House Republicans Demand Biden Not Ban Gas Stoves, Submit Legislation to Stop Agency From Doing So
“This kind of intrusion into the homes of Americans by the federal government as a way of forcing rush-to-green, liberal policies is the ‘nanny state’ at its worst.”
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and 43 House Republicans submitted H.R. 337 on Thursday to stop federal government “agencies from banning gas-burning stoves.”
Issa said: “The Biden Administration’s clear consideration to ban an appliance used by more than 40 million homes and 76 percent of restaurants is worse than Green New Deal-style regulation run amok. It is a preposterous overreach of federal power that would deny Americans a necessary product they use every day.”
The fight over gas stoves quiety began in December when 22 Democrats asked Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Commissioner Richard Truma Jr. “for stronger regulation of gas stoves due to the indoor air pollution and negative health impacts they cause.” From EcoWatch:
The effort was championed by Senator Corey Booker (N.J.) and Rep. Don Beyer (Va.). “As you know, the CPSC has broad authority under the Consumer Product Safety Act to regulate consumer products that pose an unreasonable risk of injury,” the lawmakers wrote. “We ask the CPSC to explicitly evaluate the disparate health outcomes that occur from the coupling of gas stoves with the material realities to which the most vulnerable Americans are subjected.”
The CPSC will be soliciting information in the coming months on the dangers posed by gas stoves to human health. Citing the pollution emitted by stoves, Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. said, “We need to be talking about regulating gas stoves,” and called phasing out new gas stoves “a real possibility.”
This week, the possible ban came to light when Bloomberg News reported that Trumka Jr. said “a ban on gas stoves is on the table amid rising concern about harmful indoor pollutants emitted by the appliances.”
Trumka Jr. retweeted the article, saying the agency “will consider all approaches to regulation.” In the article, he described the stoves are a “hidden hazard.”
“Products that can’t be made sade can be banned,” Trumka Jr. boasted.
Trumka Jr. claimed he never said anything about banning gas stoves even though the article and the tweets literally say a ban is on the table. When you say all regulations are on the table for something that includes a ban. We’re not stupid.
California banned gas stoves. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul wants the state to ban gas appliances.
House Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Board asked President Joe Biden not to ban gas stoves.
“This kind of intrusion into the homes of Americans by the federal government as a way of forcing rush-to-green, liberal policies is the ‘nanny state’ at its worst,” they wrote. “Banning natural gas stoves is not about public safety – it is another example of government control; like other policies we have seen from your administration, to tell Americans what kinds of cars they can drive, how they heat their homes, and how to live their lives.”
The Republicans pointed out that the stoves can be useful in emergencies. You can still light the stove to cook when the electricity goes out.
“We call upon your administration to cease all efforts at the CPSC, and any other federal agency, to ban natural gas stoves and other home appliances reliant on natural gas, and to affirm the importance of natural gas as an affordable and reliable energy and heat source for American homes, from our stoves to our furnaces,” they concluded. “This country has led the way in reducing emissions in the world, and it has done so in part because of natural gas. It is a key energy source for America’s energy, environmental, and national security, and preserving American families’ way of life.”
The White House already said Biden does not favor banning gas stoves.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The CPSC is one of dozens of government instruments that need closing down.
I’m SURE the next GOP administration will do this, right along with the closing of CPB, Amtrak, PBS, and all the rest president Reagan closed.
/oh, wait…
Yeah. “Vote harder” has worked so well in the past.
It needs to be cleansed from top to bottom (not necessarily talking Mayor Pete here), flushed out.
In the meantime, evangelize and indoctrinate everyone you can into Christian morality and American ideals. Maybe we can get the Republic back,
It needs to be cleansed, but you’re going to lose a LOT of people with that last statement.
I remember all too well the proto-Karens of the Christian right in the 80’s/90’s and the so-called ‘moral majority’ and how insufferable they were.
I am two of what the Moral Majority hated. I am homosexual, and I am not all all religious, let alone the proper sort of Christian.
But, they are too rock-ribbed set in their thoughts or just plain too stupid to recognize that we, too, can support the nuclear family, close-knit communities, etc.
Banning gas stoves would kill RVing dead.
I think the intent was to ban “natural gas” stoves, not propane stoves.
But if they applied the same standard to RVs as to homes… yeah there goes all RVing.
And everyone goes to heating their homes with indigenous animal patties.
Or with politicians. Not sure what the air quality issues might be with that last one.
