Remember the local and state building regulations that you have worked under if you are a builder. As New Yorkers would say, Forgetaboutit…
The new legislation that passed through the House last night, unread by any of the Congress people, had inserted into the bill a new NATIONAL BUILDING CODE. You heard me right, there is language that would have a national building code override your local and state codes.
So what standards are needed for a home in Kittery, Maine will also be required of Miami, Florida or Honolulu, Hawaii.
The bill would give the federal government power over local building codes. It requires that by 2012 codes must require that new buildings be 30 percent more efficient than they would have been under current regulations. By 2016, that figure rises to 50 percent, with increases scheduled for years after that. With those targets in mind, the bill expects organizations that develop model codes for states and localities to fill in the details, creating a national code. If they don’t, the bill commands the Energy Department to draft a national code itself.
ad_iconStates, meanwhile, would have to adopt the national code or one that achieves the same efficiency targets. Those that refuse will see their codes overwritten automatically, and they will be docked federal funds and carbon “allowances” — valuable securities created elsewhere in the bill that give the holder the right to pollute and can be sold. The Energy Department also could enforce its code itself. Among other things, the policy would demonstrate the new leverage of allocation of allowances as a sort of carbon currency — leverage this bill would be giving to Congress to direct state behavior. washingtonpost.com.
The bill has not passed the Senate yet so there is still time to act, but I beg you to contact your representatives and let them know how you feel. There is a great deal riding on it, as opposed to the reason Michael Jackson died.
No related posts.
{ 28 comments… read them below or add one }
Yup.
I watched about two hours of this "debate" yesterday in the House. It's astonishing, embarrassing, sad, frightening that they voted for something that not one of them could have read in its entirety.
I called my Rep, and he still voted for it … I'm curious to see the breakdown of the people who called him and were for versus against it …
I too had the opportunity to tune into C-Span last Friday afternoon-evening. I was extremely fortunate to hear John Boehner's masterful hour long explanation of the 300 page 3 AM addendum that was added. Everyone should find and watch this speech if there's a copy available somewhere.The restrictive measures this bill will add to new construction as well as bringing existing structures "up to code" is astonishing – my husband and I would never be able to bring our current 30 year old home up to code and be able to even break even in selling our home. We all need to be more thoughtful of our environment but if this bill is allowed to pass the Real Estate industry as we know it will be gone…There should be a call to arms for every member of our profession and the home builders professionals to read and understand this bill. It is truly frightening.
Glad to see this posted here. I would have liked to see Boehner speak much longer, hell all weekend if necessary. I have read quite a bit of the bill now and this will essentially sell the American people in to slavery. Its high time everyone stand up, turn off the TV, and get pro-active. Call your Senator(s), tell them not to vote for the bill. You can also call your congress persons and tell them to switch their vote, which they still have time to do.
Hopefully this part will come out in negotiations.
I've worked in the building trades over 30 years. In '77, I was interested in green and renewable construction and 30 years later, we're finally getting some legislative momentum to this important movement. Will it change the way homes are built and sold? Of coarse. Did the telephone change anything? Not a good analogy? Then how about the Bill of Rights. Time marches on, our technological advances are double edged and demand responsible use. Global warming is not a fad.
Its the same thing with the cap and trade. The cost of pollution has to be born by the polluter. Its the cost of doing business, and if you can't afford it, you will have to find another line of work. Good old fashioned competition. It is expensive, but no one has the right to foul my air or your air. Same with water and landfills etc.
Everyone seems to want to make a buck and have someone else pay for the mess left after. Its a lousy way to do business.
Oh, and I believe the standards would pertain to new construction. Indeed, building codes march ever forward and this is a good thing. Sure, sometimes its bothersome, but on the whole, there are sound reasons for building codes.
Not that older homes shouldn't be improved when possible. I have a turn of the century two story brick house presently undergoing considerable work to reduce 'my carbon footprint'. Geothermal heat pump, new efficient windows and doors (I make them myself, but they're still expensive) efficient lighting and appliances, etc) Ahh, put yer money where you mouth is, righty-oh?
