House GOP Set To Repeal Incandescent Bulb Ban...

[rightwinger]

my question still stands Wytch......Anti made his statement.....im saying to him, were you complaining when Democrats around the Country were talking about Light Bulbs instead of our more serious problems.....simple as that.....and i should not have used the word Banned.....because they are not being banned.....the Wattage is just being down graded.....

Let's see...the "ban" went into effect before the financial meltdown. So, what "problems" were we facing at that time that needed to be addressed and wasn't?

The current House isn't doing anything else...

So you're saying things were problem-free under Pres Bush?
Do you miss him yet?

The only person to miss Bush is that guy with a shoe

 

[peach174]

Hey i'm really starting to like this Republican House of Representatives. It feels good to be proud of the Republican Party. It's been awhile...


Republican House members are preparing themselves to take a stand to save the incandescent light bulb.

Monday, the House of Representatives will vote on H.R. 2417, the Better Use of Light Bulbs (BULB) Act, a bill to repeal the federal ban on the incandescent light bulb, contained in a 2007 energy law.

Sponsored by Texas Republican Rep. Joe Barton, the bill would protect Americans’ ability to use the kind of light bulbs they want and not be forced to use mercury containing light sources such as compact fluorescent lights.

“This is about more than just energy consumption, it is about personal freedom. 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,” Barton said. “The light bulb ban is the perfect symbol of that frustration. People don’t want Congress dictating what light fixtures they can use.”

Texas Republican Rep. Michael Burgess and Tennessee Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn joined Barton and 12 other Republicans to reintroduce the bill in early 2011.

“These are the kinds of regulations that make the American people roll their eyes,” said Blackburn. “It is typical of a ‘big Washington’ solution to a non-existent problem. In this case it manifests itself as an overreach into every American home, one that ships good jobs overseas and infuriates the American consumer.” (FEMA faces House heat for taking over flood insurance policies)

Come Monday, Americans may be one step closer to having absolute freedom in their light source choices.

“Traditional incandescent bulbs are cheap and reliable. Alternatives, including the most common replacement Compact Fluorescent Lights or CFL’s, are more expensive and health hazards – so why force them on the American people?” said Barton. “From the health insurance you’re allowed to have, to the car you can drive, to the light bulbs you can buy, Washington is making too many decisions that are better left to you and your family.”

Incandescent Bulb Ban | Fluorescent Lights | House GOP | The Daily Caller

Thomas Edison would be so proud of you guys preserving his invention. However, if every one of 110 million American households screwed it in just one energy saver bulb in place of an ordinary 60-watt bulb, the energy saved would be enough to power a city of 1.5 million people. If all American homes were equipped with all energy saver bulbs, the nation would save enough electricity to power New York City, Chicago, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Los Angles.

How much will it save when you add the cost of having to get rid of the new bulb with the mercury that is in it? You have to dispose of it separately and then an added cost of extracting the mercury from them. Not cost effective at all, no energy savings.
http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/2010/01/truth-about-compact-fluorescent-lights.htm
Then there is the added cost of health care to it, if it breaks in your home and you inhale the mercury vapors. It causes lung problems.
Do really think people are going to do this if they break a mercury bulb?
Mercury Disposal - How to Dispose of Mercury
I don't think that they will and I don't think that they will dispose of it separately.
Many countries are finding this out and they are doing the same thing as congress is doing tomorrow.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

Hey i'm really starting to like this Republican House of Representatives. It feels good to be proud of the Republican Party. It's been awhile...


Republican House members are preparing themselves to take a stand to save the incandescent light bulb.

Monday, the House of Representatives will vote on H.R. 2417, the Better Use of Light Bulbs (BULB) Act, a bill to repeal the federal ban on the incandescent light bulb, contained in a 2007 energy law.

Sponsored by Texas Republican Rep. Joe Barton, the bill would protect Americans’ ability to use the kind of light bulbs they want and not be forced to use mercury containing light sources such as compact fluorescent lights.

“This is about more than just energy consumption, it is about personal freedom. 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,” Barton said. “The light bulb ban is the perfect symbol of that frustration. People don’t want Congress dictating what light fixtures they can use.”