The problem is that killing the gas stove-making industry in general would pretty much orphan propane stoves.
I’m not sure about that. Most stoves as do wall mount heaters come with a way to switch them from natural to propane. It’s not very difficult. A ban on natural gas would not hinder making the stoves but would shrink the market.
I assumed what was being talked about was all gas stoves, natural or propane.
I assume that the objections to natural gas would also apply to propane: Sooner or later it, too, could be banned.
I take it as given that these people want to kill RVing: They despise the hoi polloi, and want to deny them just about all technologies beyond those needed for bare survival. Luxuries are for the nobility, you see,.
Elections have consequences.
Thank you, Democrat voters.
Meanwhile, I cast a worrisome eye toward my gas furnace and gas log fireplace …
The state of California can’t keep the lights on, yet they are banning gas appliances and combustion vehicles….
Was it not just a few years ago that filament light bulbs were banned in favor of fluorescent bulbs which were dangerous because of their mercury content? We need to do away with federal agencies that regulate the daily lives of citizens. If something is truly dangerous the states will eventually ban it. Doing just about anything on the national level rarely makes sense.
When that ban was announced, I stocked up on dozen of incandescent light bulbs, wrapped them in bubble wrap, and stored them in a sturdy plastic bin. I still have about 20 left!
That is such a stupid bit of legislation. “Hey, don’t do that!”
How about actually removing the power of the CPSC in toto? How about refining any authorizing legislation so they can’t ban shit without direct legislation from the House and Senate?
“Don’t ban gas stoves” accomplishes nothing in terms of actually protecting the people from this bureaucratic crapola.
EXACTLY.
And not to mention this crap is so full of holes that they can do the same thing anyway.
GOP – ‘You can’t ban gas stoves’.
CPSC – ‘OK, so now we’ll just ban ALL gas’
GOP – ‘Surprised Pikachu’
They should not be able to ban ANY product already on the market, particularly products that have been in existence for a VERY long time.
While I am likely the only conservative that doesn’t make the claim of having to flush twice or more with low-flow toilets, I DO want to see a rollback on these damnable low-gallonage bath and kitchen faucets, and low flow shower heads.
My avatar hear is me, big bushy beard and all. Rinsing shampoo out of it is a blasted nuisance with a low flow shower head. Mine, fortunately, took kindly to the application of a drill bit on one particular part, so, I get a good flow. I should not have had to do this.
american standard champion toilet with the 4 inch flush valve can be your best friend……
That toilet is great at flushing. But the flush doesn’t clean the rear wall of the toilet.
^^^ this
The classic workaround for this problem is to install a “multi-head” shower fixture, as the regulations specify only the flow “per head.”
If you buy the right shower head (research it first), you can find one where you can remove the flow restrictor.
And I missed that part of your post before…glad you are savvy.
My first low flow shower head did not have enough flow to keep the on demand water heater working. Had to look for a different one and found it on Amazon.
Before you buy another one, see if you can drill out – enlarge – the flow restrictor. Save a couple of bucks.
Rinsing shampoo out of it is a blasted nuisance with a low flow shower head. Mine, fortunately, took kindly to the application of a drill bit on one particular part, so, I get a good flow.
For a second I thought “mine” referred to your beard!
The mental picture amused me. 🙂
If I stuck a drill in my beard, part of it would wrap around the bit and that would be very painful.
To the gentle grizzly
Here in Florida we are blessed with abundant water.
There’s actually no reason that we should be using low flow faucets and showers.
We also get our electricity from natural gas and nuclear power.
Electricity routinely goes out after a hurricane, and people with gas stoves have an advantage over those with electric.
Funny that they seem in such a rush to ban natural gas stops when there is very little evidence they cause any harm at all.
They balance it with their reluctance to ban mRNA vaccines, for which there is abundant evidence they are killing people.
“Since vaccination, “1598 athletes suffered cardiac arrest, 1101 of which with deadly outcome. Over a prior 38-years (1966-2004), 1101 athletes < age of 35 died (~29/yr).” (tweet)
“Electricity routinely goes out after a hurricane, and people with gas stoves have an advantage over those with electric.”
They don’t want some people to have an advantage over others. Equity of outcome means that everyone should be in the same boat.
Harrison Bergeron was not available for comment.
“The fight over gas stoves quietly began in December when 22 Democrats asked Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Commissioner Richard Truma Jr. “for stronger regulation of gas stoves due to the indoor air pollution and negative health impacts they cause.”’