How much more are you people willing to endure ? Are you ready NOW to do something to put a stop to this tyranny ?
Go to Twitter and search for OpposeTyranny.
It's past time to put a stop to this movement toward socialism.
Most people I know have made efforts all by themselves to buy energy efficient light bulbs and be more aware of not wasting water , gas , electricity. We do NOT need to be regulated just educated on ways to save all on our own.
Mr. George is confused if he thinks the cost of pollution will be borne by the polluters. It will be borne, just like every other excessive tax imposed by the government, by the consumer and taxpayer. That is why cap and trade will destroy the real estate market. And as we have already seen, as the real estate market goes, so goes the economy.
Dear Fran,
I beg to differ with your mixing up of the facts. The concept of 'Cap and Trade' is to place the the economic responsibility for pollution on the polluter. It is a business cost. Its not 'Socialism'. That is such an outworn red herring, you would do service to your argument to give it a rest. If I build a house, there are overhead costs including the disposal of the refuse generated in bringing that house into being. I can't back my truck up and dump it in your yard. I can't legally dump it in my yard either.
The government, you rail against like banging on pots and pans, the government that we all elect to bridge the many different views, have determined (consistently) that the public good is served by the not allowing people to make wasteland dumps of their own property, or anyone else's. Its not socialism, look it up.
Our technological advances have yielded a convincing scientific basis for reason to regulate green house gases. It's a speed limit, its not socialism. If trucks could deliver product at 1000 miles an hour, perhaps the cost would go down a little. You can imagine some of the other consequences.
Cap and trade and better building code standards will increase the cost of new construction, no doubt. The housing industry will not self destruct, those who can, will adapt, raise there game. Prudent regulation is part of the cost of doing business in the twentyfirst century and that is where we are.
Too much of the bogus wealth we have all witnessed the evaporation of over the last year was, – that bogus wealth was build upon fraudulent foolish speculation, on a number of levels too. From the top of the financial games to the local developer. Anyone in this field with an ounce of brains could see the market was overheated, absurdly inflated and heading for the cliff. Not everyone has eyes, I suppose.
Capitalism does not mean that an investment is a guarantee of a high return, investment has risks and the market place was so out of balance precisely because politicians were unduly influenced by the financial industry that was making enormous hay on the fraudulent bubble and also unduly influenced by real estate industry who were also making obscene margins building over inflated crap.
Higher building standards will be good for the industry. Lower profit margins will be good for the industry by driving the venal quick buck speculators out. That is not socialism my dear, that is prudent regulation of the marketplace for the common good of all, and at the expense of unwarranted profit taking.
Real estate speculation is not the savior of our economy, our environment, or our society. It is a problem to be dealt with.
Best in the 21st C
you are an idiot
I completely agree with the code though. I understand that this will change a lot of things, and that a lot of people will be unhappy and you feel like the government is controlling EVERYTHING. But unfortunately some of these changes have to be forced from the top. Builders will get away with building inefficient homes forever if someone does not stop them. Paradigm shifts can hurt, and this one has been a long time coming.
Does anyone writing responses to this article understand what is going on in the entire “small” world outside of the good ole US of A ????? How many Chinese coal fired power plants are comming on line every day ??? So much for Global Warming. How many Hollywood Pyrotechnic stunts are staged just South of the California/Mexico border??? So much for protecting the air you breathe. I have been a builder/remodeler for 20 years and all I have to say is good luck getting this situation regulated. Whoever said that this was not Socialism could not be further from the truth.. Their will be more grand-fathering in of old buildings because the valuations will not work for the precious banking system that we are all working so hard to save. I would compare it to giving GM more money to fail. How much damage can old buildings do when the homeless won’t even live in them.????
I have not read the bill, but believe that home owners bear responsibility if their homes are not efficient. I have a modest income, but I have done basic improvements to my home to improve my efficiency over the years. We all need to do our part. Calling it Socialism is merely a tool used by those of a different perspective to influence others to their way of thinking. I would prefer an intelligent, well presented argument over emotion-provoking tactics. My perspective as I have said, we all have to do our part in big and small ways to protect our environment and the future of our children. Without that, no job, economic environment, or political system really matters. Change does not come easily, but it must come for the planet to thrive. The consequences are too great and will effect all other aspects of life. Therefore, the change in the way we live and use resources must be significant and we all must participate.
The idea of a national housing standard is scary. My home in Atlanta has different needs than a home in Florida or Coastal North Carolina, not to mention Maine or Las Vegas.
The idea of building codes being local is logical, and the idea that some nameless bureaucrat is going to put together regulations that are going to affect whether or not I have to make changes in my house to sell it is absurd.
Efficiency should drive the process. If it makes economic sense to implement green ideas, lets do it. That is what is happening with solar power, the private sector is making breakthroughs that makes it cost effective to install solar power. Now it makes sense to use, not just accepting government subsidies because it is a nice thing.
Nice is killing us, we can not keep borrowing and destroying our future to be nice all the time.
This IS socialism and on the way to Communism (which is the definition of socialism by Carl Marx himself). you don't have to have government tax and control of energy. you could just make energy more expensive and let the people decide if they want to tighten up their house and reduce energy use. The Government WANTS you to waste energy because if you do – they get more money in taxes. Just like our local Meat packing plant that polutes our river – the government loves it when they dump garbage into it because the plant is hit with more fines (taxes) and the government gets more money to spend on themselves.
I have a house built in 1865 with almost 40 windows, most of which would need to be custom made if I had to switch over. Besides the money, that's a lot of waste that would need to put in a landfill somewhere. We've tried over the years to make improvements as money allows, but it's hard when you're living on modest income. I don't disagree that we should all try and do our part. I do have a problem with the federal government trying to take over another aspect of our lives and an issue that should be left to the individual states.
From what little I read of the bill, it seemed like most of the housing regulation would be directed at homes built with or mortgages backed by HUD money….such as an FHA loan…if you use Govt. money you'd have to do it their way…If anyone has a clarification on this I'd really appreciate hearing it.
Even if it is only on projects built with government money, its still pretty scary. Im a Realtor and I can only imagine what this is going to do to the housing market from a resale standpoint and from a struggling new home standpoint. You think we have problems now with foreclosures? If a seller must retrofit their home prior to selling it and they are in the position of having to sell because of financial problems, you can bet your a#% they don't have the money to retro fit, and buiders are having to build on dirt they bought at market highs and sell at equivalants to REO prices, if they have to put even more money in, you can count on new housing starts going right into the toilet as well.
As far as the codes go, how can a one size fits all set of codes be affective. I live in Las Vegas, the way we build houses here, tensioned slab/frame stucco, would never fly in Montana…State government is in a much better position to dictate these regulations.
As far as demanding greening of homes goes, its already happening. When I first started selling houses, double pane glass was a big "energy saveing" feature, and buyers responded by paying a bit more for them. Now we have builders providing all sorts of energy efficient upgrades or standard features and again the market has shown that those builders are succeeding. By allowing the market to produce the change, it does happen at a slower pace, but it causes less damage to the economy and in the long run the same affect is achieved. We don't need to be "told" what to do by big government. For the most part we are not a bunch of toddlers that have to be dictated to.
An earlier post stated that polluters bare the brunt of pollution they create…If thats the case, then why is the supposed money generated from the trade part of this bill being doled out to the corporations that do the majority of the polluting, or being used as payoffs for votes for the bill. I see provisions in the bill to counteract the increased costs to low income folks, I see big business being able to find offsets, but what about us schlubs in the middle? Don't see a whole lot of equality in us paying for our pollution, along with handing out rebates to those less fortunate or those more fortunate.
This bill speaks of energy neutral costs throughout, the countries that have tried this same type of program have found that there is no energy neutral way of switching over to "green energy" it costs jobs and doesn't create as many as it loses, nor do the savings passed along equal the costs, otherwise there wouldn't be provisions in the bill that clearly state there are monies to be set aside to offset those costs. If these kinds of changes are forced at warp speed the affects are devastating. New clean energy is out there, but there has to be a gradual change to it, based on common sense and savings that are generated by the market, not by the government. The government can only print money for so long…oh and by the way, the government doesn't create money, they just spend ours.
If bills like this force us to move at light speed toward something that will cripple our economy, while other economies watch us go down in flames, even if they are green flames, and they don't share our "green philosophy", the manufacturing that moves to those countries will not be "green". We have to be able to sustain our place in the global economy in order to really have a lasting impact. You can't save the homeless by giving a homeless guy on the streetcorner your mortgage payment for the month, you'll be next to him 30 days later hoping someone will give you their mortgage payment.
I truly hope that the Senate actually reads this thousand plus page roll of toilet paper and comes to their senses. Of course the only way thats going to happen is if WE THE PEOPLE let them know that if they do vote for it, they wont be receiving our votes any time soon. Since they are all career politicians, if they feel their jobs are the threatened, the money they receive on the side from speicial interests won't seem quite as shiny.
It just seems like we are having so much crap rammed down our throats with the politicians that support them saying "if we don't do it now the sky will fall". I'm sorry, but I don't buy it anymore, from the Bush administration to the Obama administration, its always an extreme call to throw tons of money we don't have at a problem that might have another solution if we took the time to actually explore other possibilites.
When selling our homes, what takes place should be between the seller and the buyer. Not the government. Never should we have a one size fits all, that will not work and it should not happen. No one seems to think things through or read what they are voting on. Just vote to get it through. Right now I 'm so mad I can't even think what to write, but will be working on my words, as I will be contacting my Represenatives and all the other idiots in our government.
Sam
My Representative is one of the infamous eight Republicans who voted to support this disgraceful legislation, Frank LoBiondo in South Jersey. His office told me that the regulation requiring retrofitting an older home for sale for energy efficiency was removed at the last minute. I do not believe that but I cannot find the truth. Does anyone know? This is just awful!
Ethically and morally this is not the best way to deal with the energy crisis which is an outgrowth of our consumerism. This bill needs to be stopped.
As an inspector, I can tell you, the more I read about this legislation, the scarier it becomes. The current system in real estate, is that if you have a home in need of repair, and some wants to buy it at a reduced price, and both parties are in agreement…. then the deal gets done. But if this Cap and Trade legislation is approved, the government will step in and require inspections to be made to see if your home (regardless of age!) meets the code requirements of the California Green Standard. If not… you have a lot of home repairs to make.
If this legislation goes through, government approved environmental inspectors will review your property and to tell people that unfortunately, you can't sell your house until certain upgrades are made. Homeowners may have to spend thousands of dollars to make their property energy efficient, with the proper roof venting, double-paned windows, energy star upgraded appliances, etc., before they can list their home for sale.
I assume, as an inspector, I'll get more business, but at what cost to the country! This is a bad deal.
Eric Bolmer, SafeHouse Inspection
Houston, Texas
Kim — you are foolish if you think all nations will participate and care equally about the environment and reducing their use of resources. China and India are growing fast, the jobs that have been outsourced to both and the influx of money is wildly increasing the standard of living – thereby increasing demand and competition for resources. Oddly, within 10 years we may have more people in China driving cars than in teh US, and we'll be the ones riding bikes (exactly the opposite of how it is now) – now, is that progress or is it just you exchanging or sharing your economic status and advantage with someone else? (read this as a decrease for you: higher costs, less available) Calling it socialism is calling it what it is — you have the federal government dictating to the nth degree what each citizen is allowed or not allowed to do, determining winners/losers in businesses and industries (largely based on supporters and political allies), and expanding their reach into your life and your pocket well beyond constitutional limits.
The federal government was created for the national defense and to protect US borders – period. it's not their job to regulate each minute aspect of our lives, especially when the control is gained by essentially manipulating the public to rally behind faulty science under the guise of cleaner air or 'saving the planet'. Everything government touches gets bigger, more expensive and less efficient – everything – name one thing they have run efficiently?
I have have read potions of the bill, including the parts that address the kinds of efficiencies and improvements you would be required to make prior to selling your home – many people simply won't be able to bear the cost of doing this so we would in effect be trapping them in their homes, and reducing the number of homes potentially available for sale. It will especially hurt the elderly and retirees who want to sell their homes and move to smaller ones but don't have the money for improvements.
I'm not in the real estate business, but I do own a rent house that I rent to 84 year old mother in law for less than half the mortage payment. It's what you do to take care of your family. When she passes on, I plan to sell the house. I simply can't afford to do tons of work on a 55 year old house just to sell it.
The legislation being pushed through government is more than socialism, it's communism. Since when did the federal government have the knowledge to decide what local communities should put in their building codes? We're loosing our freedom here, people. You can't sell your house because it's not "green" enough. You CHOOSE not to by health insurance, here's a little more tax for you. Don't think the amount of carbon we emit affects global warming, tough, here's another tax for you.
A large federal government, with it's tentacles in every aspect of your life, will leave you with in shackles. Freedom is dying.
Getting back to having to make expensive upgrades to sell an old house, I expect a rash of fires.
This is exactly what we do not need to happen to our real estate market. We are in the worst real estate market as a nation since the Great Depression. This litigation if applied could cause our nation to stagnate to a worse degree than what has happend in the last two years. It would add more fees to real estate transactions, cause uneeded red tape and eventually grind the real estate mareket to increase pricing due to the expenses associated with compliance.
I am afraid Mr. George is missing one of the major points of this cap and trade bill, which is yes, the polluters will pay initally the cost for the credits they need to stay in business. However, Mr. George do you believe they are NOT going to pass that cost on to the consumers? The polluters will place any additional cost including the credits to appease the government into their cost of doing business, which will directly effect the cost the power we use in our homes. It won’t be just homes who will pay for the cost of their pollution, the groceries stores, department stores, gas stations, and the list goes on. They will in turn increase the price of their products. Essentially everything we buy will be increased. I understand their needs to be building codes or we would all be at risk for the shoddy materials and workmanship put into the buildings. All I can tell you is be prepared to pay higher prices on everything else. Last I heard an increase of $.70 per gallon on gasoline was also included into the cap and trade bill.
I am afraid Mr. George is missing one of the major points of this cap and trade bill, which is yes, the polluters will pay initally the cost for the credits they need to stay in business. However, Mr. George do you believe they are NOT going to pass that cost on to the consumers? The polluters will place any additional cost including the credits to appease the government into their cost of doing business, which will directly effect the cost of the power we use in our homes. It won’t be just homes who will pay for the cost of their pollution, the groceries stores, department stores, gas stations, and the list goes on. They will in turn increase the price of their products. Essentially everything we buy will be increased. I understand their needs to be building codes or we would all be at risk for the shoddy materials and workmanship put into the buildings. All I can tell you is be prepared to pay higher prices on everything else. Last I heard an increase of $.70 per gallon on gasoline was also included into the cap and trade bill.
Not only will the W-M bill have an effect on housing, it will have an effect on our wallets as well. Higher energy prices, higher gas prices, fewer coal plants which in turn causes a lack on natural resources, and lets not forget a decrease in jobs. Please sign this letter and let congress no that this bill is definately one for the trash. http://tinyurl.com/klfut8
I think you guys are all missing the point. This bill is about carbon trading that will benefit Wall Street. Nothing more…nothing less.
{ 5 trackbacks }