how many lawmakers does it take to...

by:C.E.T     2020-06-09
In 5 months, the traditional 100-
Watt incandescent lamps will become illegal in the United States.
12 months later, the same fate will come.
1 year later, the traditional 60 W incandescent lampand 40-
The watt light bulb will also disappear.
The World of Thomas Edison
The ever-changing invention is one of the most popular products ever.
So useful, so reliable and so cheap things that in more than a century, consumers bought them for billions of dollars.
However, due to a federal law, when Congress passed it and signed it by George W, relatively few Americans knew anything.
In 2007, the familiar light bulb was about to be banned.
Of course Americans know the law now.
In theory, it aims to improve energy efficiency by requiring more light per Watt of the bulb.
But by setting new standards that are higher than ordinary incandescent lamps, what the law really means
The world effect is to deprive most Americans of the freedom to buy bulbs they like.
Instead, they will be forced to spend more money on fragile halogen lamps or whirlpool compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs)
This has been the case for decades, but most consumers have never thought about buying.
The impending ban has sparked outrage among the grassroots, especially the right wing.
When presidential candidate Michelle bach man told the Republican audience: \"President bach man will allow you to buy any light bulb you want, she won cheers and applause.
Last week, a bill to repeal the lightbulb mandate was voted on in the House;
It won the majority. 233-193)
Almost every Republican is in favor of repeal, and almost every Democrat is in opposition. Since two-
Law 2007 is still intact and requires support from people in their thirties to pass. For now.
Washington always goes beyond its legal boundaries and usually gets away with it.
But the violation of the federal government from time to time is so bad that the public is against it.
I am shocked to announce the bulb of the American family that lights up 85%.
Even Democrats should be embarrassed to defend it.
Using efficiency instructions to kill standard bulbs is a pure nepotism approach.
After the big bulb manufacturers were frustrated by customers refusing to switch from cheap disposable incandescent lamps to the more profitable compact fluorescent lamps touted by green companies, they decided to play hard balls.
The New York Times Magazine pointed out last month, \"so a few years ago, [Philips]Electronics]
Forming alliances with environmental organizations, including the Natural Resources Conservation Commission, to promote standards.
\"We feel the need to do so. . .
Show the best-
Harry verhal, head of the company\'s strategic sustainability program, said the known lighting technology, incandescent lamps, is at the end of the life cycle.
\"Other companies have also joined the program, lobbying Congress to veto products that Americans like so much and forcing them to buy more expensive alternatives that the industry is keen to sell.
A commentator from the National Association of electrical manufacturers testified frankly in 2007 that the whole plan was \"under the initiative of the industry.
Unable to persuade consumers to voluntarily give up Edison\'s light bulb, the big business forced the government to solve the problem.
Virginia Pollard, a Bloomberg columnist, commented: \"The Tea Party is born in such a deal.
\"Defenders of the ban insist that moving to compact fluorescent lamps will save money, save energy and be better for the environment in the long run.
But countless Americans find the case against CFLs more convincing: the things they buy are more expensive, the speed at which they reach full light is slow, do not work with dimmers, contain toxic mercury, cannot be used in many ordinary fixtures.
And, for many people, fluorescent can make people feel cold and disgusting.
But even if the case of CFLs is unquestionable, when does the government start making choices for consumers?
Once the prime time is ready, Americans can effortlessly adopt advanced technology
There is no need for any law to force people to switch from vinyl records to cd or from landline to mobile.
Deciding what bulbs to buy may be a challenge they can cope with without congressional interference.
The bulb ban may not be the biggest issue on the national agenda.
But it is invasive and annoying and it puts many teeth on the edge.
I bet it\'s an invasion that Washington can\'t get away.
Jeff Jacoby can be reached at jacoby @ globe. com.
@ Jeff_Jacoby on Twitter
Custom message
Chat Online
Chat Online
Chat Online inputting...