Now that the 118^th Congress has officially begun work, two new select committees have been established, the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist Party and the House Judiciary Committee Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Both of these committees are important steps in ensuring American taxpayers and consumers are protected. The Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) welcomes these new committees. It’s important that the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government focuses on how Americans have been unfairly targeted online. It was recently discovered that federal agencies like the FBI and Department of Homeland Security have pressured tech companies to censor certain groups of individuals online, and frankly, such is an unjust violation of the First Amendment. TPA is hopeful that the select committee on China will highlight the importance of cybersecurity and data privacy. Unfortunately, there are certain members of Congress who have proposed pieces of legislation that would put Americans' devices at risk to cybersecurity threats from nefarious foreign state actors. We hope that this select committee will highlight the need to empower American technology companies to retain consumer-protective practices, rather than use federal power to strip companies of the ability to ensure online safety and cybersecurity.
 
Beware of Misinformation About Vaping

For several years, respected voices in the public health community have warned of a breakdown in trust in their profession if the dishonest, damaging, and often vicious campaign against safer alternatives to smoking by some of their colleagues continues to misinform the public. It is no surprise, therefore, that an editorial was recently published in the journal Addiction (authored by a group of public health experts from five major U.S. universities, as well as the Iowa Attorney General) criticizing the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and U.S. Surgeon General (SG) for tolerating misinformation about vaping. The authors highlight an advisory from the SG earlier this year, which declared that “[h]ealth misinformation is a serious threat to public health” and that countering it “is a moral and civic imperative.” The authors then note that the same SG’s office is guilty of promoting false claims that vaping is a gateway to youth smoking and that the CDC continues to falsely attribute a 2019 outbreak of lung injuries to nicotine vaping products.
 
This is not the first time that the CDC has been requested to cease spreading false information about vaping. In 2021, a group of 75 multidisciplinary experts wrote to the agency to ask that they clarify that nicotine vaping was not to blame for the 2019 outbreak, but the taxpayer-funded agency declined to do so. To this day, the CDC continues to sit by and allow widespread misinformation to prevail in the media and amongst conflicted academics. The latest criticism of the CDC insists that “[p]ublic health officials, in particular the SG and the CDC, must do a better job” of explaining that the cause of the 2019 illnesses was not due to nicotine vaping, and that “public health recommendations should be based on solid causal data and communicated clearly and appropriately to the lay public.” The authors lament that the CDC is complicit in producing misinformation that leads to “aggressive e-cigarette regulation that many studies have shown leads to increases  in combustible tobacco product use” and warn that correcting this misinformation must be “a public health priority.”
 
This is not a trivial concern. In the United States, 480,000 people die annually from combustible cigarette smoking. A majority of those may not have prematurely passed if they had opted for safer nicotine delivery devices, the very same products that are subject to equivocal messaging on relative risk by the CDC. The extent of the absurdity to which such misinformation can lead came into sharp focus just this month with an astonishing case in Australia. Faced with a bombardment of false information from an Australian government advised by committed anti-vaping propagandists, a General Practitioner who found his 15-year-old son to be vaping apparently “has resorted to giving his son two cigarettes a day to replace the vape.” Considering that the risks of vaping are estimated to be less than 5 percent of those of combustible tobacco use, this is a damning indictment of those who are using their position to sow doubt and confusion about safer alternatives to smoking. The new commentary from prominent and respected tobacco and nicotine policy experts for the CDC to stop misleading the public is not the first. The public trusts the CDC to provide sound, science-based information, yet it is repeatedly exposed as a dishonest broker.

If the Surgeon General truly believes it is “an imperative” to campaign against health misinformation, he should take heed of the views expressed by experts in this editorial and re-order messaging from his own offices and those of the CDC. Anything less is a shameful and avoidable threat to public health.  
 
 
Gas(lighting) the American Consumer

One of the Trump administration’s final public policy campaigns was an effort to – as he put it – “make dishwashers great again.” It was a slogan as over-the-top and eccentric as the former President. However, it did refer to a legitimate public policy concern. For years, the Department of Energy (DOE) had restrictions in place limiting the water usage of home appliances – not least among them were dishwashers. And, thus, one of Donald Trump’s last acts as President was to have DOE create rules to allow a new, legal class of more efficient dishwashers. The logic was very simple. From 1983 to 2018, the average wash cycle time in the U.S. more than doubled from 69 minutes to 140 minutes. While, the appliances used less water, they ran for twice the time and did not perform as well. Naturally, 98 percent of the 2,244 people who submitted comments to the Trump DOE’s regulatory docket supported the proposal for the legalization of these new dishwashers. It was a commonsense proposal that would save American consumers time – and ultimately money. Sadly, the Biden administration quickly did away with this rule change, reverting back to the old DOE standards. This once again relegated Americans to choosing between hand-washing their dishes one at a time – which would likely use as much, if not more, water – or running wash cycles that would take twice as long and even then might not get the job done.
 
