure that the Commission understands the Committee’s positions and provides 

the Committee with the information it needs to effectively perform its legislative responsibilities. 

Finally, I would not purport to be an expert on all issues currently pending before 

the Commission, nor have I formed any pre-conceived positions on any pending or 

potential matters there. I would like, however, to suggest to the Committee three 

general topics, in addition to those that may currently be on the Commission’s agenda, that I believe are important to the future success of the Commission’s mission. 

First, I would like to explore ways in which the Commission could improve its performance and increase its efficiencies through various methods including improved 

inter-agency consultation and information sharing. It is my understanding that several other Federal agencies possess data, information and expertise that could be 

useful to the Commission’s mission. Improved coordination with such agencies could 

maximize the Commission’s budgetary and related resources. 

Second, the Commission’s consumer education outreach programs and consumer 

notification procedures are critical to protecting consumers and should be strengthened and enhanced to the maximum extent possible. While I realize that the Commission continues to strive to improve communication with consumers, I would hope 

to lead the Commission in enhancing its educational programs and communication 

with the all of the Nation’s consumers. 

I believe this effort to be particularly important in relation to our most vulnerable 

and hard to reach consumers. This included seniors, parents, consumers who are 

less fortunate economically and those of our citizens who do not speak English as 

their first language. Coming from New Mexico where hispanics constitute 42 percent of the population and Native Americans constitute about 11 percent of the population, I appreciate the necessity of providing Commission information to consumers in a multi-lingual format. I intend to use my involvement and relationship 

in the Native American community and in the Hispanic and Spanish speaking community to improve and enhance the dissemination of consumer information to this 

segment of our population. 

Third, I believe it would be useful to continue to enhance the Commission’s oversight of imported products. I know that efforts toward this goal are well down the 

line between the Commission and the U.S. Customs Service. In light of the increasing number of consumer products imported from foreign countries, the Commission’s 

responsibility in this area is substantial. While working with the appropriate government agencies, including Customs, I would like to review the existing procedures 

and, if warranted, attempt to improve the nature of the Commission’s oversight of 

such products. 

Mr. Chairman, should the Senate decide to confirm me for this very important 

position, I look forward to carrying out the mission of the CPSC. I can assure you, 

that with two young daughters, I think of consumer product safety every single day. 

I look forward to bringing this interest and concern to the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

Once again, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you today and am prepared to respond to your your questions. 

A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

1. Name: Harold D. Stratton, Jr., (Hal Stratton). 

2. Position to which nominated: Commissioner and Chairman, Consumer Product 

Safety Commission. 

3. Date of Nomination: March 1, 2002. 

4. Address: (Information not released to the public). 

5. Date and place of birth: 12/6/50, Muskogee, Oklahoma, USA. 

6. Marital status: Married, Theresa Rivera Stratton. 

7. Names and ages of children: Maria Alexandra, 7; Claire Qingya, 2. 

8

8. Education: John Marshall High School, Okla. City, 9/66–5/69, High School Diploma; Univ. of Okla., 9/69–5/73, B.S., Geology; Univ. of Okla. 9/73–5/76, J.D., Law. 

9. Employment record: Coors, Singer & Broullire (and successor firms), 1977– 1982, Attorney; Harold D. Stratton, Jr., P.A., 1982–1984, Attorney; Stratton & 

Barnett, P.A., 1984–1986, Attorney; N.M. Attorney General, 1987–1990, Attorney 

General; Stratton & Cavin, P.A., 1991-present, Attorney. The location of all firms 

is Albuquerque, NM except the Office of the Attorney General which is in Santa Fe, 

NM. 

10. Government Experience: Member, New Mexico House of Representatives, 

1979–1986; Western Conference, Council of State Governments, 1981–1984; National Conference of State Legislators, 1979–1986; National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, 1985–1986; New Mexico Judicial Council, 1981– 1982; BLM Citizens Advisory Committee, ABQ Dist., 1983–1986; New Mexico Attorney General, 1987–1990. 

11. Business Relationships: Stratton & Cavin, P.A., shareholder Rio Grande Foundation, President DCI Associates, LLC, contact consultant Americans for Technology 

Leadership, advisory board member. 

12. Memberships: Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (Registry No. C 2141). Professional Memberships: (a) State Bar Associations: New Mexico Bar Association; Oklahoma Bar Association; Colorado Bar Association; Texas Bar Association. (b) Other 

Attorney Organizations: State Attorney General Emeritus (affiliate of the National 

Association of Attorneys General); Native American Bar Association; United States 

Supreme Court; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Fifth Circuit; U.S. District Court, District of New Mexico; U.S. District 

Court, District of Colorado; U.S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma; U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of Texas. 

13. Political affiliations and activities: (a) List all offices with a political party 

which you have held or any public office for which you have been a candidate: Cochair, Republican Lawyers for Bush, New Mexico, 2000; Bush 1988, Citizens 

Against Crime, 1988; New Mexico Republican Legislative Campaign Committee, 

1979–1986; Republican National Committee, NM Legal Counsel, 1984–1987; New 

Mexico State Republican Party Central Committee; Bernalillo County Republican 

Party Central Committee; New Mexico House of Representatives, 1979–1986; New 

Mexico Attorney General, 1987–1990. 

(b) List all memberships and offices held in and services rendered to all political 

parties or election committees during the last 10 years: None except those listed in 

13(a) above. 

(c) Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign organization, po- litical party, political action committee, or similar entity of $500 or more for the past 

10 years: New Mexico State Republican Party, $1,000, 2001; People for Pete 

[Domenici], $1,000, 2001; Heather Wilson for Congress, $1,000, 2002. 

