And you thought the Green Police ad was just funny – new Obama Dept of Energy regulations will force you to replace appliances and light bulbs to sell your home

April 12, 2010 12:41

In yet more green lunacy from the Obama administration, the DOE will be inspecting your home for green appliance compliance.

F. Swemson at American Thinker reported:

What’s actually going to happen is that anyone who tries to sell their home is going to need to replace that perfectly good water heater, and lots of other electrical devices in their homes in order to legally sell their home.

What was that you said?

If that last sentence surprises you, then you’re not aware of the fact that the Obama administration is planning to force us to register our homes, just like our cars, and get them inspected by an authorized agent of the DOE in order to get an “Inspection Label” for the home. So I suggest that you all read the Cap & Trade bill which was passed by the House last June, and which President Barack Obama is probably going to try to ram through the Senate shortly. That abomination of a bill requires us to bring our homes into compliance with each of the new standards for all regulated appliances, in order to legally sell them.

And if that’s not enough, it’s not just about water heaters, or home heaters either:

“Since President Barack Obama came to office, the DOE has issued or codified new efficiency standards for more than twenty different products, which will save consumers between $250 and $300 billion on their energy bills through 2030:

March 2009 – 14 consumer and commercial products with standards prescribed in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), including dishwashers, general service incandescent lamps and residential clothes washers

April 2009 – Microwaves, kitchen ranges and ovens

July 2009 – General service fluorescent lamps and incandescent reflector lamps

July 2009 – Commercial heating, air-conditioning and water-heating equipment

August 2009 – Beverage vending machines

December 2009 – Commercial clothes washers

February 2010 – Small electric motors

March 2010 – Residential water heaters, direct heating equipment and pool heaters”

Watch out for the second to the last item listed above, because almost every electrical device you use has a “small electric motor” inside.

When you add the value of the millions of perfectly good appliances that are going to wind up on the trash heap, to the other costs of this bill, you’ll realize how damaging this is going to be to our country.

Is this the green energy police state?  Big corporations that have green profits in mind are pushing hard for this legislation as well as the lusual lefts environmental groups.

The supposed “climate bill” soon to be intoduced by Senators Kerry, Grahm and Lieberman, has some real hidden surprises also. Click here to read more about it.

Louis Case at American Thinker questions the constitutionality of DOE’s search and seizure provisions:

The feds are coming to inspect your home if you want to sell it, according to regulations buried in cap-and-trade legislation and standards decreed by the Secretary of Energy. But there are numerous legal difficulties inherent in DOE “inspections.” Here are a few:

First, the regulations purportedly require homeowners to submit to a warrantless search of their property. The result of this inspection (“looking in”) of their home would be to condemn real property (fixtures and things attached to the land are real estate in many states) and/or personal property.

There has been a controversy about whether so-called regulatory searches require a warrant. But whatever the state of the law is now, one should consider the truth of the words of the Supreme Court in Camara v. Municipal Court, a case about a warrantless regulatory search:

We may agree that a routine inspection of the physical condition of private property is a less hostile intrusion than the typical policeman’s search for the fruits and instrumentalities of crime. … But we cannot agree that the Fourth Amendment interests at stake in these inspection cases are merely “peripheral.” It is surely anomalous to say that the individual and his private property are fully protected by the Fourth Amendment only when the individual is suspected of criminal behavior.

The Supreme Court goes on to suggest that there are indeed criminal consequences in many cases involving regulatory searches. But consider the logical consequences of such an argument. If a warrantless regulatory search results in eventual criminal prosecution, then it is prohibited. If that were true, then it would mean that warrantless searches not resulting in dire consequences are permissible. Following such logic, the government’s ability to make warrantless searches is commensurate with the unserious consequences resulting from the warrantless search. Thus, the most law-abiding citizens would have the least protection from warrantless searches.

Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere:

Interested In Further Reading? Click Here