Texas Republican Rep. Michael Burgess and Tennessee Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn joined Barton and 12 other Republicans to reintroduce the bill in early 2011.

“These are the kinds of regulations that make the American people roll their eyes,” said Blackburn. “It is typical of a ‘big Washington’ solution to a non-existent problem. In this case it manifests itself as an overreach into every American home, one that ships good jobs overseas and infuriates the American consumer.” (FEMA faces House heat for taking over flood insurance policies)

Come Monday, Americans may be one step closer to having absolute freedom in their light source choices.

“Traditional incandescent bulbs are cheap and reliable. Alternatives, including the most common replacement Compact Fluorescent Lights or CFL’s, are more expensive and health hazards – so why force them on the American people?” said Barton. “From the health insurance you’re allowed to have, to the car you can drive, to the light bulbs you can buy, Washington is making too many decisions that are better left to you and your family.”

Incandescent Bulb Ban | Fluorescent Lights | House GOP | The Daily Caller

But all the Polar bears will die, and people in China will lose jobs !

 

[Zoom-boing]

In the name of personnel freedom we could make the sale on un-pasteurized milk legal throughout the country. How about repealing the seat belt laws or texting while driving?

Didn't they just have some kind of sting operation on the Amish selling unpasturized milk? God forbid people decide for themselves if they want to buy that or not. Seal belt laws? Why should the government force me to wear a seat belt? If I fly through the window in an accident and destroy my body well.... my body, my choice. Right? Texting-while-driving laws? What the hell do they need that for? There are already distracted driving laws and texting-while-driving certainly falls into that category so why no just enforce the laws we already have rather than making yet more laws? The same is true with these light bulbs. If CFLs were so great and so energy efficient and so wonderful they would surpass incandescents on their own. They haven't. Why? Because there are problems with these bulbs and because they bother a percentage of people. Leave the bulbs alone and something better will come along . . . it already is w/the LEDs. Time will bring the efficiency and cost down. Government needs to butt out.

 

[Harry Dresden]

You mean when Republican George Bush banned them don't you?

Note to Fox News: George W. Bush Banned Incandescent Light Bulbs

my question still stands Wytch......Anti made his statement.....im saying to him, were you complaining when Democrats around the Country were talking about Light Bulbs instead of our more serious problems.....simple as that.....and i should not have used the word Banned.....because they are not being banned.....the Wattage is just being down graded.....

Let's see...the "ban" went into effect before the financial meltdown. So, what "problems" were we facing at that time that needed to be addressed and wasn't?

The current House isn't doing anything else...

we were not having problems in 2007?.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

No, I didn't say we were "problem free"...only that the financial meltdown hadn't occurred so we were certainly less problems at the time. Were the light bulb regulation changes the ONLY thing that was being done at the time?

What other things are the GnOP led house working on?

your just trying to make yourself sound like your right......we had plenty of problems 4 years ago......

 

[The Rabbi]

No, I didn't say we were "problem free"...only that the financial meltdown hadn't occurred so we were certainly less problems at the time. Were the light bulb regulation changes the ONLY thing that was being done at the time?

What other things are the GnOP led house working on?

your just trying to make yourself sound like your right......we had plenty of problems 4 years ago......

Congress going over to the Democrats being the biggest one....

 

[uscitizen]

This thing with the light bulbs is about not having to go thru the expense of building newe power plants or upgrade the electric network to make it be able to carry more current.
It is that more than the CO2/pollution, etc aspects.
The electric companys supported it, how do you think it got thru congress?

 

[rightwinger]

It used to piss me off when I came home from work and would find two people home and every light in the house on. Thats 23 fixtures at 1670 watts.

Now, with the curly bulbs in....all those lights are 278 watts


I can see why rightwingers are so upset

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Such a rush by so many to be good little loyal Government Goose Steppers. What has happened to these people? All this rushing to ban things and shill for Government. It really is very sad.