14. Honors and Awards: Philips Petroleum, Petroleum Engineering scholarship, 

1969; Union Oil of California geology scholarship, 1969–1972; George Wyatt Brown 

geology scholarship, 1972–1973; George Wyatt Brown geology award, 1972; Distinguished Military Graduate, Univ. of Okla. R.O.T.C., 1973. 

15. Published Writings: Published works which I can recall and provide information about are: Office of the Attorney General: History, Powers & Responsibilities, 

1845–1990, Hal Stratton and Paul Farley, 1990; Report of the Attorney General: 

Crime in New Mexico, Office of the New Mexico Attorney General, 1990; Wall Street 

Journal, opinion piece, June 10, 1988; States Derail Microsoft Deal, ABQ Journal, 

April 16, 2000; The Microsoft Mess, IBD, October 10, 2000; Gale Norton as Sec. of 

the Interior, ABQ Journal, February, 2001; N.M. Needs a President on the Fast 

Track, ABQ Journal, Sept. 13, 2001; Atty. Gen Madrid and MSFT, ABQ Journal, 

July 19, 2001. 

From time to time as a New Mexico legislator, I published newsletters to inform 

my constituents of legislative initiatives and developments related to my district. 

As New Mexico’s Attorney General, my office occasionally published a newsletter 

covering current developments in the Office of Attorney General and distributed it 

throughout the state. 

16. Speeches: I have not delivered any formal speeches which are responsive to 

the question. 

17. Selection: (a) Do you know why you were chosen for this nomination by the 

President? I believe I was chosen by the President as a result of my broad public 

service and private sector work experience, and my general reputation for honesty, 

independent judgment and a strong work ethic. My service as New Mexico’s Attorney General and as a four-term New Mexico State legislator provides me with a 

unique experience and pragmatic understanding of the demands and essential interrelationships of the Executive, Legislative, and judicial branches of government. 

9

Those positions also provided me with administrative, agency management and substantive consumer affairs experience. Moreover, combined with my experience as 

founding partner of the law firm Stratton & Cavin, P.A. in Albuquerque, NM, I have 

a keen awareness of the power of investigative and litigation authority as well as 

the attendant costs and risks. Finally, I am committed to public service and I bring 

to this task a willingness to learn from the Commission’s staff, other Commissioners, this Committee and others in the consumer products community. 

(b) What do you believe in your background or employment experience affirmatively qualifies you for this particular appointment. I believe my management and 

consumer protection experience in the New Mexico Attorney General’s office qualifies me for this position, as does my experience in managing my law firm. As Attorney General I was the primary State official responsible for protecting consumers 

through the Consumer Protection Division of the attorney generals office. The office 

was also involved in statewide criminal prosecutions emphasizing white collar and 

consumer crime. This gives me a solid, practical perspective on the enforcement of 

consumer laws, related criminal violations and prosecutions, and civil investigatory 

procedures. 

I also have considerable experience in legislative matters from serving four terms 

in the New Mexico legislature. That service provides me with knowledge of consumer and related legislative issues as well as an appreciation for the importance 

of considering legislative intent. My service in the legislature provides me with a 

heightened awareness 4 and sensitivity of this Committee’s interest in and responsibility to the Commission. I believe this legislative perspective can also be a positive 

asset for the Commission. 

Finally, as a practicing lawyer and former Attorney General, I believe I have a 

good grasp of administrative law and procedure and the concept of due process of 

law as applied to administrative agencies.

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Stratton, thank you very much. Let me ask 

you a series of questions. I’m trying to understand a bit about how 

you would administer the CPSC and also what your objectives 

would be. You described several of them, including consultation 

with other agencies and consumer education. 

The first question is why do you want to be the Chairman of the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission? 

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, I have been in public service, and 

I want to do some more public service. I’ve been out in the private 

sector for the last 10 years, and I’ve enjoyed that, as well, but 

there’s nothing like being a public servant, and I’ve done it, and 

I look forward to doing it again. 

Now, the CPSC is of particular interest to me, because, notwithstanding some of the things I’ve read in the newspaper, I’ve had 

a very active effort in consumer protection. It’s very important. 

Consumers are what run this country, and they do need to be protected from the harms that the Consumer Product Safety Act provides. So it’s a very important mission. 

As you indicated earlier, with two kids, 7 and 2, it just brings 

home the importance of that, and it gives me a chance to run an 

agency that I think is—it’s certainly one of the more important consumer agencies in the government. 

Senator DORGAN. What do you think of Ralph Nader? 

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, I’m sorry, you mean as an individual? 

Senator DORGAN. Well, the reason I’m asking the question is—

I guess it’s a philosophic question, really, in terms of consumer 

products and so forth. Several decades ago, Mr. Nader raised the 

question of unsafe automobiles, and we went through a long period 

of debate about these issues. The automobile he raised questions 

about caught fire when it was rear-ended because of the way the 

fuel tank was placed. He raised a lot of questions about the autoVerDate Apr 24 2002 09:46 Jul 24, 2003 Jkt 087746 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\87746.TXT SCOM1 PsN: CAROLT
10

mobile industry and became very controversial. He has since become a consumer advocate, and I’m just curious how you view— perhaps I shouldn’t have used Ralph Nader, per se—but how do 

you view the consumer advocates out there, perhaps symbolized by 

him? 

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, I think, of what I know—I mean, 

that’s a very broad question, but, of what I know, I think they’re 

an important stakeholder in the consumer safety area, and I think 

they play an important role before the Commission. 

Senator DORGAN. If one is a pro-business, free-market person, 

one, perhaps, comes down on the side of saying, you know, ‘‘I don’t 

like this notion of intrusion and constantly taking on those that are 

making these products, whether it’s child seats or automobiles, for 

that matter.’’ We, of course, will want someone in the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission who says, ‘‘Look, I’m here on behalf of 

the American consumer and the American public, paid by taxpayers’ dollars, and I’m going to be a tiger on these issues of demanding that products be safe; and when not safe, I’m going to 

take on the companies who produce them.’’ How do you feel about 

that charge? 