No, there was no fight until they got caught. It started quiet because they were trying to sneak a ban on 40,000,000 people in on the D-L by “quietly” reinterpreting rules in place. Borrowed the ATF’s favorite tactic, it seems.
Are we governing by inter-branch letters, these days? They’re congresscritters; write a law, get some co-sponsors, and get it pased on the calendar in regular order. We do that now (again), for a little while at least.
Or have a hearing to make the agency do what they’ve been told, if they’ve already been told. That dais n jumbo-tron are not being used just now.
“As you know, the CPSC has broad authority under the Consumer Product Safety Act to regulate consumer products that pose an unreasonable risk of injury”
Well, maybe: the Supremes recently declared that laws have to explicitly authorize the big stuff — radical concept, I know. Of course, the CPSC bit at the chance for a turf-grab.
Maybe we’re learning to authorize authoritah narrowly, as they’ll grab anything they can to create patrons and clients, advocates and operatives.
“We ask the CPSC to explicitly evaluate the disparate health outcomes that occur from the coupling of gas stoves with the material realities to which the most vulnerable Americans are subjected.”
“The risk, such as it is, is perfectly reasonable, down in the noise under a ton of other stuff, and easily mitigated even so.” Evaluation done.
Yet, somehow they landed immediately on “Ban all the things!” It’s like banning things is the point.
They only want ‘commonsense stove reform’ after all. Only a horrid person would stand against that, right? Since gas stoves generate such high temperatures, we need to regulate them for the children’s safety. Obviously, Big Gas will oppose such minor changes because they hate you all and want you to die in a fire. Etc…
The dream of an honest, nonpartisan federal bureaucracy is dead. Dead.
Whenever an agency misbehaves like this, it should be taken as evidence that its staff needs to be reduced by half.
Good to see the reaction against this nonsense, and also good to see legislation introduced to stop it. But I don’t see anyone questioning why (or if) the CPSC actually has the authority to do this in the first place. This is the underlying problem of our runaway and unaccountable administrative state.
They sure are tough when they’re the minor party knowing that posturing will placate the plebes for a while.
Where were they when usable toilets, working clothes washing machines, and effective dishwashers were banned?
My washer is HE and runs just fine thank you very much. I avoided the HE top loaders after ONE experience. It went back to the store, and I have had front loaders ever since. I do as any appliance repairman or “home handy hints” website tells you: on a front loader, two to to and one half tablespoons of HE detergent gets the job done well.
As I said in another comment: I am one of those conservatives that just hasn’t had all the problems so many profess to have. My ONE agreement was with compact fluorescent lamps. Most were of incredibly shoddy quality, and this includes the name brands.
I used to get a laugh out of the brand-name talk show hosts like Hannity and especially Limbaugh, going on and on about “they took our 100W light bulbs away!!!” Yes, and replaced them with – I think – a 92 watt lamp with a different filament design. It yielded VERY nearly the same lumen value as the 100s. The 67W replacement for the 75: same thing. I was at that time doing energy conservation work where my field is… lighting.
PS: same with my dishwasher. A low-end Bosch, with Finish brand detergent. Now, if you live in Oregon, the detergent is what is bad, not the machines.
The Biden administration, intellectually and morally bankrupt as it is, is simply the current face of the Beltway and Swamp. Contemporarily, its only function is reproduction, is self perpetuation. It serves no other purpose. It produces nothing, it creates nothing.
Personally, I believe the next target for elimination should be the fork. And the spoon. We don’t need them. Just think of all the material and affiliated manufacturing costs to be eliminated if two thirds of all utensils were eliminated. First, they’re dangerous and besides, forks leak. The mind boggles. The runcible spoon’s time has come.. Ban individual forks and spoons, turn them all in. It’s time.
Exceptions must be made, of course. Pitch fork, potato fork, and tuning fork standards will have to be established along with licensing boards and enforcement agencies for oversight. And certainly, dinner forks, desert forks, and pickle forks will be continue to be permitted for select persons in select places under select circumstances. The licensing boards will issue the appropriate authorizations. Careful study of the impact on handedness – right and left – must also be performed prior to the issuance of final regulations.
But wait, eureka. the chop stick! They’ll need to have a blunt end, can only be so long, of limited diameter, made of specified materials, but we can create and finance a study group for that . . .
The leftists’ nirvana is bearing fruit: another unelected federal agency with broad authority to control, … er, … I mean, “regulate” consumers and the products they use.
Vote DEM 2024!!