July 14, 2011 - 5:32 pm
Word has it there is about to be a second attempt to pass legislation to repeal the law requiring the phase out of incandescent bulbs. The report I got says:
Congressman Mike Burgess (R-TX) offered the light bulb amendment to the Energy and Water Appropriations bill a few minutes ago. He made a very persuasive case for adoption of the amendment and Subcommittee Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) expressed his support. The roll call vote on the amendment will occur on Friday.
Call. Write. Fight the Darkness!
UPDATE: The Hill says the amendment is likely to pass the House tomorrow.
Clarice, if this news is accurate, I’ll be the happiest blogger in the world. Make that “person.” I will call & I will write. And I will fight the darkness. Until the incandescent end of this absurd, freedom-limiting, meddlesome, intrusive, obnoxious idea.
I know it’s true, Belladonna.
If the bulb ban is repealed, the next thing that should be repealed is the moronic ban on all children’s books printed prior to 1985.
For those who may have missed it, it is now illegal to sell pre-1985 children’s books as anything other than “collector’s items”; they have been banned on “safety” grounds, because of alleged trace elements of lead in the ink.
Let’s look at this, shall we? Is there any evidence that these alleged trace elements have damaged any child—even if a child literally rather than figuratively devoured a book or two? Yet this massive act of cultural vandalism has operated to have many used bookstores and charitable resale shops withdraw pre-1985 books from their shelves.
This erasure of the collective memory—and destruction of many out of print books and marvelous illustrations—on “safety” grounds is a quiet yet pervasive example of the nanny state run riot.
I’d certainly add that to the list of things to be repealed. But looking at what the EPA is about to do to Texas, it would not be the very first thing on my to do list.
Point taken; certainly the EPA’s current attack on what remains of the economic infrastructure has, shall we say, a certain urgency.
I would, however, point out that there is a certain urgency to the book-ban, too—insofar that every day it is in place it serves as an incentive for the further destruction of irreplaceable pieces of our history and culture.
Greetings:
If I may add a couple of my own pet peeves about our leftist, statist government’s attempt to “lead” us into their new light, light has color and light has volume and the new, better, state-approved bulbs fail on both counts.
Color-wise, tungsten bulbs provide a “warm” light on the reddish end of the spectrum. It is the warmth of the home-fire not the bright, blue brilliance of the modern antiseptic workplace. “Relax,” tungsten light says, “you’ve returned from the day’s struggles. Feel the warmth.”
Additionally, the current crop of fluorescents fail volume wise. I’m of an age where the intensity and variability of a three-way 50-100-150 watt tungsten bulb is much appreciated, especially for a long evening of reading. To get an equivalent amount of light from fluorescents will require multiple bulbs or multiple lamps.
Much like the proponents of low-flush (aka flush-twice) toilets, one of which I’ve already had to replace, the definition of the problem as one of energy-consumption is a manipulation that neglects pertinent “quality of life” aspects. If you enjoy flushing twice and that bit of suspense as you wait to see what level of function the equipment will reach, fine, have at it. But, if these brillentos think that their fixation on controlling energy consumption is so important that they can re-order my quality of life, how I feel and what I do in my home, then I think we have passed the point of meaningfully limited government.
Very well put!
I started using flourescent bulbs for the simple reason that I’m tired of sending my money to Saudi Arabia. Took a few months, but I got used to them. I’ve also got 4 low flush toilets and don’t have a problem flushing. I suspect those that do are full of crap.
Greetings:
Well I would certainly agree that the volume is the important variable. If one were, say, well over six-feet tall and 200 pounds and blessed with once-a-day regularity, there could be a substantial volume to be relocated. Now, I don’t know how the science was done to see what volumes are generated across humankind and how well those volumes could be could be effectively moved by how much less “flow” but I’m sure that it must have been done because how else would a society of our intelligence operate in this enlightened day and age. Congratulations on your success!
Well the amendment passed according to Politico. Mark, you are just more evolved than the rest of us. The day Jane Harman who is rolling in dough has the right to direct people scraping by what light bulbs they must use is a sad day for this country.
Thanks for the news, Clarice! I’m running out of room for my growing incandescent bulb stockpile. Who do I call/email/write to support this?
Your own congressman and Senators,I should think.