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, that is a charge I’ve had before as 

a consumer advocate at the attorney general level, and I believe in 

it very strongly. I don’t want to filibuster you, and I certainly don’t 

intend to do that, but I would not call myself a pro-business person. I know some people maybe have, but there are a lot of businesses out there that, after my service as attorney general, didn’t 

consider that. I am a free-enterprise, free-market person, and I 

think that really is more pro-consumer than it is pro-business. 

Senator DORGAN. Tell us, if you would, a bit about what you did 

as attorney general of New Mexico, because most attorneys general, of course, are the top consumer advocates in their states. 

They’re the top law-enforcement people. Your office, perhaps, as 

the office in North Dakota and many others do, had the charge of 

consumer protection. Can you tell us a bit about what you did as 

attorney general in New Mexico? 

Mr. STRATTON. I’d be happy to, Mr. Chairman. In fact, you are 

absolutely correct, we really are the only consumer protection agency in New Mexico, so we do serve that role. 

The first thing that we do that I think is very important, and the 

CPSC has a role in this, too, is we have an 800-number that consumers can call. And when I was there, we got approximately 100 

calls per day from consumers needing consumer help. We got almost another 100 on our normal telephone line. And although that 

doesn’t make headlines, and that’s not something that shows up in 

the newspaper all the time, that is a very important role, to have 

people have a place to call. 

During my service as attorney general, I think there was one 

particular case which exemplifies, not only my philosophy there, 

but exemplifies what my philosophy is going to be at the CPSC, 

and that was a case that’s still talked about called the ‘‘Frontier 

Ford’’ case. We had a particular car dealership that was abusing 

consumers. It was the tenth largest car dealership in the country. 

It also provided half of the advertising to all the media outlets in 

New Mexico, and was a big employer, but they were doing the kind 

11

of things which we don’t have time to go into here today. But we 

talked with them, and they wouldn’t stop it, so we proceeded to sue 

them to get consumers’ money back and to enjoin them from engaging in the kind of activity that they were engaging in—locking people in rooms without insulin, throwing people’s keys on the roof, 

lying to people about what they sold consigned cars for, and many 

other things I’d rather not mention that are subject of affidavit, but 

that I don’t know personally. So we proceeded to sue the company, 

and we recovered $1.2 million for consumers in that particular 

case, from one company. 

Now, that was a lot of money in New Mexico, in a state of 1.3 

million. But that company eventually went out of business. And the 

issue was, well, are you going to put a company out of business 

over a consumer issue? And sometimes you have to. And I know 

that’s an issue at the Commission. You have businesses who, from 

time to time, say, ‘‘We can’t do this recall. We can’t do this remedial action. It’ll put us out of business.’’ Well, if they’re violating 

the statute, which is the most important thing here, and that is to 

enforce the Consumer Product Safety Act—I mean, that is what the 

job is—then you go out and you do what you need to do, and you 

let the chips fall where they may, and you’ve got a charge, and 

that’s the way you handle it. 

That case took up a lot of time and was a very important case, 

so that was one of the cases. I don’t know how much you want. I 

can go through a number of other things we did, telemarketing 

fraud, charitable contribution issues, art fraud—we have a lot of 

art fraud in the State of New Mexico because of the art community—pyramid promotion scams that we went into and stopped. 

And then, maybe even more importantly, in New Mexico, we 

were the lawyer for consumers at the Public Utility Commission, 

so we represented consumers in regard to rate hearings for their 

electricity. And we possibly saved them more money doing that 

than maybe by doing all the other things that we did. 

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Stratton, perhaps because of where I come 

from, I’ve never considered the issue of art fraud. I guess we would 

think art fraud is bad art. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DORGAN. I think I understand what you mean, coming 

from New Mexico and serving as attorney general. Let me ask one 

additional question. I asked you to recite what you had done with 

respect to consumer protection as attorney general, and I’m aware 

of your accomplishments because I’ve reviewed your record, but I 

wanted you to be able to put it on the record, as well. 

There is one thing that I read about you that concerned me just 

a bit, and I would like you to respond to it. When you were attorney general, you wrote to the Wall Street Journal, taking your fellow attorneys general to task on an issue of merger guidelines, an 

area of business regulation. You said, quote: ‘‘They are using the 

cover of ‘consumer protection’ to impose their anti-business, progovernment-regulation views on the entire nation and are bypassing the legislative process to put in place ‘enforcement guidelines’

that Congress itself refuses to pass.’’ And I believe this dealt with 

airline advertising. 

12

Then there was a ‘‘compact’’ dealing with horizontal corporate 

mergers in which 44 attorneys general signed, but you did not, saying, ‘‘We have enough government interference in our economy 

without a new group joining the anti-business parade.’’ That’s part of the reason I asked you the question before about 

being pro-business. All of us are pro-business. Business is what 

represents the economic engine in this country. However, the head 

of the Consumer Product Safety Commission has to be a tiger and 

an advocate on behalf of consumers with respect to product safety. 

When a business produces a product that’s unsafe, we need someone that’s going to move very quickly. It won’t be considered probusiness to move quickly against those that produce an unsafe 

product, but it will be considered part of the charter of the head 

of the CPSC. 

So if you will, respond to me on the two issues that I just raised 

that were also part of the briefing here. Those were both when you 

were attorney general, and your statements with respect to them 

suggest a slightly different mindset than when I asked the question 

about being pro-business. Would you respond to that for me? 

Mr. STRATTON. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this. I’ve been looking forward to it for some 

time now. The airline guidelines that the National Association of 

Attorneys General put together were illegal. And the United States 

Supreme Court found that specifically, to the guidelines. They 

found that they were preempted by the ADA, which is the Airline 

Deregulation Act, and that the power to do what we were trying 

to do as states attorneys general really lay in the Federal Trade 

Commission and in the Department of Transportation. 

