[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
U.S. Constitution Title: House to vote Monday on repealing bulb ban (save the Edison incandescent) Michigan Rep. Fred Upton has seen the light. On Monday, Energy Committee Chairman Upton will bring to the House floor legislation repealing the onerous, job-killing, consumer choice-stomping energy efficiency standard (made law in a 2007 bill he co-sponsored) that effectively bans the traditional light bulbs used in most homes beginning on January 1 of next year. "The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, would repeal sections of a 2007 energy law that require traditional incandescent light bulbs to be 30 percent more energy efficient beginning in 2012," writes The Hill. "Upton's support for the bill represents a change of tune. . . . He supported the 2007 light bulb efficiency law, much to the chagrin of his fellow Republicans." "It was never my goal for Washington to decide what type of light bulbs Americans should use," Upton admits now. "The public response on this issue is a clear signal that markets - not governments - should be driving technological advancements. I will join my colleagues to vote yes on a bill to protect consumer choice and guard against federal overreach." Repeal sponsor Barton sees the vote to revive the traditional bulb as a crucial symbol of Republicans' promise to voters last fall to reduce Big Government's intrusion in their lives. "This is about more than just energy consumption, it is about personal freedom," says Barton of the Better Use of Our Light Bulbs Act (BULB). "Voters sent us a message in November that it is time for politicians and activists in Washington to stop interfering in their lives and manipulating the free market. The light bulb ban is the perfect symbol of that frustration. People don't want Congress dictating what light fixtures they can use." Barton also notes that banning incandescent bulbs would be a financial burden on less affluent Americans as incandescents cost 40 cents per bulb - while their replacement compact fluorescents costs (CFLs) cost ten times as much at $4 and more. The bulb ban - which, Upton and President Bush's past support aside, has become a partisan issue with the Obama Administration opposing repeal - has already punished America's working lass, costing hundreds of blue-collar American jobs as U.S. plants have shuttered in recent years as jobs were shipped to China to assemble the more expensive - and less effective - CFLs. While the Republican-controlled House expects to pass the repeal, Barton and Upton are lobbying hard for at least 40 Democrat votes despite White House opposition. Indeed, despite Green propaganda about CFLs' longevity, Democratic pols will be hard pressed to explain a vote banning the most common of household items. Public outrage has been growing against the stealthy ban, as consumers learned of the January 1 implementation date and the disappearance of a basic household item that makes up 85 percent of the bulb market. Now if we could get the Republicans to do something about car-killing federal fuel economy standards. Like the bulb ban, it's the Nanny State run amok in consumer affairs.
Poster Comment: We don't need no stinking Chinese CFL's! Ban the EPA!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: hondo68 (#0)
Ban the EPA! And the Dept of Energy, and the Dept of Education and ....................
There are no replies to Comment # 1. End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|