THERE ARE LIMITS TO DOING MORE WITH LESS.

I've long maintained that downsizing is a false economy in business.  There comes a time when you cut staff or add tasks and the goods or services are no longer useful.

So it also is with washing machines.

Biden's Energy Department last month proposed new efficiency standards for washing machines that would require new appliances to use considerably less water, all in an effort to "confront the global climate crisis." Those mandates would force manufacturers to reduce cleaning performance to ensure their machines comply, leading industry giants such as Whirlpool said in public comments on the rule. They'll also make the appliances more expensive and laundry day a headache—each cycle will take longer, the detergent will cost more, and in the end, the clothes will be less clean, the manufacturers say.

It's not as if the designers of washing machines have some interest in selling more detergent and electricity.

For the Heritage Foundation's Travis Fisher, however, manufacturer concerns over the proposal are justified.

"When you're squeezing all you can out of the efficiency in terms of electricity use and water … you by definition either make the appliance worse or slower," said Fisher, who serves as a senior research fellow at the foundation's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment. "Why are we so focused on the energy output, as opposed to if it's helping me wash my clothes? That standard has kind of gone off the rails."

Beyond the performance standard debate, the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers argued that the Energy Department's washing machine regulations "would have a disproportionate, negative impact on low-income households" by eliminating cheaper appliances from the market.

That's how the fuel economy standards worked, years ago.  The remaining guzzlers, or cars that burned leaded gas, lost resale value and wound up being owned by poorer people.  As far as washing machines are concerned, I can reduce their water, energy, and detergent use to zero by ... not washing clothes.  But if my standard of efficiency is "being presentable in polite company," that sort of environmental performance is not efficient at all.

Didn't these Wise Experts learn anything from the so-called low-flow toilets, that had to be flushed twice, using more water than the toilets they replaced, to clear the bowl?