The law has drawn national attention because it could require stronger warnings for products than those set by the Federal Government.

Adopted a decade ago, this statute requires warnings where exposures to certain toxic substances present a serious health risk.

Most recently, the state has required warnings for pregnant women about mercury in certain fish.

Barry Epstein, a lawyer representing the children and parents, said that the law requires warnings when a product can cause defects.

He has also championed numerous environmental and health bills, including one to require warnings on alcoholic beverages that drinking can cause birth defects.

The bill would allow the states to require tougher warnings.

He ruled that requiring enlarged warnings on packaging is reasonable because it serves to better alert the public about adverse health effects of smoking.

The Government has required warnings on cigarette packages for more than 30 years, but consumption has declined only slightly.

Specifically recognizes a state's right to require warnings or labeling of food that has been treated with pesticides, such as California's Proposition 65.

Mr. Gejdenson's measure would require explicit warnings about choking danger.