Skip to comments.EDITORIAL: Light-bulb rights showdown--States defy federal claim to meddle in fixture choice
Posted on 04/01/2011 4:53:52 PM PDT by jazusamo
State lawmakers are fed up with the federal government micromanaging their lives. The South Carolina Senate is scheduled to strike back Tuesday with a bill that asserts the 10th Amendment right of the state to tell Washington to take a hike when it comes to the sale of incandescent light bulbs manufactured within state borders.
Ever since then-President George W. Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the clock has been ticking on Thomas Edisons venerable incandescent. Unless Congress acts before Jan. 1, 2012, federal bureaucrats will begin their campaign to foist the mostly Chinese-made, compact fluorescent bulbs on a public that has shown no interest in buying them on the free market.
Palmetto State lawmakers arent interested in waiting for the feds to see the light. The South Carolina Incandescent Light Bulb Freedom Act declares any fixture that bears the stamp Made in South Carolina is a product of intrastate commerce and thus is not subject to federal law or federal regulation. State Rep. William E. Sandifer III, chairman of the South Carolina House Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee, told The Washington Times that the measure he co-sponsored has a very good chance of becoming law. I believe that it is improper for the federal government to tell us as citizens what light bulbs we can use to light our own private homes or businesses, he explained. I think the feds have overstepped our 10th Amendment constitutional rights as theyve so often done under the Commerce Clause.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
There is a resolution to this frustration that states tote.
What is there in an individuals life each day that one could point out that government doesn't have some sort of control over?
One point that the CFL Marxist overlook is that millions of
ornamental and antique light fixtures would look stupid
and become worthless with CFL bulbs.
Correct. It’s ridiculous for the feds to mandate what bulb can be used by us peons. There’s a place for both and people should make the choice for themselves.
Big BUMP! :-)
Uhhhh. Are there any lightbulbs actually made in South Carolina?
WHY did GWB sign this POS legisation? I realized he wanted to be “liked” by evironmentalists who hated him, but he could have veoted it and sent it back to committee WITHOUT the light bulb ban. Then again, his “advisors” were morons.
Oooh, maybe we can buy them from there.
I have no idea but he sure screwed up, this is a real fiasco.
Lol, thank you FRiend.
The vast bulk of the political class of both parties would seem to be almost completely divorced from real life, let alone the concept of limited government.
Toilets. We have to get commodes on the list in SC.
And washing machines and dishwashers. I forgot washing machines and dishwashers.
“Oooh, maybe we can buy them from there.”
Well, this sounds like a good idea, but... a company sets up shop in SC (pretty capital-intensive, BTW); then, the feds will set up border agents to check cars for illegal lightbulbs. A tax will be set up for enforcement on everyone (on the assumption that you are purchasing illegal lightbulbs). Far fetched?
Then the “feds” will need to be arrested and jailed.
I don't have an issue with the lights themselves. If people want to use them, that is their business if they want to pay the money and a manufacturer thinks they can make money by producing them. What I take issue with is government bureaucrats taking my money via confiscatory taxes, TELLING me how to spend the money they leave me, then passing legislation to DRIVE up the cost of energy so we are FORCED to spend more money to drive our cars, heat our homes and turn on our lights, whether they be incandescent or CFL. These bastards think they are doing us a big favor because they think they know best, and are trying to twist our arms to accept their utopian crap. They think if energy costs go up high enough, their plans to harness unicorn flatulence or whatever will become economically viable.
Well I don't care to take part in their damned experiments. If my town wants to purchase LED based traffic and street lights because it saves the town money and is a guaranteed return on investment, then power to them. If people want these CFL lights in the marketplace as an alternative to make their homes more energy efficient, then I think is is fine and would never say boo to anyone so inclined. Actually, my issue is not even residential lighting. Making citizens purchase stuff we don't want and don't need is NOT going to solve any kind of energy shortage. It is the equivalent of selling carbon credits or putting a magnetic sticker on the back of a car. It is Jimmy Carter wearing sweaters and telling us to turn our thermostats down.
So to make my point that forcing all of us to use these things, have to pay MORE money to buy them (even though most of us have found they don't last nearly as long as the government says they do) Here an the original unaltered graph from Livermore Labs/DOE which I think is a very, very good graphical representation (reflecting the situation in 2009):
As shown below, I cut out a part of that graph and marked it up. Of the four major sectors, residential is the second smallest using just 4.65% of generated electrical power as shown by the graph. Government statistics say lighting consumes 12% of 4.65% of electricity flowing into a house. In the inset (enlarged) part shows the 4.65% pipeline with the red stripe on it showing the lighting share, and the green stripe showing what it would be if we assume 10% efficiency compared to CFL for incandescent bulbs. (The orange pipe leading into the box signifies the RESIDENTAL SECTOR of the energy grid and is representative of energy generated from all sources)
I didn't get this image from some anti-enviroweenie website. I made it myself after analyzing the data on the graph and government data such as estimates of how much lighting uses. And it illustrates the point I make, backed up with the government's own data, that forcing us to do this via statist legislation is basically ANOTHER camel nose in the figurative tent...BECAUSE THEY CAN.
