The holiday season is in full swing, but the spirit of giving has become tainted by headline news of toxic chemicals in children’s toys. An estimated 25 million dangerous toys have been recalled recently, and independent research has revealed that many toxic children’s products are still on store shelves.

Toxic chemicals have no place in children’s toys or, for that matter, in everyday household products. Yet they are pervasive. I am living proof of it. A little more than a year ago, I was asked to participate in a body burden study to test the levels of toxic chemicals in my body. Since I grew up on a small island, I expected my results to show little toxicity in my body. Instead, I was shocked to learn I have a body with a heavy toxic burden. And I am not an anomaly. I am a typical person with typical use of everyday products.

Of the more than 60,000 chemicals in commerce today, less than 1 percent have been tested for their health effects on humans. Among the minuscule number tested is lead, a notorious toxic chemical at the epicenter of this year’s massive toy recalls. Exposure to lead can cause developmental disorders ranging from behavioral problems and learning disabilities to seizures, coma and even death. Young children are particularly vulnerable to lead as they crawl on their hands and put lead-laden products into their mouths.

Though no level of lead exposure has been identified as safe for children, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends a maximum limit for lead in children’s products of 40 parts per million. However, not unless a product contains 600 parts per million or more does it meet the federal recall standard. In other words, our federal government allows toys to contain up to 15 times more lead than is recommended by medical professionals. Even more alarming, despite massive recalls, many toys still on store shelves exceed the recall standard; among the most severe cases is an available children’s product that contains lead levels 1,000 times higher than the recall standard.

A nationwide coalition of environmental health organizations has just launched an electronic, national database (www.healthytoys.org) that allows consumers to conduct searches on the chemical makeup of more than 1,200 children’s products.

If a coalition of nonprofit organizations can test our toys for safety, it should absolutely be within the means, the mission and the moral obligation of the U.S. government to undertake this critical task. Sadly, the agency tasked with ensuring the safety of our everyday products, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has only one toy tester and 15 inspectors to check millions of toys at hundreds of ports of entry in the U.S.

Toxic chemicals are one of the most significant threats to our environment and public health. Federal governments around the world also recognize the magnitude of this issue, but the U.S. lags far behind on chemical policy. Lead in toys is a case study of the federal government’s failure to protect public health from toxic chemicals in everyday products, especially children’s toys. It is a failure that shakes consumers’ faith in what is and is not safe. And it is an impetus for state action.

Maine is already a national leader in chemical policy. In the 2007 legislative session, we passed a bill to phase out the use of deca-BDE, a chemical flame retardant in electronics and furniture that is proven to have negative effects on human brain development, animals and the environment. As the bill’s sponsor, I worked with fellow legislators, Maine’s major firefighter organizations and more than 30 environmental and public health advocates to defeat the sole opponent to the bill – the out-of-state chemical industry, which spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on deceptive ad campaigns and other stall tactics to try to derail the bill.

This new law is an important victory, but thousands of untested and potentially harmful chemicals remain in everyday products. We cannot protect the public from dangerous and unnecessary chemicals on a recall-by-recall basis. And we cannot always take on deep-pocketed special interests on a chemical-by-chemical basis.

We need to venture beyond specific chemical legislation toward broader reform. A bill I have submitted for the 2008 legislative session aims to do just that. The bill would establish a comprehensive plan for identifying toxic chemicals, moving them out of the market and replacing them with safer alternatives. It shifts the burden of proof from consumers to the chemical industry to confirm the safety of chemicals before, not after, they’re on the market. Unlike reactive recalls, this bill is a proactive approach to protecting the public from toxic chemicals. Other legislators have also submitted bills to reduce toxics exposure, such as measures by Reps. Jill Conover of Oakland and Gary Connor of Kennebunk to screen for the presence of lead in toys and children.

These measures together will work to ensure that next holiday season is the season of safety, not the season of recalls.

Hannah Pingree, D-North Haven, is the Maine House majority leader.