Nov. 1, 2000
Few changes in our society have done as much to liberate women
from the drudgery of "women's work" as the washing machine. American
ingenuity and the private enterprise system combined to provide us with
a wide variety of models of this convenient labor-saving appliance, the
envy of women all over the world.
Some 81 million households are equipped with washing machines and
10 million are bought every year. But Big Brother Busybodies in the
Clinton-Gore Administration want to take off the market the models that
Americans have been buying, and then force us to change to a style the
environmental extremists claim will reduce global warming.
This is the same Administration that sanctimoniously espouses "a
woman's right to choose." But it wants to deny us the right to choose
the kind of washing machine that sales data prove we prefer.
In a back room deal without consumers or taxpayers present, the
Clinton-Gore environmentalists conspired with industry to mandate the
manufacture of only front-loading, instead of top-loading, washing
machines. The mandate requires elimination of the agitator which is
the element that washes our clothes.
Front-loading washers are available now but they make up less than
12 percent of sales. So Big Brother's attitude is, let's force people
to buy front-loading washers.
On October 5, the Department of Energy (DOE) proposed two new
regulations, one for clothes washers and the other for residential air
conditioners and heat pumps. Not many homemakers make a practice of
reading notices in the Federal Register, and the 60-day comment period
will expire just as households are busy getting ready for Christmas.
DOE Secretary Bill Richardson had the nerve to issue a press
release claiming the new regulation will bring "big savings for
consumers and the environment." However, the regulations will actually
add $240 to the price of a clothes washer, $274 to the price of a
residential central air conditioner, and $486 to the price of a
residential heat pump.
In addition, a load of laundry will take about 10 minutes longer
to wash than in ordinary washers and will require a special detergent.
If the housewife uses her ordinary detergent, it over-suds; if she cuts
back on the amount, her clothes won't get clean.
The reason for these mandates is that the Gore-style
environmentalists want to reduce the amount of water and electricity
Americans use in order to comply with United Nations treaties about
energy, even if the United States hasn't ratified them. And they don't
care how much this costs consumers or how much it reduces our standard
Where does the Department of Energy (DOE) get the authority to
upset housewives all over America with these draconian rules? A 1987
law, the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act
, authorized the DOE
to impose efficiency standards in order to reduce U.S. dependence on
foreign oil. The Clinton-Gore environmentalists are trying to exploit
this law to implement the Kyoto Protocol on Global Warming, a treaty so
extreme that the Senate has refused to ratify it.
These regulations come from the same mindset of the bureaucrats
who in 1992 banned the sale of toilets that use more than 1.6 gallons
of water per flush. Today there is a flourishing black market in
old-style toilets because the new toilets simply can't carry out the
mission assigned to toilets.
The 1.6-gallon toilets don't help the environment, either, because
it usually take two flushes to do the job that the old-style toilets
can accomplish with one flush.
Don't look to big business to defend us from the federal
environmentalists who are now licking their chops at the prospect of
dictating all our energy use if Al Gore is elected President. The
appliance manufacturers are glad to support the new rule to force us to
buy the more expensive front-loading washing machines that otherwise
One manufacturer said, "selling it in the marketplace is easy if
there's a [government] standard in place." A press release from
Whirlpool "commends" DOE for requiring Americans to buy and use the
more expensive energy-efficiency appliances "because consumers have
historically shown a disinclination to pay more for products that are
more environmentally friendly."
The manufacturers have also been induced to go along because the
White House is proposing a tax credit for appliance manufacturers who
cooperate with these regulations. This washing machine mandate is a
good example of the anti-free-market, high-tax regime that would be
imposed by the Gore environmentalists who truly believe that government
knows best, even about such things as how to wash our clothes.
At this late date in the congressional session, the only practical
step citizens can take is to demand that Congress append an amendment
to any piece of must-go legislation to order DOE to extend the public
comment time until those of us who actually use washing machines have
time to register our objections. Call your Members of Congress today.