EDITORIAL : SAFETY CHECK; TWO PROPOSED LAWS DON'T PROTECT CONSUMERS.

TWO bills regarding child safety seats are making their way through the Legislature. Somebody in Sacramento ought to stop them because they have more to do with safeguarding corporate profits than keeping kids safe.

SB 363 would require insurance companies to treat the seats as part of the vehicle and replace them after every accident - even fender-benders. SB 567 would ban the sale of used car seats.

Think about it. If you accidentally crunch someone's taillight, that little mishap can end up costing your insurer thousands and send your rates through the roof. So we can pretty much guarantee you'll be paying more in premiums if this bill becomes law.

You can bet, too, that the hike will cost motorists far more than the price of a new car seat from the neighborhood discount outlet.

Secondhand sales? Come on, lawmakers, the consumer can check out straps, housing, buckles, etc., and decide whether the used seat is OK.

While a new seat is preferable - manufacturers say their seats can sustain hairline cracks in minor crashes - how are we going to enforce such a law? By roving garage-sale patrols or car-seat sting operations? And at what expense and cost to other law enforcement programs?

Proponents also note that securing car seats in the vehicle is tricky business and that buckling instructions are often lost with used car seats, even in the best of shape. True, but it makes better sense to simply require manufacturers to print or mold instructions directly on the seat rather than prohibit resale.

We appreciate the thought behind the proposals. We all want kids to be as safe as possible.

But we believe the law requiring car seats is sufficient. SB 363 and SB 567 ought to be scrapped in favor of tougher manufacturing standards to ensure seats survive more than one slow-speed collision, and voluntary insurance riders for car seat replacement.