Thursday, March 10, 2011

Department of Energy- #2709 - VIDEO: Rand Paul on Light Bulb Ban During Energy Committee Hearings - Freedom Works (2) Light Liberty and Unintended Consequences of Government Regulations -

Rand Paul on Light Bulb Ban During Energy Committee Hearings - Freedom Works -  Despite their rhetoric, the Department of Energy has little to no interest in protecting consumer choice. These federal bureaucrats believe that they can live your life better than you can. Beginning in 2012, the Department of Energy will ban anyone from using the 100-watt incandescent light bulb. The ban will effect the production of the popular child's toy the Easy-Bake Oven. During the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) gave the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency Dr. Kathleen Hogan an earful. Please see above for the video of Rand Paul saying what is likely on the mind of many Americans. Read more....... This clip is PRICELESS......

Light Liberty and Unintended Consequences of Government Regulations - - Regulation: The leader of the Tea Party Caucus introduces a bill saying government can't tell us what light bulbs to buy, especially if the replacements for Thomas Edison's creation pose an environmental hazard all their own. Before there was ObamaCare and its mandate to buy health insurance as a condition of citizenship, there was the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, one of the first things Democrats took up on taking power in the 2006 elections.  Read more.......  Behind every major national problem is some form of government regulation or legislation. No other organization or group is big enough or powerful enough to have such tragic effect on our lives. The worst problems occur when the politicians attempt to go back and "fix" problems THEY created in the first place. It is their attempt at correcting the unintended consequences of their prior legislation that places the citizens out in the heartlands at greatest risk. A great example is Senator Dodd and Barney Frank's bank legislation.  Article and commentary contributed by Steve Peters.


  1. Think about this:
    Why do the major light bulb manufacturers, surprisingly, welcome these regulations?
    Why would manufacturers actually like to be told what they can – or can’t – make?

    Profits of course:
    The removal of the unprofitable, cheap, simple, safe, and popular bulbs,
    so that major manufacturers can make bigger profits from expensive inferior products that people otherwise would not to buy in sufficient quantities

    Increased – not decreased – marketplace competition gives good energy saving bulbs that people want to buy – since manufacturers then have to try to satisfy them – and people have always bought energy saving products.

    “Expensive to buy but cheap in the long run”…
    Battery (Energizer bunny!) and washing up liquid manufacturers can imaginatively advertise and sell such products – if they are good enough. So can light bulb and other manufacturers.

    New businesses are created with local American jobs, whatever the type of bulbs made, perhaps with research grants towards new energy saving alternatives.

    Besides, overall, the savings are hardly there anyway
    The so-called power factor alone means that common CFLs use twice the energy compared with what your meter says (
    with Sylvania, DOE and other references, and with more on why supposed
    savings from banning simple incandescents don’t hold up ).

    Much greater and more relevant savings of actual “energy waste” comes from power plant and grid changes, and from preventing the unnecessary usage of products eg night lighting in buildings,
    than from preventing the personal choices of the products that people want to use.

  2. About Edison, and inventions past….

    No-one was calling for “a ban on energy guzzling radio tubes” (similarities with incandescents) when they were abundant, and newer transistors (similarities with LEDs) were arriving on the market.
    The tubes got used less anyway – but are still appreciated for special uses, without breaking down any power plant (any guitarists out there?).

    If a new product is preferred to the old one, why ban the old one?
    (No point, little savings)
    If an old product is preferred to the new one, why ban the old one?
    (No point, the old one is better)
    Think about it.

    On a deeper level, it’s about celebrating Creativity – not Destruction.

    Celebrating creativity is about recognizing the advantages that different products have.
    That is why they exist for people to choose.
    (Some “efficient incandescents” like Halogen replacements will temporarily be allowed, phase-out by 2020, but have a whiter light and constructional differences, apart from being much more expensive for marginal savings, which is why neither consumers or governments like them)

    President Obama, State of the Union Address 25 January 2011:
    What we can do – what America does better than anyone – is spark the creativity and imagination of our people.
    We are the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices, the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers…

    Yes Mr President, Creative America, the nation of Edison:
    Would you not have allowed him to create his popular light bulb?

    And so it came to pass, in the autumn of 1879, after tireless effort working with different materials, Thomas Edison finally arrived at the ingenious invention we still see today, the Edison light bulb, in its basic form the world’s single most popular electrical appliance and the oldest electrical invention in widespread common use:
    A beautifully simple, safe, cheap, bright light delivering construction.

    Maybe the time will come when, like its cousin the gleaming radio tube, it gradually fades away, the passing of old technology.

    But let it be a democratic passing by the will of the people, not a passing by committee dictats and decrees.

    How many American, European or other officials should it take to change a light bulb?
    How many citizens should be allowed to choose?

    ( )