We weren't really aware that there was a need for a law banning the use of mercury in cosmetics, but apparently Minnesota thinks there is.

Turns out that mercury sometimes finds its way into mascara and other products used around your eye, says the AP.
"Mercury does cause neurological damage to people even in tiny quantities," said Sen. John Marty, the Democrat from Roseville who sponsored the ban. "Every source of mercury adds to it. We wanted to make sure it wasn't here."

Most makeup manufacturers have phased out the use of mercury, but it's still added legally to some eye products as a preservative and germ-killer, said John Bailey, chief scientist with the Personal Care Products Council in Washington. That group doesn't track mercury in beauty products and favors a national approach to regulating cosmetics, instead of laws that vary from state to state.

Federal law allows eye products to contain up to 65 parts per million of mercury. The exposure a person would get from a product used in small quantities around the eyes would not cause a problem, Bailey said.

"It's added at very low levels, and for good reason," he said. Well, not in Minnesota anymore it isn't. Retailers that "knowingly" sell cosmetics containing mercury in Minnesota will face fines of $700 and manufacturers who fail to disclose mercury could be on the hook for $10,000.

Today the White House will announce TorrentFreak has posted an interview with a 9 year-old girl who uses LimeWire.

She has some interesting thoughts about DRM vs Downloading, and we're somewhat inclined to agree with her...

TF. Do you think its legal or illegal to copy a CD or DVD?

- Some men right, they sell you a DVD at the market but when you get home it doesn't play, that's illegal.

TF. Why is it illegal?

- Duh!! Because they tell you it works and when you get it home it's rubbish and jumps in the middle and its a waste of money! We've never been big fans of "Kids Say The Darnedest Things", but we now realize that had Bill Cosby been asking children to interpret copyright law, we would have been enthralled.

From the "boring but important" category of meat-related news, the Consumer Federation of America has joined with other advocacy groups as well as union and labor groups, under the assistance of men and women in Congress, to work out a compromise in response to July's ill-conceived attempt by Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson to do away with the federal inspections requirement for interstate meat sales. The new plan augments Peterson's measure in a way that Slate investigates, and the short answer is, because the government stands to lose too much money on lost sales of spirits, which are taxed far higher than beer: the U.S. "takes an excise tax of $2.14 for each 750-milliliter bottle of 80-proof spirits, compared with 21 cents for a bottle of wine (of 14 percent alcohol or less) and 5 cents for a can of beer."

The article provides a lot of other useful information for the DIY liquor-store-enthusiast. For instance, it was illegal under federal law to brew your own beer or wine until 1978, but now a household with two adults can brew up to 200 gallons each of wine and beer, unless you live in a state that says you can't. Also, moonshine drinkers tend to have lots of lead poisoning, which is why 'round these parts we call it "Chinese Import Tea."

"Why Is Moonshine Against the Law?" [Slate]