So that was the first problem. And if there’s something, in my 

opinion, that any attorney general, or any attorney shouldn’t be 

doing, that is going out and acting illegally. And we knew it was 

illegal when we were doing it. It didn’t matter to some of them. All 

of these are my friends, by the way. This is nothing personal with 

my fellow attorneys general. We’re a very close-knit group. But 

that is first and foremost. It was a federal government function, 

just like the CPSC has functions, the Federal Trade Commission, 

as well as the Department of Transportation have functions. And 

that was their function. The state attorneys general didn’t like the 

way it was going to be done, so they decided to come in and usurp 

the power of the FTC and the DOT. The U.S. Supreme Court found 

that they shouldn’t do it. 

In New Mexico, we didn’t have one single complaint about airline 

advertising. Yet they wanted me, in my small state, to throw in 

with them—California, Texas—and support these guidelines in 

their states. We weren’t going to do it. We were doing our job in 

the state of New Mexico, and we had an Unfair Practices Act which 

clearly took care of that. 

Now, there was—you mentioned the horizontal merger guidelines. They were attempting to do that. They were attempting to 

regulate interstate mergers the same way as the Justice Department and the FTC did, and I opposed those, as well, which they 

were illegal, as well. 

And one other area that they were trying to do it in was car rental. And I’ve got to tell you, I was awfully tempted to go along on 

13

the car rental situation, because there was a lot of abuse going on, 

but we had other mechanisms with which to do that, rather than 

enter into an illegal compact amongst the States and try to usurp 

the power of other federal agencies. 

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Stratton, thank you for your response. 

Let me call on the Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Senator McCain. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN McCAIN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA 

Senator MCCAIN. Thank you, Senator Dorgan, and thank you for 

holding this hearing. I believe that Mr. Stratton is a highly qualified individual. I congratulate him, and I thank him for his patience throughout the process. We all know how important the Consumer Product Safety Commission is, and we need you there for it 

to be working with all of its members. As the Chairman knows, the 

6-month statutory deadline that allows the CPSC to perform its duties with only two commissioners expires on May 1, so it’s important that we move as quickly as possible. We don’t want the agency 

to cease its functions. 

I didn’t quite get your explanation on the airline advertising, but 

I’ll accept it anyway, Mr. Stratton. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to working with you, 

Mr. Stratton. And congratulations, again, not only for this appointment, but your previous service to the State of New Mexico, of 

which Arizona was once part of the New Mexico Territory, as you 

recall. 

[The prepared statement of Senator McCain follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN MCCAIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

Good afternoon. I want to thank Chairman Hollings for holding this nomination 

hearing and I know that the Administration, and in particular, Mr. Stratton, are 

appreciative of his nomination to serve the nation in the important position of 

Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). I thank him for his 

patience throughout this process. 

The Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with the responsibility of 

protecting consumers ‘‘against unreasonable risks of injuries associated with consumer products.’’ The CPSC works to ensure that the more than 15,000 products 

under its jurisdiction are safe for consumer use. It is important that those who serve 

on the Commission have a firm grasp of the authority and limitations of the Consumer Product Safety Act, and take appropriate action to fulfill the Commission’s 

mandate. 

Mr. Stratton’s background demonstrates that, not only is he a skilled lawyer who 

has worked in private practice for over 10 years, but he also holds an appreciation 

for public service, having served in the New Mexico House of Representatives and 

as New Mexico’s Attorney General. Mr. Stratton has been described by his former 

Deputy Attorney General as someone who is ‘‘always cautions about following the 

law and living within the restrictions imposed by the law. He does not overstep his 

authority.’’

I believe the nominee is extremely qualified for this position and will work to fulfill his duties within the bound of his authority, and in the best interest of this nation’s consumers. 

Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, the six-month statutory deadline that allows the 

CPSC to perform its duties with only two commissioners expires on May 1st. Thus, 

the timely confirmation of Mr. Stratton is becoming increasingly important. 

Again, thank you Mr. Chairman. I hope that we can approve this nomination 

promptly and enable timely action by the full Senate.

Mr. STRATTON. Thank you, Senator. 

14

Senator MCCAIN. We were very glad to have been split off. I 

thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DORGAN. Perhaps New Mexico is, as well. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DORGAN. Maybe not. 

Senator Wyden. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Stratton, the first area I want to explore with you involves 

individual responsibility and how you look at that in connection 

with the kind of decisions that come before the Consumer Product 

Safety Commission. You’ve stressed this in your writings, and 

again, as with the free-market matter, this is an area that I wholly 

agree is an important principle. It’s a fine one, and it’s got to be 

respected. However, at the same time, we know that people are 

human, and, particularly, you may have some people who don’t use 

a product perfectly and can end up getting hurt as a result, particularly children and seniors. 

Tell us, if you would, how you would balance the question of individual responsibility, which I think you’re right to stress, with the 

need to have government on the side of people who really don’t 

have a lot of clout, kids and seniors, and find it hard, for example, 

to stand up to these big companies. 

Mr. STRATTON. Senator, thank you for that question. I think I 

would not look at it as a balancing test, because I don’t believe, 

when you look at the Consumer Product Safety Act, and you look 

at the mission of the Commission, that it talks about balancing 

personal responsibility. I don’t think that’s an issue, frankly. I 

mean, I know it’s an issue from an evidentiary matter, but I believe that the issue is whether the product creates an unreasonable 

risk to injury. And if it does, then there’s a mandate to do something about it. And I don’t see, absent some other type of facts 

being present, individual responsibility really entering into that 

mandate. 

