BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SJR 22
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 10, 2014

              ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER  
                                     PROTECTION
                               Susan A. Bonilla, Chair
                   SJR 22 (Block) - As Introduced:  March 24, 2014

           SENATE VOTE  :   31-0
           
          SUBJECT  :   Cruelty-free cosmetics.

           SUMMARY  :   Urges the United States Congress (Congress) to enact  
          legislation that would establish reasonable guidelines for the  
          prohibition of cosmetic product testing on animals, and further  
          urges the federal government to mandate alternative methods to  
          animal testing of cosmetic products.  Specifically,  this bill  :    


          1)Makes the following declarations:

             a)   For more than 50 years, animals have been used in  
               painful tests to assess the safety of certain chemicals  
               used in cosmetic products; 

             b)   Modern alternatives to harmful animal testing are  
               increasingly less expensive, faster, and more accurate at  
               predicting human reactions;

             c)   Mandating and promoting the use of accepted alternative  
               methods to animal testing has, and will continue to have, a  
               huge positive impact on animal welfare;

             d)   Careful evaluation of alternative methods to animal  
               tests ensures that their proper use supports the equal or  
               better protection of people, animals, and the environment;

             e)   In 2000, California became the first state in the nation  
               to pass a law restricting the use of animals in product  
               testing by making it unlawful to use animals for testing  
               when an appropriate, validated, alternative method is  
               available;

             f)   Our nation's largest trading partner, the European  
               Union, which accounts for nearly half of the global  
               cosmetics market worth an estimated $90 billion a year,  








                                                                  SJR 22
                                                                  Page  2

               prohibits the importation and sale of cosmetics that have  
               been tested on animals as of March 2013; 

             g)   Norway, India, Israel, and the State of Sao Paulo,  
               Brazil have also banned all animal testing for cosmetics;

             h)   Harmonizing international laws that encourage modern  
               science and respond to consumer expectations benefits  
               businesses and consumers in today's global market place;  
               and,

             i)   Polls show that the American public overwhelmingly  
               supports alternatives to testing cosmetics on animals, and  
               a recent poll conducted by ORC International, a leading  
               global market research firm, found that 72% of American  
               adults surveyed believe that testing cosmetics on animals  
               is unethical.

          2)Resolves jointly, by the Senate and the Assembly of the State  
            of California (Legislature): 

             a)   That the Legislature urges Congress to enact legislation  
               that would establish reasonable deadlines for the  
               prohibition of the testing and marketing of cosmetic  
               products that have been tested on animals;

             b)   That the Legislature urges the federal government to  
               mandate alternative methods to animal testing of cosmetic  
               products, whenever those scientifically satisfactory  
               methods are available, and to prioritize the validation and  
               acceptance of additional nonanimal tests; and

             c)   That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this  
               resolution to the President and the Vice President of the  
               United States, to the Majority Leader of the Senate, to the  
               Speaker of the House of Representatives, to each Senator  
               and Representative from California in Congress, to the  
               Governor of California, and to the author for appropriate  
               distribution.  

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)States that manufacturers and contract testing facilities may  
            not use traditional animal test methods within this state when  
            an appropriate alternative test method has been scientifically  








                                                                  SJR 22
                                                                  Page  3

            validated and recommended by the Inter-Agency Coordinating  
            Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM)  
            and adopted by the relevant federal agency or agencies or  
            program within an agency responsible for regulating the  
            specific product or activity for which the test is being  
            conducted.  (Civil Code Section (CC) 1834.9(a))

          2)Clarifies that there is no prohibition against the use of any  
            alternative nonanimal test method for the testing of any  
            product, product formulation, chemical or ingredient that is  
            not recommended by ICCVAM.  (CC 1834.9(b))

          3)Clarifies that there is no prohibition against the use of  
            animal tests to comply with requirements of state agencies, or  
            federal agencies when the federal agency has approved an  
            alternative nonanimal test, as specified, and the federal  
            agency staff concludes that the alternative nonanimal test  
            does not assure the health and safety of consumers.  (CC  
            1934.9(c))

          4)Defines "animal" to mean, "vertebrate nonhuman animal." (CC  
            1834.9(f)(1))

          5)Defines "traditional animal test method" to mean "a process or  
            procedure using animals to obtain information on the  
            characteristics of a chemical or agent.  Toxicological test  
            methods generate information regarding the ability of a  
            chemical or agent to produce a specific biological effect  
            under specified conditions."  (CC 1834.9(f)(6))

          6)Defines "validated alternative test method" to mean, "a test  
            method that does not use animals, or in some cases reduces or  
            refines the current use of animals, for which the reliability  
            and relevance for a specific purpose has been established in  
            validation studies as specified in the ICCVAM report provided  
            to the relevant federal agencies."  (CC 1834.9(f)(7))

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   None.  This resolution is keyed non-fiscal by  
          the Legislative Counsel.

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Purpose of this resolution  .  This resolution urges Congress to  
            enact legislation that would establish reasonable guidelines  
            for the prohibition of cosmetic animal testing in the United  








                                                                  SJR 22
                                                                  Page  4

            States, and also urges the federal government to mandate  
            alternative methods to animal tests to promote equal or better  
            protection of people, animals and the environment.  This  
            resolution is sponsored by Cruelty-Free International. 

