Congress overturns incandescent bulb ban ... for now

jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
They put a delaying clause in the spending bill that will stop this madness for now. Hopefully, sometime soon, there will be a full repeal in the offing.

SOURCE

Congress overturns incandescent light bulb ban

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times

Friday, December 16, 2011

Congressional negotiators struck a deal Thursday that overturns the new rules that were to have banned sales of traditional incandescent light bulbs beginning next year.

That agreement is tucked inside the massive 1,200-page spending bill that funds the government through the rest of this fiscal year, and which both houses of Congress will vote on Friday. Mr. Obama is expected to sign the bill, which heads off a looming government shutdown.

Congressional Republicans dropped almost all of the policy restrictions they tried to attach to the bill, but won inclusion of the light bulb provision, which prevents the Obama administration from carrying through a 2007 law that would have set energy efficiency standards that effectively made the traditional light bulb obsolete.

Stopping the bulb ban was a chief GOP priority coming into this year, with all of the candidates seeking to become chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee saying they would push through a repeal. That bill cleared the House but Democrats blocked its consideration in the Senate.

House Republicans then insisted on adding a provision into the year-end spending bill, and it was one of the last major sticking-points in the negotiations.

The spending bill doesn’t actually amend the 2007 law, but does prohibit the administration from spending any money to carry out the light bulb standards — which amounts to at least a temporary reprieve.

The spending bill is full of similar provisions that are included year after year to restrict what administrations can do.

At $915 billion in discretionary spending, the bill amounts to $750.6 million per page, and funds the vast majority of government operations, from defense to homeland security to federal parks. Since it is a must-pass bill, it also becomes a major battleground for policy fights such as the light bulbs.

Among the other policy riders attached to the bill is a requirement that all new federal employees be run through E-Verify, the voluntary government system for checking to see if employees are authorized to work in the U.S.; restrictions on the administration transferring suspected terrorist detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the U.S.; and a ban on the District of Columbia using government money to pay for abortions.

The GOP tried but failed to attach restrictions on the Obama administration’s nuclear waste policy, its international family planning policy and major restrictions on the president’s environmental agenda. Mr. Obama and Democrats also forced Republicans to remove provisions that would have prevented him from requiring government contractors to disclose their political contributions — though they cannot be required to disclose them as part of an application for a loan or grant.

“These contentious policy riders had no place in our annual appropriations bills, and it was encouraging that we were able to remove nearly all of them from the final version of this bill,” said Rep. Norm Dicks, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee.

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.
Click to expand...
 
Think light bulbs, while Rome burns?

Congressional Republicans dropped almost all of the policy restrictions
they tried to attach to the bill, but won inclusion of the light bulb provision,

Like that is a big priority? Are you freakin' kidding me?

What's next?
What's next?
What's next?
 
the whole new bulb thing is nothing more than an optimization problem.

big ancient power grid that no one wants to invest in because it's a near-term profitability sinkhole
+
easily-effected and non-impactful change in end user power use that would let said power grid endure for a few more years
=
no-brainer.

the folks that are getting upset about this are assholes. what, you don't think you look as good in florescent lighting? no one does. get over it, drama queens. there's no functional difference to anyone between the old and new bulbs. and they both fit in the same hole. standardization. sometimes it works. henry ford kinda knew that.

internet-memes-conpiracy-keanu-makes-more-sense-than-a-simple-explanation.jpg
 
When you type that stuff I almost get taken in that you really
believe it but I know you are just trying to yank our chains.

I switched over to CFL's years ago for two reasons:
they last longer and use far less energy.

There's is nothing wrong with the power grid
if it weren't for government interference power costs
would drop every year that goes by like all other commodities.

How much water toilets use when we flush What foods to eat
what thoughts we can think Yeah Right we sure as fuck don't need no mulatto to
to tell us what light bulbs to use Take over GM, socialize the medical industry, outlaw
offshore drilling or run up the national debt by 5 trillion dollars
2qsupow.jpg


So yeah they can take their light bulb ban and shove it where the Sun don't shine
GRR.gif
 
really minks think about it

energy prices could be falling every year if it wasn't for government
regulation and taxation. You know this to be true but can not admit it.


I don't know whose more pathetic, a Christian that believes in Jebus or
these secular whackos that believe in global warming
at least the bible belters aren't out to see to it that it costs me
five bucks a gallon for gas?

an infinitesimal amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere 0.038 percent
was causing the Earth to heat up, the seas to rise,
and Minnie Mouse to announce she was pregnant.
Click to expand...
 
Texas could face rolling blackouts next year

and your point?

I mean c'mon seriously ya know what the underlying issue is
it sure as hell ain't that there's not enough coal to burn

there sure as hell isn't a lack of demand

hah
 
2minkey said:
i bet you're upset that buggies are banned on interstates, too.
Click to expand...

:yawn:

All that education...:sigh:

For the record, I am a big fan of CFL and LED lighting...mostly LED. Screw the environmental consequences of mercury. I gotta save some bucks! ;)

BTW...a negro invented the microchip you are using to type your rhetoric Winky. You need to recognize.
 
you don't understand why i don't give a shit about the formal obsolescence of technologies that are socially irrelevant and transposable?

send me a pm if i'm missing your point.
 
Re: Thems some funky lookin' brothas

Winky said:
33wbjif.jpg
Click to expand...

Sorry. Wrong again. While we're at it, check this site out...If that's too much for your mind to handle, you can always claim that the plow, invented in Africa, was also invented by the Europeans who, at the time, were more interested in screwing their livestock. ;)

You can also try googling Mark Dean.
 
nice link to the info on all those black inventors. gee whiz, look at their names. don't sound too bantu to me. sounds like they took on the affect of anglo_whiteguy civilization. you think they woulda thought up all that cool shit as horticulturalists in dahomey? UMMMMM NOPE...

BTW the plow was not "invented in africa." the first known uses of the plow are in ancient sumer and egypt IIRC.

you might think egypt is somehow related to all those black american folks in that article you reference. it's not. those folks are from the equatorial crotch of west africa. vastly different language and culture. besides, they were americans, anyway. 'tis american culture - you know the culture well-known for practical invention per de tocqueville et al - that produced them.

regardless a plow is something that ANYONE would think of during a period of agricultural intensification, assuming the availability cheap draft animals. yeah i said cheap. there have been many societies that simply chose not to intensify because, well, it makes life less fun. the fourteen dudes in namibia that still make a living as hunter-gatherers would rather pick berries than deal with domesticated oxen. not sure i blame them.

now of course i'm not trying to "pile on" with winky here, because he is far more wrong that you are in this instance. but yer shit ain't holding up to any kind of critical muster.
 
I might be wrong
but I don't have a problem with my skin color
and if someone else has an inferiority complex
because of their race, culture or their ancestors lack of advancement
that isn't my problem either.

If I were a Negro I'd be pissed that Obama the first mullato President is a flaming Marxist!

Just take a gander at the 1st world nations
you'll see they all share one thing in common,
white folks and their culture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top