JOSEPH K. KNOLLENBERG 7$ COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

'N 11T DISTRICT, MICHIGAN .. SUBCOMMITTEES:

y L .

1 *. * -* '/i/-,f4Ff " , .'ryo<T. r- ENERGY AND WATER

2 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING /S 7 - vY 0O_ i A FOREIGNOPERATIONS

WASHINGTON. DC 20515 6 on ofVA-HUD f 4 t 'L. r 

202-225-5802 Congr of te imteb btate COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET DISTRICT OFFICES:

30833 NORTHWESTERN HIGHWAY ouse of Raepreaentattibe COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF

SUITE 100 OFFICIAL CONDUCT

FARMINGTON HILLS, Mi 48334 TIaligton, -lC 20515-2211 248-851-1366 'tn °~ o, 255 21Paul F. Welday

15439 MIDDLEBELT November 1, 2000 CHIEF OF STAFF

LIVONIA, MI 48154

734-425-7557

Dear Colleague:

Recently, the Department of Energy (DOE) proposed a mandate that, if left unchallenged, would

'affect nearly every American in an extremely negative way. Once again the big hand of Government has

opened the door to our homes and has invited itself in.

In the dark of night, the DOE along with other special interest groups colluded in an attempt to

change the style in which we do laundry and heat and cool our homes. They have proposed to take away

our choice as to which appliances we want and have supplanted elitist, big-government intervention for the

people's judgment about cost, benefit, and risk. Nobody knows the people's situation better than the

people, ourselves.

As an "October Surprise" and "Midnight Regulation," the Department of Energy waited five months

until just before Congress ends to publish the proposed mandate that DOE previously stated on May 23,

2000, would be done in June of 2000. Their surprise was a mandate to double the price of washing

machines and maim the free market by reducing the choice consumers have on which washer to use.

Also, the new machines will require up to 50% longer run time per wash. Moreover, these

machines will require a special brand of soap manufactured specially for these washers. In addition, fears

exist that these appliances will require more expensive servicing. Lastly and most importantly in my eyes,

THE CONSUMERS HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AWARE OF THIS MANDATE.

Who will feel the greatest repercussions from this mandate? The poor, the elderly and those on

fixed incomes that cannot afford such a drastic change in price for the purpose of cleaning our clothes.

Please note the consumers' point of view stated in this week's news piece on the reverse.

I urge you, my fellow colleagues, to set aside partisanship and stand with me for the poor, the

elderly and those on fixed incomes. Let us allow the people's will to be heard on the mandate that the DOE

has unjustly placed before the American people. We, as Congress, must ensure that a strong statement is

issued demanding that the comment period regarding the DOE mandates be extended.

Call my staff (Aloysius Hogan, Joe Green, or Megan Barnhart) at 5-5802 to support extending

public comment on the mandate and to cosponsor my bill, H.R. 5613, to allow the public's voice sufficient

time to be heard.

Thank you,

Joe Knollenberg

Member of Congress PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73FFA
The National Conservative Weekly.

NOVEMBER 3,2000

After December 5, Only Front-Loading Units Legal in U.S.

Clinton-Gore Administration Outlaws Your Washing Machine

BY PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY

Few changes in our society have done as much to liber- just as households are busy getting ready for Christmas. flourishing black market in old-style toilets because the

ate women from the drudgery of "women's work" as the DOE Secretary Bill Richardson had the nerve to issue a new toilets simply can't carry out the mission assigned to

washing machine. American ingenuity and the private press release claiming the new regulation will bring "big sav- toilets. The 1.6-gallon toilets don't help the environment,

enterprise system combined to provide us with a wide vari ings for consumers and the environment." However, the reg- either, because it usually take two flushes to do the job that

ety of models of this convenient labor-saving appliance, the ulations will actually add $240 to the price of a clothes the old-style toilets can accomplish with one flush.

envy of women all over the world. washer, $274 to the price of a residential central air condi- Don't look to big business to defend us from the federSome 81 million households are equipped with washing tioner, and $486 to the price of a residential heat pump. al environmentalists who are now licking their chops at the

machines and 10 million are bought every year. But Big In addition, a load of laundry will take about 10 minutes prospect of dictating all our energy use if Al Gore is electBrother Busybodies in the Clinton-Gore Administration longer to wash than in ordinary washers and will require a ed President. The appliance manufacturers are glad to supwant to take off the market the models that Americans have special detergent. If the housewife uses her ordinary deter- port the new rule to force us to buy the more expensive

been buying, and then force us to change to a style the envi- gent, it over-suds; if she cuts back on the amount, her front-loading washing machines that otherwise don't sell.

ronmental extremists claim will reduce global warming. clothes won't get clean. One manufacturer said, "[S]elling it in the marketplace

This is the same administration that sanctimoniously The reason for these mandates is that the Gore-style is easy if there's a government standard in place." A press

espouses "a woman's right to choose." But it wants to deny environmentalists want to reduce the amount of water and release from Whirlpool "commends" DOE for requiring

us the right to choose the kind of washing machine that electricity Americans use in order to comply with United Americans to buy and use the more expensive energy-effisales data prove we prefer. Nations treaties about energy, even if the United States has- ciency appliances "because consumers have historically

In a back-room deal without consumers or taxpayers pres- n't ratified them. And they don't care how much this costs shown a disinclination to pay more for products that are

ent, the Clinton-Gore environmentalists conspired with consumers or how much it reduces our standard of living. more environmentally friendly."

industry to mandate the manufacture of only front-loading, Where does the Department of Energy (DOE) get the At this late date, the only practical step citizens can take is

instead of top-loading, washing machines. The mandate authority to upset housewives all over America with these to demand that Congress, if still in session, append an amendrequires elimination of the agitator which is the element that Dracoiian rules? A 1987 law, the NationalAppliance Energy ment to any piece of must-go legislation to order DOE to

washes our clothes. Front-loading washers are available now, Conservation Act, authorized the DOE to impose efficiency extend the public comment time until those of us who actualbut they make up less than 12% of sales. So Big Brother's standards in order to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. ly use washing machines have time to register our objections.

attitude is, let's force people to buy front-loading washers. The Clinton-Gore environmentalists are trying to exploit this Call your members of Congress today. If they are out of slff

On October 5, the Department of Energy (DOE) pro- law to implement the Kyoto Protocol on Global Warming, a sion, they can still send letters of complaint to DOE. m

posed two new regulations, one for clothes washers and the treaty so extreme that the Senate has refused to ratify it. "

other for residential air conditioners and heat pumps. Not These regulations come from the same mindset of the

many homemakers make a practice of reading notices in the bureaucrats who in 1992 banned the sale of toilets that use -

Federal Register, and the 60-day comment period will expire more than 1.6 gallons of water per flush. Today, there is a

',k

EE-RM-STD-98-440 COMMENT 73FFA