Connect with us

Politics

House Dems join Republicans to pass crackdown of Biden rules on dishwashers, fridges

Published

on

House Dems join Republicans to pass crackdown of Biden rules on dishwashers, fridges

A handful of House Democrats joined Republicans on legislation aimed at blocking new Biden administration energy efficiency standards for refrigerators and dishwashers.

The Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act by Rep. Nick Langworthy, R-N.Y., and Refrigerator Freedom Act by Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, passed along party lines Tuesday evening.

Seven House Democrats voted for each bill. The dishwasher standards legislation passed 214-192 with no GOP dissent. The refrigerator bill passed 212-192, with one Republican voting against it.

Both bills are aimed at prohibiting the Secretary of Energy from enacting and enforcing “energy efficiency standards for residential refrigerators, freezers and dishwashers that are not technologically feasible and economically justified,” the House GOP has said.

CONSUMER GROUP EXPOSES COSTS OF BIDEN ADMIN’S WAR ON HOME APPLIANCES

Advertisement

House Republicans are moving to roll back Biden administration standards for dishwashers and fridges. (Getty Images)

It would also block rules that did not result in “significant conservation of energy.”

Langworthy accused the Biden DOE of a “relentless assault on efficient, affordable and reliable appliances for everyday Americans” during debate on the bill Tuesday.

The Department of Energy has said its new proposed rule on dishwashers would save Americans $652 million in utility payments and would cut the appliances’ water usage by more than a quarter. 

But House Republicans argued “DOE’s own analysis finds that efficiency mandates could increase the upfront cost by 28%, and it could take consumers 12 years to pay back the increased costs on a product that may only last 7-12 years.”

Advertisement

Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., claimed Republicans’ calculations were out of date and related to an earlier rule during debate on the bills, maintaining the payback time for dishwashers under the new standard was 3.9 years.

DEMOCRAT IN ANOTHER BLUE CITY JOINS PUSH TO BAN GAS STOVES

Rep. Nick Langworthy introduced the dishwasher policy bill. (Getty Images)

The DOE’s new rules for residential refrigerators and freezers, proposed earlier this year, would save consumers more than $36 billion over 30 years, according to the Department.

But House Republicans similarly pointed to a DOE projection that “finds that efficiency mandates could increase the upfront costs by 25%, and it could take consumers 10 years to pay back the increased costs for a product that may only last 14-15 years.”

Advertisement

It’s part of House Republicans’ wider legislative strategy to push back against the Department of Energy’s climate-friendly regulatory agenda under President Biden. 

BIDEN ADMIN UNVEILS STRING OF ECO REGULATIONS IN LATEST APPLIANCE CRACKDOWN TARGETING FRIDGES, FREEZERS

Debate on the dishwasher bill briefly got heated Monday afternoon when Rep. Katie Porter, D-Calif., and Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., got into a back-and-forth about their own familiarity with the appliance.

“This bill is ridiculous. It is Congress at its worst,” Porter said during the lively debate. “A bunch of people who haven’t unloaded a dishwasher ever telling the American people … what kind of dishwasher they should or should not be able to buy. On behalf of every American woman who’s going to load and unload tonight and again tomorrow morning, I yield back.”

Rep. Katie Porter spoke out aggressively against the dishwasher bill. (Andrew Harnik/Pool via Reuters)

Advertisement

Duncan responded, “To address the gentle lady … I do load and unload the dishwasher. And I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that many times I have opened the dishwasher, loaded properly with the right among of dishwasher liquid or pod put in, that all the dishes are clean, rinsed off before they’re put it, and then run it again.

  

“Americans know they have to run the dishwasher ofttimes more than once. How is that a cost savings?” Duncan added, arguing the new standards would make them even less efficient.

“I’m not going to stand here and be lectured by someone who seems very pious about dishwashers … or loading a refrigerator properly.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

Published

on

Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

new video loaded: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

transcript

transcript

Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.

“Good evening. This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions, or whether instead, monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.” “Well, thank you very much. We’re looking at the construction. Thank you.”

Advertisement
Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.

By Nailah Morgan

January 12, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action

Published

on

San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

San Antonio has shut down its out-of-state abortion travel fund after a new Texas law that prohibits the use of public funds to cover abortions and a lawsuit from the state challenging the city’s fund.

City Council members last year approved $100,000 for its Reproductive Justice Fund to support abortion-related travel, prompting Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to sue over allegations that the city was “transparently attempting to undermine and subvert Texas law and public policy.”

Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit on Friday after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side.

WYOMING SUPREME COURT RULES LAWS RESTRICTING ABORTION VIOLATE STATE CONSTITUTION

Advertisement

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side. (Hannah Beier/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“Texas respects the sanctity of unborn life, and I will always do everything in my power to prevent radicals from manipulating the system to murder innocent babies,” Paxton said in a statement. “It is illegal for cities to fund abortion tourism with taxpayer funds. San Antonio’s unlawful attempt to cover the travel and other expenses for out-of-state abortions has now officially been defeated.”

