Ahem, the big 3 light bulb makers have already announced they will no longer be making incadescents so this proposed law is useless.
Why not let the consumer market decide?
Or are you schilling for the nanny state?
And who do you think is behind the scenes? Especially since there have/are other better alternatives - or would be if they were allowed to produce?
Someone should be ferreting out who owns stock that will bring some very big dividends on the new bulbs...
(BTW, I believe it's spelled "incandescents"? Gonna embrace 'em, aught spell 'em right, right?)
Also, BTW, I have some in my house, but not in all lamps. They dont' work in my lamps that run on the motion detector switches - they flicker like mad - and from reports - can be dangerous. I also find them uncomfortable to read by. So I have regular bulbs for those applications. Should be MY CHOICE - not dictated...(and for a product that requires hazmat 'rules of engagement' to clean up should one break, just how is this passing the CDC criteria for doing one of the FEW things big Gov's IS supposed to do - protect us from hazards that we can't ourselves. For months now, almost on a daily basis, we hear of new recalls of anything 'China' = and then we force these on everyone? (Doesn't pass the smell test.)
Meanwhile, I'm stocking up. That said, if the "proposed law is useless," why is it being implemented???
Ahem
How easily we are led to the edge of the cliff