By way of introduction, I’m a long-time Consumer Reports subscriber, since 1987.

While doing research on
clothes washers recently, I learned something that surprised me about federal regulation of washers.  Specifically, the mandatory energy conservation standard for clothes washers, being the same for
top-loaders and front-loaders, is actually a very forgiving standard when applied to front-loaders.  Incentive for further energy and water conservation in front-loaders comes from a program of
manufacturer tax credits.  This fact is at odds with the prevalent public belief that washer manufacturers’ hands are
tied by federal regulations, and therefore deficiencies in recent models simply
have to be tolerated.  

I feel the public should be
educated about how clothes washers are regulated.  Consumers should be told that shortcomings
due to lowered wash temperatures, inadequate rinsing, and limited internal
heater use (especially important when an HE washer is far from the house water heater) are not inevitable.  Such
knowledge might lead to more consumer choice in clothes washers.

For example, buyers who want
a front-loader with hotter wash temperatures, better use of the internal water
heater, and higher rinse levels could, in theory, get a machine programmed
thus, by paying an extra amount equal to the tax credit that the manufacturer
would forego.  The extra amount could be
as little as $100, the difference between the stringent $250 performance tier
and the less stringent $150 tier.  Such a
machine targeted to allergic households might sell very well, and fill a real need. 

I would like to see Consumers
Union take the lead in disseminating the facts about clothes washer regulation,
and in advocating for more choices.