But San Antonio’s city attorney argued that the city did nothing wrong and pushed back on Paxton’s claim that the state won the lawsuit.

“This litigation was both initiated and abandoned by the State of Texas,” the San Antonio city attorney’s office said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “In other words, the City did not drop any claims; the State of Texas, through the Texas Office of the Attorney General, dropped its claims.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he will continue opposing the use of public funds for abortion-related travel. (Justin Lane/Reuters)

Advertisement

Paxton’s lawsuit argued that the travel fund violates the gift clause of the Texas Constitution. The state’s 15th Court of Appeals sided with Paxton and granted a temporary injunction in June to block the city from disbursing the fund while the case moved forward.

Gov. Greg Abbott in August signed into law Senate Bill 33, which bans the use of public money to fund “logistical support” for abortion. The law also allows Texas residents to file a civil suit if they believe a city violated the law.

“The City believed the law, prior to the passage of SB 33, allowed the uses of the fund for out-of-state abortion travel that were discussed publicly,” the city attorney’s office said in its statement. “After SB 33 became law and no longer allowed those uses, the City did not proceed with the procurement of those specific uses—consistent with its intent all along that it would follow the law.”

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a law in August that blocks cities from using public money to help cover travel or other costs related to abortion. (Antranik Tavitian/Reuters)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The broader Reproductive Justice Fund remains, but it is restricted to non-abortion services such as home pregnancy tests, emergency contraception and STI testing.

The city of Austin also shut down its abortion travel fund after the law was signed. Austin had allocated $400,000 to its Reproductive Healthcare Logistics Fund in 2024 to help women traveling to other states for an abortion with funding for travel, food and lodging.

Continue Reading

Politics

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.

Published

on

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Sunday that he would not run for California governor, a decision grounded in his belief that his legal efforts combating the Trump administration as the state’s top prosecutor are paramount at this moment in history.

“Watching this dystopian horror come to life has reaffirmed something I feel in every fiber of my being: in this moment, my place is here — shielding Californians from the most brazen attacks on our rights and our families,” Bonta said in a statement. “My vision for the California Department of Justice is that we remain the nation’s largest and most powerful check on power.”

Bonta said that President Trump’s blocking of welfare funds to California and the fatal shooting of a Minnesota mother of three last week by a federal immigration agent cemented his decision to seek reelection to his current post, according to Politico, which first reported that Bonta would not run for governor.

Bonta, 53, a former state lawmaker and a close political ally to Gov. Gavin Newsom, has served as the state’s top law enforcement official since Newsom appointed him to the position in 2021. In the last year, his office has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times — a track record that would probably have served him well had he decided to run in a state where Trump has lost three times and has sky-high disapproval ratings.

Advertisement

Bonta in 2024 said that he was considering running. Then in February he announced he had ruled it out and was focused instead on doing the job of attorney general, which he considers especially important under the Trump administration. Then, both former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) announced they would not run for governor, and Bonta began reconsidering, he said.

“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta told The Times in November. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”

The race for California governor remains wide open. Newsom is serving the final year of his second term and is barred from running again because of term limits. Newsom has said he is considering a run for president in 2028.

Former Rep. Katie Porter — an early leader in polls — late last year faltered after videos emerged of her screaming at an aide and berating a reporter. The videos contributed to her dropping behind Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, in a November poll released by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.

Porter rebounded a bit toward the end of the year, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed, however none of the candidates has secured a majority of support and many voters remain undecided.

Advertisement

California hasn’t elected a Republican governor since 2006, Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the state, and many are seething with anger over Trump and looking for Democratic candidates willing to fight back against the current administration.

Bonta has faced questions in recent months about spending about $468,000 in campaign funds on legal advice last year as he spoke to federal investigators about alleged corruption involving former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, who was charged in an alleged bribery scheme involving local businessmen David Trung Duong and Andy Hung Duong. All three have pleaded not guilty.

According to his political consultant Dan Newman, Bonta — who had received campaign donations from the Duong family — was approached by investigators because he was initially viewed as a “possible victim” in the alleged scheme, though that was later ruled out. Bonta has since returned $155,000 in campaign contributions from the Duong family, according to news reports.

Bonta is the son of civil rights activists Warren Bonta, a white native Californian, and Cynthia Bonta, a native of the Philippines who immigrated to the U.S. on a scholarship in 1965. Bonta, a U.S. citizen, was born in Quezon City, Philippines, in 1972, when his parents were working there as missionaries, and immigrated with his family to California as an infant.

In 2012, Bonta was elected to represent Oakland, Alameda and San Leandro as the first Filipino American to serve in California’s Legislature. In Sacramento, he pursued a string of criminal justice reforms and developed a record as one of the body’s most liberal members.

Advertisement

Bonta is married to Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who succeeded him in the state Assembly, and the couple have three children.

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending