Guess what was tucked in the 1,200 page bill?
It will take weeks to unravel the whole thing, but for one, the ban on incandescent lightbulbs has been suspended. My father in-law now has an attic full of scrap-glass.
Also, all federal employees are now required to meet e-verify standards (be American citizens).
Another rider keeps Detainees at Guantanamo from being transferred to the United States.
With each page totaling about $780 million dollars, I'm sure it's full of great stuff!
Quote from: Gaspar on December 16, 2011, 02:59:17 PM
Guess what was tucked in the 1,200 page bill?
It will take weeks to unravel the whole thing, but for one, the ban on incandescent lightbulbs has been suspended. My father in-law now has an attic full of scrap-glass.
Also, all federal employees are now required to meet e-verify standards (be American citizens).
Another rider keeps Detainees at Guantanamo from being transferred to the United States.
With each page totaling about $780 million dollars, I'm sure it's full of great stuff!
If someone wants to keep wasting that much money on light bulbs, well, hey what can you say to that kind of dumb?
The defense bill kept detainees out, too. Belt and suspenders?
Saw that this morning about the bulbs.
Per the free Republic post:
QuoteAs part of last night's omnibus budget bill which prevented government shutdown, Republicans won a small victory: they suspended the incandescent light bulb ban. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle bowed to widespread public pressure, as the American people made it clear they weren't interested in this literal government intrusion into their livingrooms.
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.
The 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.
Rep. Paul Gosar, a freshman from Arizona, issued a statement shortly after the 296-121 vote explaining why he was sour on the deal – even though he supported it.
"You definitely do not want to bite into it, you cannot stand the taste, but you know you have to eat it," Gosar said. "I hoped that this bill would include far more cuts, greater reforms, and more regulatory relief. I'm disappointed that it does not! Let me be the first to admit, this legislation is far from perfect!"
He called it "A Crap Sandwich"
Sounds like Conan's signature pile!
Quote from: Gaspar on December 16, 2011, 03:07:05 PM
Rep. Paul Gosar, a freshman from Arizona, issued a statement shortly after the 296-121 vote explaining why he was sour on the deal – even though he supported it.
"You definitely do not want to bite into it, you cannot stand the taste, but you know you have to eat it," Gosar said. "I hoped that this bill would include far more cuts, greater reforms, and more regulatory relief. I'm disappointed that it does not! Let me be the first to admit, this legislation is far from perfect!"
He called it "A Crap Sandwich"
Sounds like Conan's signature pile!
I think each of them have been handed that soundbite for about 12 years now.
QuoteAs part of last night's omnibus budget bill which prevented government shutdown, Republicans won a small victory: they suspended the incandescent light bulb ban. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle bowed to widespread public pressure, as the American people made it clear they weren't interested in this literal government intrusion into their livingrooms.
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.
The 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.
Outstanding! Curious to know how many jobs the GOP created with that move?
For the 80th time, it's not a ban. Incandescent bulbs will still be perfectly legal to sell, just not for general lighting purposes, and even then, only if they're labeled between 40 and 100 watts. IOW, you can buy an "outdoor" bulb that's the same as what you're buying today. You're a little dumb in the pocketbook if you do, but that's your business, I guess. And if you don't like that way of explaining it, let me make it even simpler: Halogen bulbs are also incandescent, they're just filled with different air. They will still be allowed to be sold for general lighting use.
It's not about control, it's about reducing grid demand. We presently suffer from a chronic lack of transmission capacity across large segments of the country. Since nobody is willing to spend the dough to increase capacity, the only solution is increased energy efficiency. That it happens to save you and I money is just a bonus.
Conan, they probably created zero jobs, but they did manage to give the foreign light bulb manufacturers even more time to milk the old tech.
Quote from: nathanm on December 16, 2011, 03:50:14 PM
Conan, they probably created zero jobs, but they did manage to give the foreign light bulb manufacturers even more time to milk the old tech.
The new ones are made in China too, and sold at a far higher profit margin than then incandescent bulbs.
I actually like the CFL bulbs. Have them all through the house and they are very efficient. I like incandescent for a reading lamp, but more and more I just read on my iPad.
CFL is actually on it's way out now that we are producing cheaper brighter LED technology. I would estimate that by the time the BAN is back, we will have gone to LED and the product will be less expensive and so attractive from an energy standpoint that a BAN will not be necessary.
I just noticed today that we haven't put a ban on candles yet. Why not? They are flammable, produce toxic fumes, and severe burns. What is wrong with us? Get those things out of your house!
Quote from: Conan71 on December 16, 2011, 03:23:23 PM
Outstanding! Curious to know how many jobs the GOP created with that move?
Or, how many are not eliminated. Never mind the fact that all the tungsten bulbs are probably made in China. At least I won't have to get rid of my dimmers.
Quote from: nathanm on December 16, 2011, 03:50:14 PM
IOW, you can buy an "outdoor" bulb that's the same as what you're buying today. You're a little dumb in the pocketbook if you do, but that's your business, I guess.
We tried it. The florescent bulbs had a bigger base and DID NOT FIT the existing sockets. Someone forgot to check compatibility with existing fixtures.
I was talking about the usual incandescent bulb, which will be (would have been?) sold as an "outdoor" bulb for those folks who really had to have the hot-metal kind.