Senator WYDEN. Well, that’s a very good answer. That was what 

I was hoping to hear. There’s no question in my mind that there 

are instances of products that are defective that you’ve really got 

to stand up for the consumer for, and you’ve got to do it even if 

people aren’t using them perfectly, because the world doesn’t always play out that way. 

Let me ask you, along the same lines that I talked about earlier, 

with respect to free-market principles, where you would draw the 

line between voluntary standards and mandatory standards at the 

Commission? As you know, the Commission tries to use voluntary 

standards to the greatest extent possible. That’s something that, 

again, I think makes sense. It’s a good use of resources. At the 

same time, there have got to be instances where you do use the 

mandatory approach, which, of course, carries the force of law. 

Companies can be fined for compliance. When, in your view, in 

terms of just conceptually, do you think mandatory standards are 

appropriate? 

Mr. STRATTON. Senator, once again, you have done this work for 

the Commission, because you have put in the Consumer Product 

Safety Act that provision as to when you do it and when you don’t 

15

do it. And I believe the Act requires the Commission to look at voluntary standards when they would eliminate or adequately remediate the risk of injury and there’s a substantial likelihood of compliance. 

So if you have a voluntary standard, in every fact situation, you 

look at those and determine whether—and there’s another part of 

that also that really isn’t that section of the statute, and that is 

that the Commission needs to set up a way to monitor that to 

make sure that they know that. Because if the Commission doesn’t 

know that, it doesn’t do very much good. 

So if the standard doesn’t meet those criteria, then you have to 

move to the rulemaking proceeding, I think, and enact a mandatory standard. 

Senator WYDEN. There is one other area that I wanted to explore 

with you on this round of questions. You’ve got big decisions coming up at the Consumer Product Safety Commission, decisions with 

respect to arsenic and various kinds of materials that children may 

come in contact with on playgrounds. There are some significant 

questions of consumer safety coming up. You cannot prejudge any 

of those, and I don’t want to ask you to do so today, but I think 

it would be very helpful in terms of getting a sense of how you 

would approach these kinds of questions, whether there are certain 

principles—other than the Act, of course, and I appreciate your earlier answers where you’ve made it clear that you’re committed to 

following the Act—but tell us, if you would, given the fact that 

there are some big decisions coming up, give us a sense of how 

you’re going to go about tackling them, recognizing that you certainly can’t comment on things like that at this point. 

Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Chairman, I think the way you have to go 

about this, and I think it’s—I think, you know, as you’re well 

aware, the CPSC is a quasi-judicial, or an adjudicatory body, and 

so you’re sitting there like a judge in a way, and I think you have 

to go about it by looking at all the evidence that’s presented to you. 

Although I haven’t had an opportunity to be out there, I’m told 

that they have an excellent staff, great scientists, great engineers, 

and they’re involved in making all these decisions. These aren’t 

just decisions that I come in and make, and there are two other 

commissioners, after all. But I think the only way I can answer 

that is to say look at the evidence as objectively as possible and try 

to make the right decision, with the continuing mission in mind 

that we’re trying to make the marketplace as safe as we can for 

consumer products. 

Senator WYDEN. The only other question I wanted to ask today—

most of your previous record, you know, relates to consumer fraud. 

But the Consumer Product Safety Commission really isn’t aimed 

primarily at outright fraud. It’s obvious that products can be unsafe even if manufacturers are well intentioned and honest. What 

would you cite as your big consumer accomplishments up to this 

point, other than in areas combating fraud? 

Mr. STRATTON. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think it’s—those are—we 

call it business practices, actually, as opposed to safety practices, 

so I think the biggest one, I’ve already talked about, and I don’t 

know that I’ve had any records—I certainly haven’t served on the 

Commission, so I can’t cite you anything there. And I don’t think 

16

unless you’ve served on the Commission you can cite any record of 

doing anything for the government as far as consumer safety. But 

I think I’ve pretty well run down the record for you the best I can 

of the types of consumer things I’ve done. 

Senator WYDEN. Well, let me wrap up, then, by saying, given the 

limited resources at the Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

you’re going to have to make some choices. You’re going to have to 

make some choices about what your priorities are going to be. And, 

if you would, wrap up for me by saying a little bit about what principles you’d use in setting your priorities, if confirmed, at the 

CPSC. 

Mr. STRATTON. Senator, I think the main principle is—and you’re 

certainly right about the priorities, and you’re certainly right about 

the limited resources. That’s one of the things I’ve heard about the 

most as I’ve dealt a little bit with some of the people out there. But 

I think what you have do is, you just have to prioritize based on 

the degree of risk. I mean, we want to find the worst products and 

work on them first and get them out of the marketplace. I think 

you just have to—I’m not prepared today to set that up for you, because I don’t know the record or the evidence at the Commission, 

but I think what we want to do is get the worst products and the 

worst doers out of the way and then proceed down the line. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator DORGAN. Senator Fitzgerald. Senator Fitzgerald is the 

Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PETER G. FITZGERALD,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS 

Senator FITZGERALD. Well, thank you, Mr. Stratton, for being 

here, and congratulations. I enjoyed the opportunity to visit with 

you in my office. I think you have an outstanding record, both in 

the private sector and in public service, having served as the attorney general of New Mexico, and I think you’ll make an outstanding 

Chairman and Commissioner on the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. And I just look forward to working with you. In this 

Committee, we’re very actively involved in consumer affairs, and 

look forward to working with you. And I see nothing in your background, really, that needs any clarification, in my judgment. And 

I just want to congratulate you on your accomplishments to date, 

thus far, and I hope you have smooth sailing through the process 

here. 

Mr. STRATTON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator FITZGERALD. Thank you. 

Senator DORGAN. Senator Fitzgerald, thank you very much. 

Let me ask another question. As we have obviously perused all 

of the records that have been submitted to us about your background and your work, there is one question regarding your role as 

the president of a non-profit organization, the Rio Grande Foundation. On its website, in the announcement of its creation it states: 

‘‘The Rio Grande Foundation promotes public policy founded upon 

the principle of limited government, economic freedom, and individual responsibility.’’