 

[Flopper]

In the name of personnel freedom we could make the sale on un-pasteurized milk legal throughout the country. How about repealing the seat belt laws or texting while driving?

Didn't they just have some kind of sting operation on the Amish selling unpasturized milk? God forbid people decide for themselves if they want to buy that or not. Seal belt laws? Why should the government force me to wear a seat belt? If I fly through the window in an accident and destroy my body well.... my body, my choice. Right? Texting-while-driving laws? What the hell do they need that for? There are already distracted driving laws and texting-while-driving certainly falls into that category so why no just enforce the laws we already have rather than making yet more laws? The same is true with these light bulbs. If CFLs were so great and so energy efficient and so wonderful they would surpass incandescents on their own. They haven't. Why? Because there are problems with these bulbs and because they bother a percentage of people. Leave the bulbs alone and something better will come along . . . it already is w/the LEDs. Time will bring the efficiency and cost down. Government needs to butt out.

I think if you had to pickup body parts off the highway after an auto accident you would understand why we have seat belt laws. It’s not all about you. It’s about the family where Dad decides to exercise his personal freedom and the family pays the price. It’s about the increase costs of healthcare and insurance caused by increased auto fatalities. It’s about the kids that follow the example of their parents and don’t buckle up. My daughter walked away from a crash that killed her best friend because she was wearing seatbelts. Requiring seat beats is one the smartest laws we have ever passed. But I see right wing nuts are at work here. House vote may repeal seat belt law | Northfield News

I have CFLs in my house and really don’t like them as much as the old incandescent bulbs because they don’t come to full brightness immediately. But I think that’s a small incontinence when considering I’m saving about $10 bucks a month on electricity and don’t need to replace them as often. When you consider the amount of energy it would save the nation it’s well worth it.

 

[uscitizen]

The govt banning things? Like how some want it to ban gay marriage/civil unions?

 

[elvis]

The govt banning things? Like how some want it to ban gay marriage/civil unions?

let's not ban those either.

 

[rightwinger]

Such a rush by so many to be good little loyal Government Goose Steppers. What has happened to these people? All this rushing to ban things and shill for Government. It really is very sad.

You tell them Libo!


First lightbulbs...then concentration camps

 

[The Rabbi]

In the name of personnel freedom we could make the sale on un-pasteurized milk legal throughout the country. How about repealing the seat belt laws or texting while driving?

Didn't they just have some kind of sting operation on the Amish selling unpasturized milk? God forbid people decide for themselves if they want to buy that or not. Seal belt laws? Why should the government force me to wear a seat belt? If I fly through the window in an accident and destroy my body well.... my body, my choice. Right? Texting-while-driving laws? What the hell do they need that for? There are already distracted driving laws and texting-while-driving certainly falls into that category so why no just enforce the laws we already have rather than making yet more laws? The same is true with these light bulbs. If CFLs were so great and so energy efficient and so wonderful they would surpass incandescents on their own. They haven't. Why? Because there are problems with these bulbs and because they bother a percentage of people. Leave the bulbs alone and something better will come along . . . it already is w/the LEDs. Time will bring the efficiency and cost down. Government needs to butt out.

I think if you had to pickup body parts off the highway after an auto accident you would understand why we have seat belt laws. It’s not all about you. It’s about the family where Dad decides to exercise his personal freedom and the family pays the price. It’s about the increase costs of healthcare and insurance caused by increased auto fatalities. It’s about the kids that follow the example of their parents and don’t buckle up. My daughter walked away from a crash that killed her best friend because she was wearing seatbelts. Requiring seat beats is one the smartest laws we have ever passed. But I see right wing nuts are at work here. House vote may repeal seat belt law | Northfield News

I have CFLs in my house and really don’t like them as much as the old incandescent bulbs because they don’t come to full brightness immediately. But I think that’s a small incontinence when considering I’m saving about $10 bucks a month on electricity and don’t need to replace them as often. When you consider the amount of energy it would save the nation it’s well worth it.

Like I said, it's FOR THE CHILDREN!

 

[Trajan]

so what say you USMB yes, or no.