If the market really wanted these lightbulbs, they would have made it on their own without government legislation. But, in my opinion, buying into this without a fight just exacerbates this statist mess we are in covering everything from legislation against transfats and salt in the diet to the amount of water we can flush down our toilet. Liberals think this is great because it is their pet thing that they have bought hook, line and sinker, running around screaming that we are running out of energy. Surrendering to this just invites the government to intrude into EVERY facet of our life.
I don't disparage people for choosing CFL's as a stand to take. I believe I have the data (shown graphically here) to indicate that using CFL's in houses isn't going to save us from anything. It is just a piece of do-gooder legislation that only does just that...makes guilty people feel good. I readily admit that one can make an argument for commercial/industrial building codes and so on, and I might buy into it and agree, the same as I agree with towns purchasing led-based traffic lights. However, building codes are so top heavy with bureaucracy now that I would fight against mandating these in commercial use on those grounds alone.
By my home is my home. And we have gone far too long allowing the government to dictate what we can and cannot do on our own quarter acre of land, small as it is. I am sick to death of it.
Time for a little eco-terrorism of our own. Go to a town hall meeting and drop a few of these CFL’s and make sure to call 911 and a HAZMAT response team. Also make sure that the HAZMAT response team checks everybody for mercury vapor inhalation. Now do it at the City Counsel meet, next the County Commissioners meeting. Heck, find the next “eco-day” meeting and drop a few dozen. After a while the politicians may get the idea that CFL’s are more dangerous than incandescent bulbs.
I have little respect for the man.
Why didn't he push to clean up voter fraud,stop illegal immigration,stop government growth and interference,promote oil refineries and drilling,etc.etc.etc.
G.W. Bush was no Constitutional conservative nor did he do much for the Republican party.He was too accomadating to the socialists and as for "Islam is a religion of peace",bah!
Nor have I ever worshipped at the altar of Rove.
Bushes are Democrat Lite.
But force the the homeowner to have a toilet that won't flush and a light that isn't bright enough to tell if it did ,and we will save the nation!
LOL! You just said in one sentence in your second paragraph what I took a whole lengthy post to say!
I am not even concerned about the mercury, the slowness to reach peak illumination or the confusion one must go through to find a light that has an attractive luminance.
It is the statist intrusion I find most disturbing!
Send FReepmail to join or leave this list.
Low pressure sodium vapor lights are the UGLIEST thing created by man. How would you like your house illuminated by these buzzing orange freaks of nature? I’ve read where 7/11s put these atrocities on the side of their buildings to scare away the thugs. If an armed robber is driven away by these POS lights, why would a normal person like them in their house?
You said it all. I don’t want the government telling me what bulb, toilet, soap, washing machine, etc. to use. I pay for it and I should be able to make my own choices. Period.
Frankly, this was the last straw for me with GWB. I appreciate Roberts and Alito on the SCOTUS, and I like having no attacks on the US for 8 years,but this dude was like Nixon. Trying his damndest to be “liked” by the Left by giving them exactly what they wanted. Nixon left office disgraced and hated by everybody. Bush left office being hated by everybody. Reagan left office with a 69% approval rating. Not only was he liked by the republican base, but even the leftists respected him.
Way too little, but hopefully it's the start of something larger.
It doesn't have an outright ban. It "merely" establishes minimum efficiency levels.
And that's way beyond Congress' business, IMHO.
Please ~ping~ me to articles relating to the 10th Amendment/States Rights so I can engage the pinger.
If you want on or off the ping list just say the word.
Tenth Amendment Chronicles Thread
Tenth Amendment Center
Firearms Freedom Act
Health Care Nullification
|CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES|
“Well, this sounds like a good idea, but...”
How about mail order?
I don’t think it’s illegal for us citizen types to purchase lightbulbs. Just illegal for manufacturers to sell them here. If it ends up legal in SC presumably we can buy them for our own use.
What’s housing and jobs like over there?
Yes, after all we all want all the armed robbers we can get in the house.
Not good. New construction is really down and existing values are tanking. Seattle is one of the worst in the country I believe.
Minor quibble to help avoid misinformation: Valero is based in San Antonio TEXAS; the T Boone dude owns a large chunk. Maybe you're thinking of CITGO???
I distinctly remember, during the 2000 campaign, when GW first said "compassionate conservative" and i thought, "uh oh." But the alternative was vastly worse...
And consider the alternatives the Democrats have offered.
In my view, you have to go back to 1968 to find somebody who wasn't corrupt or incompetent.
I would have to go back to 1908, but William Jennings Bryan was no prize either.
Why don’t they just re-label incandescents as “Heat Lamps”?
I doubt the law would apply if they did.
Gee, I wish I lived there.
Well, we know how the federal fascists will take care of that lofty ideal....if a half-inch filament is shipped into a light bulb factory from another state, the transaction will be pounced on and immediately ruled "INTERstate commerce".
See my tag line.....
No doubt you’re right, the feds will say it’s interstate if the ink for the packaging is from another state.
Love that tag line :-)
Well not a house.