The 16 Dec 2002 issue of The New Republic has another article by Jonathan Cohn about lead poisoning. I think it's overall a reasonable article (unlike his previous effort). The main gripe is that, while he mentions liability issues, he glosses over the legitimacy of ex-post-facto liability for the paint industry. Indeed, the paint industry is one of the few where the manufacturers moved well before the government made legal changes. Their reward - retroactive liability. What is the real goal here, to enrich the trial lawyers or to improve the health and safety of the public? If the "public interest" forces were really concerned about the public interest, they would prohibit such retro-active liablity, which does little to help, and in exchange void the resistance of the primary industrial opponents of tightening standards.