The battle for light bulb freedom continues. The Democrats still believe that the American people are too stupid to choose their own light bulbs. The House GOP was able to delay enforcement of the new 100 watt ban for a year. At least we have a few more months before the Department of Energy sends its apparatchiks across the land to spy out Americans using the old incandescent bulbs!
It's worth noting who in addition to the Democrats favors light bulb socialism. Big Business. As usual, the capitalists are the greatest enemies to capitalism because they really don't believe in free markets.
Earlier this month, Republicans suspended the law until October by denying funds for its implementation as part of a massive spending bill. For Democrats, this move was another sign of how out of touch the GOP is.
But look who else is complaining. As Politico reported, "big companies like General Electric, Philips and Osram Sylvania (are) fuming." Allegedly these companies are mad because they invested lots of money getting ready for the new rules.
Fact is, they were pushing for the ban all along.
In 2007, Philips urged an incandescent ban as a way to force the market toward high-efficiency bulbs, complaining that without such laws, "purchase price and functional performance often take precedence over environmental concern."
That same year, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, which represents companies making 95% of bulbs sold in the U.S., told a Senate panel that a ban was needed "to further educate consumers on the benefits of energy-efficient products."
There obviously is a lot wrong with the Occupy Wall Street movement. But the protestors have helped highlight the problem of the alliance between Big Business and Big Government. Many corporate behemoths long ago made their peace with Uncle Sam and now actively lobby the Feds (and states) to safeguard their market shares and guarantee their profits. Republicans should be pro economic liberty, not pro corporate welfare.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article