In the context of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

which, by its charter, is not about limited government, it’s about 

17

using that agency to take a look at all the businesses that are producing products and trying to find those that are putting unsafe 

products on the market and prevent that from happening. So describe to me how one reconciles what this organization, the nonprofit, says, and what the role of the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission Chairman requires and how you will straddle that. 

Mr. STRATTON. Yes, sir. Well, the Rio Grande Foundation is a 

completely different concept than what we’re here about today. 

New Mexico, we believe is—we’re living in the greatest state in the 

best place in the country, but we have some economic problems 

down there. We’re No. 1 in poverty. We’re 49th in per capita income. We’re 50th in growth of per capita income. We’ve got an 81⁄2

percent income tax and some other higher taxes. And it’s always 

been my feeling, throughout my service, that we needed a think 

tank to provide some ideas about how to resolve these types of 

problems. And the primary focus of the Rio Grande Foundation, 

notwithstanding what the mission statement says, is the tax structure in New Mexico, the spending structure, the education system, 

and those types of things. 

Let me just put on the record now, in addition, to kind of conclude those thoughts, the issue of the free-market system, which 

we all believe in here today. The first thing I’ll say about is, it’s 

not perfect. There’s no system that I know of that is perfect. And 

it’s not anarchy. It is a system of laws that we’ve set up, which is 

protected, frankly, by laws that are passed here. 

And I see the Consumer Product Safety Act as a plug in the dike 

there for harmful consumer products out there when it comes to 

the free-market system, and I don’t see it inconsistent at all. All 

of us, I think, believe that the government is supposed to protect 

its citizens from harm, whether it’s the events of 9/11 or foreign 

threats or hazardous consumer products. So I wouldn’t be doing 

this unless I saw the visions to be completely compatible. 

Senator DORGAN. There are some, I must say, who don’t feel that 

way, though. I mean, there are some who feel that if someone produces an unsafe product, it means that eventually people will experience it being unsafe and not purchase it, and the free-market actually will ultimately correct itself. I don’t share that view. But 

there are some who say: ‘‘just take a hands-off approach.’’ We have 

some—not in Congress, fortunately—but we have some people writing to us saying there ought not be inspection of meat, for example. 

If people are producing unsafe meat making people sick, eventually 

no one will buy from them and that’s the way to resolve this, 

through the free-market system. 

So there are people on that side of the issue. I wouldn’t want 

someone like that to come to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and your responses today tell me that that’s certainly not 

your view. 

I think Senator Wyden’s questions go to the point. We hope that 

we have a Consumer Product Safety Commission that is active, aggressive, and that, at the end of the term of the new Chairman of 

the Consumer Product Safety Commission, that we can look back 

and say, this was a person that was a real tiger on issues where 

the American consumers, and especially children, were being injured by unsafe products. He used, or she used, the tools of that 

18

office aggressively and effectively relative to the charter of that 

Commission. Speaking for myself, that would be my aspiration, and 

I believe of others on the Committee, as well. 

I think your responses today have been helpful to us, Mr. Stratton. Again, with all of those who come to the call of public service, 

our country thanks those who offer themselves to public service. 

Our Committee will certainly evaluate your response today, but 

your responses have been very helpful to me, I must say. 

Let me include in the record a statement by the Full Committee 

Chairman, Senator Hollings, who was not able to be at this hearing. 

I believe we perhaps, also have some questions that we will want 

to direct and ask that you respond in writing. Mr. Stratton, do you 

have any other final concluding comments? 

Mr. STRATTON. No, sir. 

Senator DORGAN. All right. Well, this Committee appreciates 

very much your attendance today. And, as I said, I think your responses have been helpful to us, and you’ve been very forthcoming. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Hollings follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR ERNEST F. HOLLINGS

Americans rely upon the Consumer Product Safety Commission to protect the 

public from unsafe consumer products. And the stakes could not be higher. Each 

year there are 28 million injuries and 21,000 deaths linked to a wide range of consumer products under the agency’s jurisdiction. 

The CPSC conducts research on potential product hazards, educates the public 

and the media about potentially dangerous products, develops voluntary standards 

with industry, enforces mandatory standards, and sometimes bans or recalls defective or dangerous products. 

Without question, this Commission has played an important role in preventing 

thousands of injuries and deaths. Such an impact is difficult to quantify because we 

cannot know who or how many people would have been injured had some of the 

products stopped by the CPSC remained on the market. One of those injuries might 

have been inflicted on someone sitting in this hearing room, or someone we know. 

Therefore, we need a strong leader at the helm of the CPSC to see that these laws 

are strongly enforced for the protection of our citizens, especially those least able 

to protect themselves. 

The Administration has nominated Harold D. Stratton, Jr. to be Commissioner 

and Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Mr. Stratton earned 

his law degree at the University of Oklahoma, and from 1979 to 1986 he served as 

a member of the New Mexico House of Representatives. He opened a private law 

practice in 1982, and later formed a partnership, Stratton and Barnett, in 1984. 

From 1987 to 1990, Mr. Stratton served as Attorney General for the State of New 

Mexico. He is now a partner at the law firm of Stratton & Cavin. 

While Mr. Stratton has a long political background, I am concerned about his lack 

of experience in product liability law and consumer safety issues. The Chairman of 

the CPSC needs a strong understanding of these matters to be an aggressive advocate for protecting consumers. Therefore, I need Mr. Stratton to answer these questions fully and completely as we consider his nomination. Because Chairman of the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission is a position of trust, we must trust that he 

has the experience, ability and courage to strongly enforce the law and protect the 

American people from dangerous products.

