Everyone has a story like ours: the ancient freezer out in the garage that continues to chug along reliably as opposed to the new inside fridge that required a half-dozen warranty service calls and barely lasted beyond its five-year extended warranty before we gave up on it in frustration and bought yet another new one. Just ask any repairman and they’ll agree: “They don’t make ‘em like they used to.”

Low-flow showerheads, toilets that have to be flushed twice, dishwashers that require essentially pre-washed dishes — there are all sorts of issues with regulations adopted in the name of saving energy that actually just make products worse. These were made into standards by congressional legislation nearly two decades ago.

But in one of those infamous “sources say” stories, CNN revealed that the Trump administration might finally abolish what they term a “public-private partnership” that in reality became a mandate for conforming with other federal, state, and local codes and regulations.

The Energy Star program has its roots in the Ronald Reagan era, when a patchwork of state regulations was gathered into one federal law called the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act. This was followed in 1992 by the Energy Policy Act, which created the Energy Star program with an initial focus on computer equipment. Additional elements came into being with legislation through the following decade, with its formal adoption in 2005.

But while President Donald Trump wants to get rid of the program, he’ll need help from Congress — and that’s where the issue arises, given Energy Star’s bipartisan and industry support. “A handful of moderate Republican senators have championed the program,” reports The Washington Post, “saying it has helped consumers reduce their energy bills while improving the efficiency of refrigerators, dishwashers, clothes washers and other appliances.” The Post haughtily blamed “conservative resistance to President Joe Biden’s environmental agenda” for Trump’s decision.

“Eliminating the Energy Star program would directly contradict this administration’s promise to reduce household energy costs,” snarled Paula Glover of the nonprofit coalition Alliance to Save Energy. “For just $32 million a year,” she claimed, “Energy Star helps American families save over $40 billion in annual energy costs. That’s a return of $350 for every federal dollar invested.” Added Joseph Goffman, a former Biden EPA official, “If you want to destroy the relationship between the public and government, you’re going to target the Energy Star program.”

Yet deduct all those extra flushes and dishwashing cycles — not to mention the additional cost of appliances that have to be more frequently replaced, since repairs now cost almost as much as buying brand-new — and those savings Glover cites begin to vanish. That’s the point Reason Magazine’s Mark Oestreich makes, going through the litany of both the increasing federal regulation and his own frustration at how “energy-efficient” products do half the job at twice the price.

Perhaps the best point, though, was made by Sarah Hoyt at Instapundit, who pithily pointed out, “Oh, wait, the real reason the industry is salty. The government forced them to retool and chase ridiculously counterproductive goals all these decades. Now they don’t even know how to research to improve, instead of impair their product. And they’re terrified their competitors will get there first.”

There’s nothing wrong with pursuing energy efficiency with consumer products or buildings. In fact, it’s desirable, as it can save consumers money and reduce our energy usage. There seems to have been a tradeoff, though, where the constant pursuit of diminishing returns of increased efficiency that the government mandated has cost us the reliability and performance people expect from their appliances. Indeed, companies have spent millions retooling to conform to the Energy Star standards, which would make anyone salty if the rules of the game changed. Still, nothing says they can’t continue to use the standards as a voluntary, industry-based selling point. (It’s also insurance for the next Democrat who comes into town and brings all these things back.)

Yet removing Energy Star standards can also bring new players into the game who can sell consumers on the good old-fashioned reliability that companies used to champion before they had to add all the bells and whistles because bureaucrats told them to. It would also allow existing manufacturers to expand their product lines with an eye on reliability. Dialing back a bit on efficiency may cost consumers a couple more dollars to run their appliances, but they won’t mind when they find these things are once again built to stand the test of time.