BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SJR 22|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SJR 22
Author: Block (D), et al.
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SUBJECT : Cruelty-free cosmetics
SOURCE : Cruelty Free International
DIGEST : This resolution urges the federal government and the
United States (U.S.) Congress to adopt restrictions on animal
testing of cosmetics.
ANALYSIS : This resolution makes the following legislative
findings:
1. After much research, consumers and scientists have become
increasingly skeptical about the necessity and validity of
animal testing for cosmetics. The information that has
historically been gained from animal tests is now achieved
through quicker, less expensive, and more reliable non-animal
methods.
2. California has been a leader in addressing both animal
testing and product safety. In 2000, California became the
first state to restrict the use of animals in product testing
by making it unlawful to use animals for testing when an
alternative method is available.
3. Worldwide, many countries have taken steps to end cosmetics
testing on animals. The European Union (EU), our nation's
CONTINUED
SJR 22
Page
2
largest trading partner, which accounts for nearly half of
the global cosmetics market and worth an estimated $90
billion a year, has completely banned the importation and
sale of cosmetics that have been tested on animals. In the
U.S., however, there is no law limiting the use of animals
for cosmetics testing.
4. Polls show that the American public overwhelmingly supports
alternatives to testing cosmetics on animals. A recent poll
conducted by ORC International (Opinion Research
Corporation), a leading global market research firm, found
that 72% of American adults surveyed believe that testing
cosmetics on animals is unethical.
This resolution urges the federal government to mandate
alternative methods to animal testing whenever scientifically
satisfactory methods are available. Also calls on the U.S.
Congress to enact legislation that establishes reasonable
deadlines for the prohibition of the testing and marketing of
cosmetic products which have been tested on animals.
FISCAL EFFECT : Fiscal Com.: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/3/14)
Cruelty Free International (source)
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Animal Legal Defense Fund, Director Chris Green
New England Anti-Vivisection Society
State Humane Association of California, Board of Directors
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the American Society for
the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, "California has led the
way in enacting humane legislation in many animal welfare
issues, and limiting cosmetic testing on animals is one of those
areas of leadership. California was the first state to adopt a
law that requires all available alternatives to testing on
animals be exhausted before resorting to animal tests.
"The European Union has also adopted strong regulations against
animal testing and has proven that safe, humane cosmetics can be
created. The EU's prohibition on marketing animal tested
cosmetics means that it just makes good trade and economic sense
for the United States to follow suit.
SJR 22
Page
3
"SJR 22 provides California with the opportunity to lead once
again to this important topic by encouraging Congress and the
President to modernize our approach to cosmetic testing."
RM:d 4/3/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****