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:10 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

19

1 64 Fed. Reg. 64084, Nov. 22, 1999. 

2Letter to Sen. Robert C. Byrd from Maureen O’Leary, Director, Congressional Relations, 

Consumer Products Safety Commission, April 2, 2001. 3 63 Fed. Reg. 13017, March 17, 1998. 

APPENDIX

WRITTEN REPONSES TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BILL NELSON

Fire Safety 

Question 1. Mr. Stratton, I am very concerned about fire safety issues. Hundreds 

of deaths and terrible injuries, to say nothing of the enormous property damage, 

occur every year in this country from upholstered furniture fires alone. I understand 

that the Commission has been considered an upholstered furniture fire safety rule 

for 7 years, and that the Commission staff has presented a recommendation to the 

Commission for a proposed rule. Do you have a sense for what will be your timing 

on considering this issue? 

Answer: I agree that fire safety issues are among the most important issues before the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). I strongly believe that time 

is of the essence with all safety issues, and the Commission should act as quickly 

as possible on these issues, including the initiation of rulemaking proceedings. One 

of my goals is to significantly shorten the decisionmaking process at the CPSC. If 

confirmed by the Senate, I hope to resolve action on upholstered furniture fire safety 

issues as quickly as possible upon assuming the duties of Chairman. I am aware 

that this issue is of great importance to the Members of the Committee; Senator 

Rockefeller expressed a similar concern to me. Please know that I plan to establish 

an open dialog with the Committee and its Members on the critical issue of fire 

safety and other matters before the Commission. 

Question 2. Mr. Stratton, the Commission itself has said that—and I quote—

‘‘[s]ocietal costs associated with furniture fires are among the highest associated 

with any product subject to the Commissions authority’’ 1 and that upholstered furniture fires are ‘‘one of the biggest killers among all products under CPSC’s jurisdiction.’’ 2 The Commission has also stated that ‘‘CPSC staff believes that a small open 

flame performance standard for upholstered furniture could effectively reduce the 

risk of death, injury, and property loss resulting from small flame ignitions.’’ 3 As 

the Chair of the Commission, would you permit the staff recommendation on furniture fire safety to come to a vote before the Commission? 

Answer: I am not familiar with the details of the Commission’s staff recommendations on upholstered furniture fire safety. The tragic deaths and injuries that result 

from such fires are disturbing and should be prevented. Should I be confirmed by 

the Senate and assume the duties of Chairman, I will promptly become familiar 

with this issue. I will certainly review all of the evidence before the Commission, 

discuss the issue with the staff and the other commissioners, and take other reasonable and necessary acts to ensure that upholstered furniture is as safe as possible 

for consumers. 

Arsenic Treated Wood 

Question 3. As you may be aware, last year an amendment I sponsored on the 

VA-HUD appropriations bill, the appropriations bill which includes the EPA and the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, directed the EPA and the Consumer Product 

Safety Commission to study whether arsenic-treated lumber playground equipment 

was safe. The Consumer Product Safety Commission provided an interim report to 

me on February 15, 2002, regarding the study but, the report did not include any 

conclusions because the study had not progressed to that stage. 

This is a matter of grave importance to the people of Florida and the country because playgrounds in Florida and in other parts of the country have closed due to 

high concentrations of arsenic in the soil which leached from the playground equipment. 

I would like your commitment to continue that study, to allocate the resources 

necessary to complete the study as soon as possible and to provide me a report on 

your conclusions as soon as possible. 

Answer: I agree that the final CPSC study on arsenic treated lumber playground 

equipment—with conclusions and recommendations—should be completed quickly. I 

will, of course, make sure the Committee receives the results as soon as possible. 

I appreciate your bringing this partially completed study to my attention. I know 

this is a matter of great concern to the Committee. Senator Wyden also raised the 

20

issue of arsenic treated lumber at my confirmation hearing. I want to make sure 

our playgrounds are safe for all of our Nation’s children. 

WRITTEN RESPONSES TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

Fire Safety 

Question 1. I hope that you share my concerns regarding fire safety, and the hundreds of deaths and terrible injuries, to say nothing of the enormous property damage, that result in this country every year due to upholstered furniture fires. As you 

are no doubt aware, the Commission has considered an upholstered furniture fire 

safety rule for several years. It is my understanding that the Commission’s professional staff has presented a recommendation to the Commission for a proposed rule. 

Can you let the Committee know your sense of how the Commission should proceed on this issue, and the approximate timetable? 

The Commission is on record as saying: 

1. ‘‘The societal costs associated with furniture fires are among the highest associated with any product subject to the Commission’s authority.’’ 2. Upholstered furniture fires are ‘‘one of the biggest killers among all products 

under CPSC’s jurisdiction.’’ and, 

3. ‘‘CPSC staff believes that a small open flame performance standard for upholstered furniture could effectively reduce the risk of death, injury, and property loss 

resulting from small flame ignitions.’’ As the Chairman of the Commission, are you inclined to permit the staff recommendation on furniture fire safety to come to a vote before the Commission? 

The United Kingdom has much more stringent standards for furniture flammability than the United States. In this country, the State of California has similar 

furniture fire safety regulations. Data suggest that the rate of deaths and serious 

injuries resulting from furniture fires in California and throughout the United Kingdom is lower than that in the remainder of the United States. 

As Chairman, do you believe it would be appropriate for the Commission to examine the lower rate of deaths and serious injuries in those jurisdictions to determine 

if a link could be established between the flammability standards and the lower 

death and accident rates? 

If the link can be established, would that tend to convince you to have the Commission promulgate furniture fire safety regulations for the whole country? 

In 1992, the CPSC rolled back fire safety requirements for children’s pajamas, exempting so-called ‘‘snug fit’’ pajamas. Fire safety groups, including the Shriners, 

have repeatedly called for reinstating the stronger standard, arguing that it has resulted in increased deaths and injuries to children. Several bills in Congress are intended to improve flammability safety standards for children’s sleepwear. 

