Trump’s Weird Toilet Rant Is Actually a Crappy Old Libertarian Hobbyhorse

It goes back to the 1992 Energy Policy Act, signed into law by George H.W. Bush.

Steve Taylor/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Donald Trump on Friday ordered a federal review of water efficiency standards for toilets. ā€œWe have a situation where weā€™re looking very strongly at sinks and showers and other elements of bathrooms, where you turn the faucet onā€”in areas where thereā€™s tremendous amounts of water, where the water rushes out to sea because you could never handle itā€”you turn on the faucet, you donā€™t get any water,ā€ Trump said at a White House meeting about small business. He added that ā€œpeople are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times, as opposed to once. They end up using more water.”

This met with mockery and bafflement. Was the water review another instance of some rogue thought turning into public policy simply because Trump had started yammering in front of cameras? Yes, probably, but it turns out that libertarians have been complaining about toilet water pressure for decades, citing it as an example of statist intrusion.

This goes back to 1992, as Chris Good pointed out in The Atlantic in 2011:

The low-flow (1.6 gallon) limit on toilets was instituted with the 1992 Energy Policy Act, signed into law by George H.W. Bush. Prior to that, toilets used anywhere from 3.5 to 5 gallons, according to major toilet manufacturer American Standard. In 1999, then-Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-Mich.) introduced a law to repeal the restriction, along with other efficiency standards for faucets, showerheads and urinals instituted in the 1992 bill. Knollenberg gained the support of 107 cosponsors, including Rand’s father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), and now-Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

In a 1998 20/20 segment, in what might be his magnum opus, libertarian icon John Stossel laid waste to the very same toilet regulations that Trump complained about on Friday. He interviewed toilet pressure enthusiasts who were so bummed out by new regulations on the amount of water that could be used for flushing that they searched junkyards and traveled to Canada to find high-powered commodes. 

Stossel appears to be pretty into toilets in general. In 2013, he epically owned any moron who was stupid enough to prefer public provision to private. He tweeted: “It’s intuitive to think public is better than private. #ThinkAboutThis: public toilets.” 

More recently, Stossel in 2017 eviscerated New York City public officials for spending too much money on public bathrooms and doing oppressive things like allowing the public to comment on how taxpayer funds are spent.

But the cause’s most eloquent exponent is surely Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). In 2011, during an appliance efficiency hearing, Paul told Kathleen Hogan, then the US Department of Energy deputy assistant secretary on energy efficiency, what we’ve all been thinking: “Frankly, the toilets don’t work in my house. And I blame you, and people like you who want to tell me what I can install in my house, what I can do.” The video of his rant was blasted out to his father’s email list, Good noted, and Rand Paul was praised for “taking the fight to the statists.” Howard Roark crapped.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate