Posted on 06/23/2008 8:25:30 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
WASHINGTON Members of Congress are beginning to have second thoughts about the ban on incandescent light bulbs effective in 2014 as a result of an energy bill signed into law earlier this year. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, says his objection is very basic the Constitution doesnt authorize Congress to do anything remotely like banning a product that has been used safely and efficiently for more than 100 years in favor of Chinese-imported compact fluorescent light bulbs that pose considerable health and safety risks.
Extensive cleanup is required by the Environmental Protection Agency for simply breaking a bulb. When a bulb, which contains mercury, is broken, according to the EPA, the room must be evacuated for 15 minutes and aired out with windows, but not before all glass is removed, placed in a sealed glass jar and disposed of outside. Any remaining glass must be picked up with tape. In addition, central heating or air conditioning units must be turned off.
Wait
Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb?
(Excerpt) Read more at sayanythingblog.com ...
“Recommend by the EPA, not required.”
MANDATED by 2012 - that means REQUIRED
http://youtube.com/watch?v=e-LOtKIIKcg
I would think the EPA site would reference such a upcoming requirement.
“I do know that it does NOT mandate CFLs”
Congress has passed a bill making it MANDANTORY to use CFL’s by 2012...
You might want to do some research = besides, the bigger point is that it’s not up to the Fed. Gov’t to mandate what products we buy and use in own homes - that negates the Free Market system
http://youtube.com/watch?v=e-LOtKIIKcg
“What I would like to see is a congressman or senator take to the floor to give a speech and in the process, drop a CFL on the floor. See how quick that place empties out. Yet they want to force us to put them in our homes.”
close to it
http://youtube.com/watch?v=e-LOtKIIKcg
Ted Poe is a no-nonsense judge from Texas that went into politics. He built a reputation for imposing unorthodox punishments on criminal offenders. I'd back him to the hilt for ANY political office.
And like most, if not all, laws Congress passes, there is a proviso in it at the very end exempting Congress from having to abide by the law.
rofl When the long ones burn out Hubby does the same thing you do.
It all goes in the garbage.
One would think so - only common sense...however, you are forgetting who is making these decisions...
The bills MANDATES ONLY CFL's after 2012.
We stop it now or we kowtow...and get ready for every other phase of our lives to be mandated...
First: the low-flushers
Now: light bulbs
Next: gov't controls your thermostat. (Obama has promised - and California already has the infrastructure to do so - and was ready to implement but the hue and cry stopped it - for now.
Marxism is a One Size Fits All society - in that the ruling class with dictate to the masses who will be leveled to bare existence, while they, themselves, live high on the hog, like the Goracle
Wake up, Sheeple
Yes there is. It ain't pretty, but it can be done.
Bureaucracies, by definition, are mindless; and remember, the only requirement for an unjust society to exist is an endless supply of unjust bureaucrats.
I have been using the new bulbs for ten years; I find them to have unifornmly a shorter life than incandescents, specially in enclosed fixtures, but the energy savings is real. I am guessing I have broken even.
But it has been entirely my own choice.
The EPA can come and arrest me because I have no intention of following their "guidelines" laws or whatever they wish to call it. Even if it's for "my own good."
Well, that's reassuring!
Look it up: seatbelts, when first debated, were recommended, not required under penalty of fines.
Good luck with that pollyana outlook.
With FDR
I did do some research. Respectfully, you're incorrect. CFL's just happen to be the current technology that meets Congress's mandate.
Also, usage is not *mandated* (there won't be light bulb police checking your house, at least not yet). What research I've done shows that CURRENT incandescent technology that runs from 40W to 150W will unable to be *sold*. Other bulbs (think big+small bulbs, appliance bulbs, and "new technology" incandescents) will be able to be sold.
I don't like the law anymore than anyone else here. However, if you're going to argue against something, it's important to be correct. Any value gained in debating a point is invalidated if opponents can point to one incorrect statement.
BTW, I'm a Mainer in Exile. What's the weather like up there today?
You mean to tell me that you pretend that they are unaware that we all now flush three times?
I expect any day now to see a recommendation that meters be installed on every john to monitor compliance.
No intestinal distress allowed without official approval!
Oh great!
We can expect a new OCFEC any day now to bankrupt us some more?
Thanks for that encouraging tidbit.
Goldberg asserts that it was Wilson. Big Fascist.
And either a dedicated phone line to make sure they are not tampered with, or a huge bureaucracy to make regular unannounced inspections periodically to every residence in the state.
Don't worry about it.
Fluorescent bulbs have more mercury in them and you're still alive aren't you?
Billions have been used and didposed of over the last 80 years...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.