           2)Author's statement  .  According to the author, "Despite the  
            modern advances in product testing and bans on animal testing  
            for cosmetics in other countries, in the United States there  
            is no national law prohibiting the use of animals for  
            cosmetics testing or even requiring that companies look first  
            to available non-animal alternatives before resorting to  
            animal tests. Modern non-animal alternatives are often  
            cheaper, faster and more predictive for humans. Our nation's  
            largest trading partner, the European Union, now prohibits the  
            marketing of cosmetics that have been tested on animals. India  
            and Israel have also banned the practice. Moving away from  
            animal tests will allow the American cosmetics industry to  
            remain competitive in a changing global market that  
            increasingly requires non-animal safety tests."

           3)Animal testing  .  According to the Humane Society of the United  
            States (Humane Society), testing on animals for cosmetic  
            products is not required under federal law.  However, several  
            tests are commonly performed by exposing certain animals such  
            as mice, rats, rabbits and guinea pigs to cosmetics  
            ingredients.  

          These tests can include skin and eye irritation tests where  
            chemicals are rubbed onto the shaved skin or dripped into the  
            eyes of restrained rabbits without any pain relief; repeated  
            force-feeding studies lasting weeks or months to look for  
            signs of general illness or specific health hazards such as  
            cancer or birth defects; and, widely condemned "lethal dose"  
            tests, in which animals are forced to swallow large amounts of  
            a test chemical to determine the dose that causes death.  The  
            Humane Society further notes that at the end of the tests, the  
            animals are killed, normally by asphyxiation, neck-breaking,  
            or decapitation.  

          While a number of countries have banned the use of animal  
            testing for cosmetic purposes, including the European Union,  
            other countries, such as China, require products manufactured  
            outside of the country to be tested on animals.  

           4)Alternatives to current animal testing practices  .  There are a  








                                                                  SJR 22
                                                                  Page  5

            number of practical issues regarding the use of animals in  
            cosmetic product testing, in addition to the ethical concerns.  
             The National Anti-Vivisection Society, which is a national  
            animal advocacy organization dedicated to ending the use of  
            animals in research and testing, reports that many of the  
            current toxicity tests were developed decades ago and are  
            based on old science.  Further, animal tests are not always  
            predictive of human health effects, and the speeds at which  
            some of the animal tests are conducted are often slow and  
            costly.  

          The New England Anti-Vivisection Society reports that scientists  
            have developed and validated alternative methods shown to lead  
            to safer and more effective products and drugs for humans than  
            animal testing.  For example, skin corrosivity and irritation  
            can be measured using three-dimensional human skin equivalent  
            systems such as EpiDerm and SkinEthic.  Additional  
            alternatives include EpiSkin (a model of reconstructed human  
            epithelium) and a variety of sophisticated, computer-based  
            Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship models that  
            predict skin corrosivity and irritation by means of  
            correlating a new drug or chemical with its likely activity,  
            properties, and effects.  

          This resolution urges Congress to enact legislation that would  
            establish reasonable deadlines for the nationwide prohibition  
            of animal testing and urges the federal government to mandate  
            testing alternatives which appear to be readily available and  
            effectively utilized.  

           5)Federal legislation  :  Representative Jim Moran (D-VA)  
            introduced House Resolution 4148 on March 5, 2014, which is  
            titled the Humane Cosmetics Act.  The legislation aims to  
            phase out cosmetic animal testing and the sale of cosmetics  
            tested on animals by prohibiting an entity from contracting or  
            conducting cosmetic animal tests and prohibits selling,  
            offering for sale, or transporting any cosmetic if the final  
            product or any component thereof was developed or manufactured  
            using cosmetic animal testing.  H.R. 4148 has been referred to  
            the House Subcommittee on Commerce Manufacturing and Trade.  
             
             In 2000, Congress passed the ICCVAM Authorization Act and  
            established ICCVAM, which is charged with the development,  
            validation, and regulatory acceptance of new and revised  
            regulatory test methods that reduce, refine, and replace the  








                                                                  SJR 22
                                                                  Page  6

            use of animals in testing while maintaining and promoting  
            scientific quality and the protection of human and animal  
            health and the environment.  

           6)Arguments in support  .  Cruelty-Free International writes in  
            support, "Prohibition of animal testing for cosmetics is an  
            area where the United States has fallen behind other countries  
            including our largest trading partner, the European Union,  
            which has completely banned the importation and sale of  
            cosmetics that have been tested on animals.  Norway, India and  
            Israel have also banned animal testing for cosmetics;  
            Australia, ASEAN, Brazil and [South] Korea are also making  
            strides toward ending cosmetic testing on animals.  With [this  
            resolution], California can continue to lead by sending a  
            strong message to Congress and the President that it is time  
            to modernize [the United States'] cosmetic industry regulation  
            to match consumer expectation and international progress for  
            safe and humane cosmetics."

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          Cruelty-Free International (sponsor)
          American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals  
          (ASPCA)
          Animal Welfare Institute
          New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS)

           Opposition 
           
          None on file.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Elissa Silva / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)  
          319-3301