Gas Stove Protection and Freedom Act
Summary
This bill prohibits the Consumer Product Safety Commission from using federal funds to (1) regulate gas stoves as a banned hazardous product; or (2) issue or enforce a product safety standard that prohibits the use or sale of gas stoves, substantially increases the price of gas stoves, or makes a type of product unavailable based on the kind of fuel it consumes.
A similar bill, H.R.1640, addresses the Department of Energy’s (DOE) role in limiting the use of gas stoves.
The Department of the Energy (DOE) may not prescribe or amend energy conservation standards for kitchen ranges or ovens if they would result in the unavailability of a product on account of the type of fuel the range or oven uses.
Preventative Regulation
Before discussing these laws, it is important to understand the roles of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and the Department of Energy (DOE) within the government. Both agencies aim to regulate potential harm from consumer products. The CPSC, as outlined on their website, carries out tasks such as:
- Issuing and enforcing mandatory standards or banning consumer products if no feasible standard would adequately protect the public;
- Obtaining the recall of products and arranging for a repair, replacement or refund for recalled products;
These mandates do not require actual harm to occur before taking action against companies or ensuring consumer protection. In the context of this discussion, we can refer to Exodus 21:28-29, which addresses the responsibility of owning a dangerous animal:
When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox shall not be liable. But if the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not kept it in, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.
While this passage addresses actual harm caused by a known dangerous product, it does not directly address potential harm. Moreover, the severity of the punishment in this context serves as a reminder to exercise caution when providing a product (the ox) that has a history of causing death. In the case of the first death caused by the ox, the owner/producer is unaware of the potential threat and is not held liable, but the product is destroyed. However, if they continue providing the product despite knowing its harmful nature, and it subsequently causes death, they are held accountable, in line with Exodus 21:23-25:
But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Therefore, it can be concluded that those who knowingly cause harm or death with their products are already liable for the damage inflicted. The most severe preventive measure, putting to death those who knowingly cause harm, is already in place.
Gas Stoves
Considering the above, the limitations imposed by H.R. 1615 on the CPSC and H.R. 1640 on the DOE can be seen as placing restrictions on organizations that already deviate from biblical principles. Introducing laws upon laws and complex legal systems further complicates an already convoluted system. Instead, a serious consideration of existing biblical laws would lead to the elimination of these layers of legislation. J. Gresham Machen emphasized the importance of a serious view of God’s law:
“A new and more powerful proclamation of the law is perhaps the most pressing need of the hour… A low view of law always brings legalism into religion; a high view of law makes man a seeker after grace. Pray that the high view may prevail.”
Conclusion
While implementing laws to limit already non-biblical government institutions may seem reasonable, a better approach would be to eliminate them altogether and hold those who cause harm accountable for their actions.