Would you comment on whether, with 10 years worth of evidence related to the 

risks posed to children by this change in the agency’s regulatory requirements, it 

is now time for the CPSC to revisit the issue of fire safety for children’s pajamas? 

If not, why not? 

Answer: Without having the benefit of reviewing the evidence before the Commission on furniture fire safety, I cannot at this time prejudge how the Commission 

should proceed on this critical life-and-death issue. I assure you, however, that it 

is my belief that time is of the essence with all safety issues before the Commission. 

I intend, if confirmed as Chairman, to resolve every issue, including rulemaking proceedings, as quickly as reasonably possible. Senator Nelson also expressed his concerns over this issue, so I am aware of its importance to Members of the Committee. 

It is very appropriate to examine all competent information including other furniture flammability standards and performance records from other domestic and foreign jurisdictions such as those you mentioned in the United Kingdom and California. If a link can be established between the flammability standard and the safety record, it could be very helpful to the Commission in establishing safety performance standards in this area. 

I also appreciate your bringing the issue of children’s pajamas to my attention. 

Senator Breaux has expressed concern on this issue as well and there is legislation 

pending in the Senate introduced by Members of the Committee and by other senators. Should Congress pass legislation enhancing flammability standards for children’s sleepwear, as Chairman I would see that sleepwear laws, and all laws passed 

by Congress, are vigorously enforced. I certainly want all of our children to wear 

safe pajamas. I do not, however, currently have enough information to form a specific opinion as to whether the child sleepwear issue should be further considered 

by the Commission. As Chairman, I will promptly look into the evidence and the 

21

1 64 Fed. Reg, 64084, Nov. 22, 1999. 

2Letter to Sen. Robert C. Byrd from Maureen O’Leary, Director, Congressional Relations, 

Consumer Products Safety Commission, April 2, 2001. 3 63 Fed. Reg. 13017, March 17, 1998. 

record before the Commission to make a determination as to whether Commission 

action is warranted at this time in the absence of legislation. 

WRITTEN RESPONSES TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JOHN BREAUX

Fire Safety 

Question 1. In 1992, the CPSC rolled back fire safety requirements for children’s 

pajamas, exempting so-called snug fit pajamas. Fire safety groups, including the 

Shriners, have repeatedly called for reinstating the stronger standard, arguing that 

it has resulted in increased deaths and injuries to children. Senator Burns and I 

have introduced S. 2188, while Senator Clinton and Senator Biden have introduced 

S. 2208, to enhance flammability safety standards for children’s sleepwear. Do you 

think that fire safety for children’s pajamas is something the CPSC should take a 

look at now that 10 years have elapsed since the agency’s change in the regulatory 

requirements? 

Answer: Children’s sleepwear is of particular interest to me since I have two 

young daughters at home whom my wife and I help get into their pajamas every 

night. Senator Rockefeller has expressed concern about this as well, and there is 

legislation on this particular issue introduced in the Senate by Members of this 

Committee and by other senators. Should Congress pass legislation enhancing flammability standards for children’s sleepwear, as Chairman I would see that sleepwear 

laws, and all laws passed by Congress, are vigorously enforced. I certainly want all 

of our children to wear safe pajamas. I do not, however, currently have enough information to form a specific opinion as to whether the child sleepwear issue should 

be further considered by the Commission. Please know that I will promptly look into 

the evidence and the record before the Commission to make a determination as to 

whether Commission action is warranted at this time in the absence of legislation. 

WRITTEN RESPONSES TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR GEORGE ALLEN

Question 1. Mr. Stratton, I am very concerned about fire safety issues. Hundreds 

of deaths and terrible injuries, to say nothing of the enormous property damage, 

occur every year in this country from upholstered furniture fires alone. I understand 

that the Commission has been considered an upholstered furniture fire safety rule 

for 7 years, and that the Commission staff has presented a recommendation to the 

Commission for a proposed rule. Do you have a sense for what will be your timing 

on considering this issue? 

Answer: I agree that fire safety issues are among the most important issues before the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). I strongly believe that time 

is of the essence with all safety issues, and the Commission should act as quickly 

as possible on these issues, including the initiation of rulemaking proceedings. One 

of my goals is to significantly shorten the decisionmaking process at the CPSC. If 

confirmed by the Senate, I hope to resolve action on upholstered furniture fire safety 

issues as quickly as possible upon assuming the duties of Chairman. I am aware 

that this issue is of great importance to the Members of the Committee. Please 

know that I plan to establish an open dialog with the Committee and its Members 

on the critical issue of fire safety and other matters before the Commission. 

Question 2. Mr. Stratton, the Commission itself has said that—and I quote—

‘‘[s]ocietal costs associated with furniture fires are among the highest associated 

with any product subject to the Commissions authority’’ 1 and that upholstered furniture fires are ‘‘one of the biggest killers among all products under CPSC’s jurisdiction.’’ 2 The Commission has also stated ‘‘CPSC staff believes that a small open 

flame performance standard for upholstered furniture could effectively reduce the 

risk of death, injury, and property loss resulting from small flame ignitions.’’ 3 As 

the Chair of the Commission, would you permit the staff recommendation on furniture fire safety to come to a vote before the Commission? 

Answer: I am not familiar with the details of the Commission’s staff recommendations on upholstered furniture fire safety. The tragic deaths and injuries that result 

from such fires are disturbing and should be prevented. Should I be confirmed by 

the Senate and assume the duties of Chairman, I will promptly become familiar 

22

with this issue. I will certainly review all of the evidence before the Commission, 

discuss the issue with the staff and the other commissioners, and take other reasonable and necessary acts to ensure that upholstered furniture is as safe as possible 

for consumers.

Æ