Now, it seems the Biden administration’s war on convenience in the home is far from over. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is weighing a rule that would ban gas stoves nationwide. This comes after prompting by Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), who urged the agency to do something about gas stoves, claiming they are a “cumulative burden” on minority and low-income households. This is a deceptive way to spin gas stoves. On average, gas stoves are 10 to 30 percent less expensive than their electric counterparts. So, yes, low-income communities do utilize gas stoves more frequently than the more financially advantaged classes. However, this also means that gas stoves are a more affordable alternative for low-income communities and – without them – they will be pressed even harder economically. A ban on gas stoves would act as a backdoor tax on those who would have to switch to more expensive models.  This gas stove ban is the latest action being done in the name of protecting the vulnerable, while actually going after their way of life in a very tangible way.
 
The data behind this newfound interest in gas stoves by the federal government stands on shaky ground. In December, the International Journal of Environmental Research (IJER) and Public Health published a meta-analysis, examining the link between childhood asthma and gas stoves in the home. The study analyzed 27 other manuscripts on the subject and combined the results. This is despite the fact that a similar meta-analysis was performed in 2013, which used 41 studies, indicating the IJER analysis may have selectively chosen its data. Simply, there are a number of reasons American consumers would select a gas stove over an electric one. Gas stovetops give instant heat and have the ability to make immediate temperature changes while cooking. The stovetops are also more sturdy and compatible with a variety of cookware. This makes gas stoves more practical for restaurants as well. A ban could severely damage the business models of many independently owned restaurants, driving up costs which would either increase meal prices or – at worst – put them out of business. Whatever the reason, consumers and restaurants should be free to make the choices best for them, knowing and weighing the potential risks on their own. The ban the Biden administration is considering would vastly limit that choice and would force many into more expensive options they can scarcely afford.

BLOGS:
   
Monday: Taxpayer Watchdog Group Responds to House Rules Package
 
Tuesday: Americans Deserve a Safe, Secure Postal System
   
Wednesday: Broadband Costs are Affordable
 
Thursday: Quickly Approaching Broadband Map Challenge Deadline Raises Concerns
  
Friday: Don’t FERC With U.S. Energy Needs
 
 
MEDIA:
 
January 8, 2023: The World (Coquille, Oreg.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Broadband Costs are Affordable.”
 
January 9, 2023: The Georgia Virtue ran TPA’s op-ed, “Postal Service can learn from neighbor to the north.”
 
January 9, 2023:  WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) interviewed me about the Mayor Scott’s plan to fight crime. 
 
January 9, 2023: I joined ‘The Denise Simon Experience’ on WDDQ, Talk 92.1 (Valdosta, Ga.) to discuss government accountability.
 
January 9, 2023: Inside Sources ran TPA’s op-ed, “Americans Deserve a Safe, Secure Postal System.”
 
January 9, 2023: The Del Norte Triplicate (Crescent City, Calif.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Broadband Costs are Affordable.”
 
January 9, 2023: Financial Advisor mentioned TPA in their article, “Can The GOP Actually Repeal $72 Billion In New IRS Funding?”
 
January 9, 2023: The Daily Courier (Connellsville, Penn.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Americans Deserve a Safe, Secure Postal System.”
 
January 9, 2023: WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) quoted TPA in their story, “DPW Director Jason Mitchell's resignation draws mixed reactions from city leaders.”
 
January 10, 2023: The Daily Mail quoted me in their story, “House Republicans will now vote on ABOLISHING the IRS and replacing a national income tax with a consumption tax - after voting to strip agency of Biden-backed $72billion in funds for 87,000 new staff.”
 
January 10, 2023:  I appeared on 55KRC Radio (Cincinnati, Ohio) to talk about IRS audits and the Postal Service. 
 
January 10, 2023: CAPX ran TPA’s op-ed, “A pandemic of risk aversion is killing progress.”
 
January 10, 2023:  RealClear Policy ran TPA’s op-ed, “The CDC's Peddling of Misinformation About Vaping is a Threat to Public Health.”
 
January 10, 2023: NTD News interviewed me about Congress voting to rescind money for the IRS.
 
January 11, 2023:  The Washington Times ran TPA’s op-ed, “U.S. Postal Service’s brand expansion will lead to beaucoup bucks.”
 
January 11, 2023: The Tribune Democrat (Johnstown, Penn.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Americans deserve a safe, secure postal system.”
 
January 12, 2023:  WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) interviewed me about Congress voting to rescind money for the IRS.
 
January 12, 2023: I appeared on WBOB 600 AM (Jacksonville, Fla.) to talk about the economic outlook for 2023.
 
January 12, 2023:  Fox News ran TPA’s op-ed, “Biden's war on your kitchen continues with proposed gas stove ban.”
 
January 12, 2023: The Center Square ran TPA’s op-ed, “FDA ignores independent review of vaping.”
 
January 12, 2023: 1828 ran TPA’s op-ed, “Labour’s take back control message forgets over 10 million voters who enjoy nicotine.”
 
January 12, 2023: The Lowell Sun (Lowell, Mass.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Americans deserve a safe, secure postal system.”
 

Have a great weekend!