Sorting by

×

Democrats Forcing Americans To Give Up What?

Advertisements

Democrats have decided to take it away from Americans one way or another.

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board recently took aim at the city of Berkeley’s latest maneuver to impose higher costs on gas stoves in both commercial and residential buildings. Their critique underscores a broader concern about the potential overreach of local and federal policies aimed at curbing the use of natural gas.

In a sharply worded editorial, the Wall Street Journal highlighted Berkeley’s new policy, which seeks to drive up the cost of gas stoves through hefty taxes. “Despite the assurances from Democrats that they’re not targeting gas stoves, the actions in Berkeley reveal a different story,” the editorial stated. This development comes in the wake of the Biden-Harris administration’s controversial energy efficiency regulations that were initially set to restrict gas-powered appliances as part of its climate agenda but were later softened after backlash from consumers and businesses.

The Berkeley initiative aims to discourage the use of natural gas by imposing a substantial excise tax on commercial and multifamily residential buildings. According to the Wall Street Journal, the tax begins at $2.96 per therm of gas consumed, which is approximately double the national average residential rate. For a typical household, this could translate to an extra $180 per month, placing a significant financial burden on residents.

Advertisements

The editorial board argued that the underlying goal of this policy is to pressure building owners into replacing gas appliances with electric ones, despite the considerable costs and practical challenges involved. In a city where a mere majority of voters can approve such measures— and where only a small fraction are Republicans—the likelihood of passing this tax appears high.

The Journal warned that the aggressive tactics employed in Berkeley could serve as a troubling precedent, potentially influencing similar policies at the federal level. “While Berkeley residents may bear the brunt of this gas tax, such radical measures have a tendency to ripple out and impact broader legislative trends across the nation,” the editorial cautioned.

This critique serves as a reminder of the broader implications of local policies and their potential to influence national debates on energy and environmental regulations.