Bright Lights + Big Government = Dimwits

Only a government light bulb could come with this many warnings.

Only a government light bulb could come with this many warnings.

Beginning in 2012, old-fashioned light bulbs will be phased-out and replaced with those super-expensive “energy-efficient” bulbs. Unfortunately, while the eco-statists in Congress were salivating over compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) that resemble soft-serve ice cream cones, they neglected to consider the harmful effects the soon-to-be-government mandated bulbs pose to the public and environment.

“Critics of CFLs argue that exposure to mercury vapor is dangerous if the bulbs are broken, and others complained about CFL bulbs causing migraines and epilepsy attacks, resulting in medical groups asking for exemptions for those with health problems,” report Kelsey Huber and Nicholas D. Loris for Human Events. “They also point out that CFLs do not work well in colder temperatures nor do they work with dimmer switches.”

These problems and a handful more were not foreseen by Congress when they were being wooed by CFL manufacturers and their lobbyists write Huber and Loris. “That’s why lawmakers shouldn’t be telling people what lights to use in their homes,” they say.

The reason why Congress is banning traditional incandescent light bulbs is “simple” say Huber and Loris citing economist Don Bourdreaux‘s take on the issue:

Any legislation forcing Americans to switch from using one type of bulb to another is inevitably the product of a horrid mix of interest-group politics with reckless symbolism designed to placate an electorate that increasingly believes that the sky is falling.

Based on Boudreaux’s observation, Huber and Loris summize that Congress moved ahead with the ban under the guise of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and that paved the way for CFL manufacturers and their lobbyists to take advantage of another ‘crisis’ so they could “force consumers to use their more expensive products.”

Gone will be jobs for those who once manufactured incandescent bulbs, as well as the companies that haven’t embraced the ‘change’ promised by CFL light bulbs. It is still within Congress’ power to reverse the upcoming ban on traditional light bulbs, and they’d be wise to consider that few consumers purchase the costly CFLs without rebates or other government incentives.

Huber and Loris conclude that it’s up to American citizens to make their voices heard now before they’re left out in the dark:

Demand for cheap incandescents is not going to change because of legislation, so the only option left to environmentalists is to remove the incandescent light bulb from the market altogether and make it impossible for consumers to light their houses inexpensively. CFLs may have a role in the marketplace, but we should let the consumer decide what that role should be.

This is one example of the absurdity of federal regulations and highlights how bureaucrats pointlessly try to change human behavior. The regulatory burden grew tremendously during President George W. Bush’s tenure and is only getting worse under President Obama’s. It is a trend that restricts freedom and choice in the marketplace and costs taxpayers billions of dollars. It is a trend that the government should reverse.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

8 responses to “Bright Lights + Big Government = Dimwits

  1. I actually prefer the CFL’s because they have a longer life and they burn brighter at fewer watts. Their cost is about the same when you do the math comparing them to the current light bulbs, and then you add on the extra savings on your electric bill as well. Furthermore, the more bulbs that are produced, the cheaper they will be.

    That being said, I really don’t think the government has the right to force us to use them. Like you said in the article, it should be up to the people to decide which is better, but let them do it in a free market, not by government mandating.

  2. This is why I hate politicians in all their forms. Stay the eff outta my life. I have been buying lightbulbs for 30 years. I don’t need you to tell me which one’s to buy. (Or, HealthCare; Or, anything else for that matter.

  3. Andrea Barto McIntosh

    Just another example of government interference. Get out of my life, you intrusive bastards. You’ve caused me enough problems over the years! Why did nobody rise up years ago when this started?? Slowly, one by one our personal freedoms were taken away..slowly, to desensitize us. Stuff like seatbelts, smoking, and how you discipline your kids–oh yeah, now the fat kid issue…Funny how the government workers who are paid to ruin our lives are about the only ones who still have jobs. If you had told me twenty years ago that I would have to buy govt. approved light bulbs, I would have laughed my ass off. Not anymore, just wondering what’s next.

  4. Buy incandescent bulbs when they’re on sale; I’ve been getting them 4 or 6 for $1 at a time. I took an inventory of all the bulbs I currently use, figured 1 bulb per year (way over-kill), multiplied by 30 years, and have been stocking up. By the end of 2011, I will have enough incandescent bulbs to last me the rest of my life.

    Maybe I should double up for the coming incandescent black market…

  5. I can’t see very well under CFL’s. I suppose I will have to stock pile incandescent light bulbs. I am also very concerned about their mercury content. You can’t throw just them in the garbage or recycling bin, but that’s exactly what people will do.

  6. Pingback: Bright Lights + Big Government = Dimwits (via ) « Orwell's Dreams

  7. Pingback: NSLF’s Top 10 Least Wanted in the U.S. House |

  8. Pingback: Light Bulb Banner Plotting to Run House Energy Committee |

Leave a comment