Why Republicans are fighting to save the 30-cent light bulb

House Republicans are attempting to repeal energy-efficiency standards that would phase out the least efficient – and least expensive – incandescent light bulbs. They see the regulations as another example of government meddling.

By Mark Clayton, Staff writer / July 11, 2011

Under a "Bring Back the Bulb" banner, Republicans in the House of Representatives will debate legislation on Monday to roll back energy-efficiency standards, thereby permitting Thomas Edison's original, highly inefficient incandescent light bulb to continue being sold next year.

But were the bulbs ever actually banned? The bipartisan legislation, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush in 2007, sought to boost lighting efficiency and save on energy costs by requiring lightbulbs be more efficient, not by banning any particular style of bulb – part of a long-term government energy efficiency process that has enjoyed both parties' support for decades. Now, that support is dimming, as "nanny-government" critics complain Americans are so hen-pecked by bureaucrats that they can't even buy a simple old light bulb.

“This is about more than just energy consumption, it is about personal freedom," Rep. Joe Barton (R) of Texas, the new bill's sponsor, said in a statement earlier this year. "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.”

more at-

Why Republicans are fighting to save the 30-cent light bulb - CSMonitor.com

merged with existing thread.

 

[slackjawed]

just dislike the new ones, wrong color wrong shape, not healthy if you break them and expensive to boot.

I should have voted the other way though as to preserve my self-interests. I hoarded a ton of the old ones and am ready to sell them at a healthy profit as soon as the demand is there.

 

[California Girl]

While I'm cool with them reserving the ban.... we really do have slightly more important issues to be focusing on than light bulbs.

 

[Zoom-boing]

In the name of personnel freedom we could make the sale on un-pasteurized milk legal throughout the country. How about repealing the seat belt laws or texting while driving?

Didn't they just have some kind of sting operation on the Amish selling unpasturized milk? God forbid people decide for themselves if they want to buy that or not. Seal belt laws? Why should the government force me to wear a seat belt? If I fly through the window in an accident and destroy my body well.... my body, my choice. Right? Texting-while-driving laws? What the hell do they need that for? There are already distracted driving laws and texting-while-driving certainly falls into that category so why no just enforce the laws we already have rather than making yet more laws? The same is true with these light bulbs. If CFLs were so great and so energy efficient and so wonderful they would surpass incandescents on their own. They haven't. Why? Because there are problems with these bulbs and because they bother a percentage of people. Leave the bulbs alone and something better will come along . . . it already is w/the LEDs. Time will bring the efficiency and cost down. Government needs to butt out.

I think if you had to pickup body parts off the highway after an auto accident you would understand why we have seat belt laws. It’s not all about you. It’s about the family where Dad decides to exercise his personal freedom and the family pays the price. It’s about the increase costs of healthcare and insurance caused by increased auto fatalities. It’s about the kids that follow the example of their parents and don’t buckle up. My daughter walked away from a crash that killed her best friend because she was wearing seatbelts. Requiring seat beats is one the smartest laws we have ever passed. But I see right wing nuts are at work here. House vote may repeal seat belt law | Northfield News

I have CFLs in my house and really don’t like them as much as the old incandescent bulbs because they don’t come to full brightness immediately. But I think that’s a small incontinence when considering I’m saving about $10 bucks a month on electricity and don’t need to replace them as often. When you consider the amount of energy it would save the nation it’s well worth it.

I'm sorry to hear about your daughter's friend and the accident. Thank heavens she's ok injury-wise. Just out of curiosity . . . was your daughter's friend who was killed wearing a seat belt?

Wearing a seat belt is a smart thing to do. The government passing a law that says I have to because some people are too stupid? No. Let them be stupid, it's their choice.

Sorry, I don't think government should be mandating this or banning that because 'oh, we're saving the children and society' blarg. Some things? Yup. Most things? Nope, and that includes light bulbs. But hey, they need to save energy where ever they can so we can charge our little electric cars they want us all to be driving. Zoom zoom.

 

[rightwinger]

The govt banning things? Like how some want it to ban gay marriage/civil unions?

Light bulbs are more important than peoples lives