Quote from: nathanm on December 16, 2011, 09:39:19 PM
I was talking about the usual incandescent bulb, which will be (would have been?) sold as an "outdoor" bulb for those folks who really had to have the hot-metal kind.
We have 2 bulb, 60w (each) max incandescent fixtures on both the back porch and front porch. Except when they burn out, they light instantly. They also require horizontal mounting. Heiron says that doesn't matter. I haven't checked lately but the last time I did, CFL didn't like horizontal.
The ones that didn't fit were the flood/spot fixtures.
Edit: added "each"
Quote from: Gaspar on December 16, 2011, 04:08:10 PM
I just noticed today that we haven't put a ban on candles yet. Why not?
Because they emit light when the sun goes down and the wind stops blowing.
Quote from: nathanm on December 16, 2011, 03:50:14 PM
For the 80th time, it's not a ban. Incandescent bulbs will still be perfectly legal to sell, just not for general lighting purposes, and even then, only if they're labeled between 40 and 100 watts. IOW, you can buy an "outdoor" bulb that's the same as what you're buying today. You're a little dumb in the pocketbook if you do, but that's your business, I guess. And if you don't like that way of explaining it, let me make it even simpler: Halogen bulbs are also incandescent, they're just filled with different air. They will still be allowed to be sold for general lighting use.
It's not about control, it's about reducing grid demand. We presently suffer from a chronic lack of transmission capacity across large segments of the country. Since nobody is willing to spend the dough to increase capacity, the only solution is increased energy efficiency. That it happens to save you and I money is just a bonus.
Conan, they probably created zero jobs, but they did manage to give the foreign light bulb manufacturers even more time to milk the old tech.
The "ban" is a product of Glenn Beck and FOX news, and it's false. The bi-partisan -supported law called for bulbs to be more efficient (mostly by adding different gasses to the bulb) which is a far cry from a ban. Nathan is correct.
The energy law is still in place, but the money to enforce it now is gone. That creates a situation where speculators could import older, cheaper-made foreign bulbs to undercut sales of the newer efficient ones and create an uncompetitive disadvantage for U.S. manufacturers that made investments in the newer technology.
i.e., the GOP just screwed American bulb makers.
Good jobs strategy, guys.
Fox Admits Defeat In Phony War On "Light Bulb Ban" (But Doesn't Know It)
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201112050008
Regular Fox News viewers know that the network has spent months hyping a nonexistent "light bulb ban" going into effect on Jan. 1, 2012, that they claim would outlaw incandescent light bulbs. The law in question -- signed by former President George W. Bush -- does not outlaw incandescent bulbs, only inefficient ones.
Yet Fox has never acknowledged that its war on the "light bulb ban" was phony -- until today. With no self-awareness, Fox & Friends hyped a bulb that reportedly meets the new efficiency standards -- and it happens to be an incandescent.
(http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/sylvania-20111205-lightbulbs.png)
Quote from: patric on December 17, 2011, 12:00:31 PM
(http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/sylvania-20111205-lightbulbs.png)
Halogen bulbs are more efficient than "normal" incandescent bulbs so they emit more light per watt than "normal" bulbs. I don't have the exact numbers but replacing a 60W "normal" bulb with a 43W Halogen is probably close enough. The halogen bulbs I have used for automobile headlights also typically appear to be more white than the old sealed beam bulbs. Do you have some color info Patric?
Replacing a 60W incandescent bulb with a same technology 40W bulb is not increasing efficiency. You will use less energy but you will also get less light. Would you add a fixture or some bulbs to make up for the less light per bulb? A lower wattage with the same technology is a lot like turning the house heater thermostat down. Less light, cooler house (in the winter).
Edit: found this on Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halogen_lamp
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 17, 2011, 12:19:43 PM
Halogen bulbs are more efficient than "normal" incandescent bulbs so they emit more light per watt than "normal" bulbs. I don't have the exact numbers but replacing a 60W "normal" bulb with a 43W Halogen is probably close enough. The halogen bulbs I have used for automobile headlights also typically appear to be more white than the old sealed beam bulbs. Do you have some color info Patric?
Replacing a 60W incandescent bulb with a same technology 40W bulb is not increasing efficiency. You will use less energy but you will also get less light. Would you add a fixture or some bulbs to make up for the less light per bulb? A lower wattage with the same technology is a lot like turning the house heater thermostat down. Less light, cooler house (in the winter).
The Sylvania chart was to illustrate some of the options, but I also disagree with their incandescent-to-incandescent substitutions.
Halogen lamps can burn at higher temperatures than Tungsten lamps, which can result in an upward color shift. Since it's still well within the incandescent range it's not a problem (nor considered a "blue rich" source like Metal Halide or Mercury Vapor)
"When we say a lamp has a Color Temperature of 3000 Kelvins, it means a glowing metal at 3000 Kelvins would produce light of about the same color as the lamp. Instead, if the metal is heated to 4100 Kelvins, it will produce a much whiter light. Direct sunlight corresponds to about 5300 Kelvins while daylight, which has the blue from the sky mixed in, is typically 6000 Kelvins or above. A standard incandescent lamp has a filament at 2700 Kelvins, and therefore (by definition) a Color Temperature of 2700 Kelvins." "Daylight" colors at night = bad for body clock.
Quote from: patric on December 17, 2011, 11:48:21 AM
i.e., the GOP just screwed American bulb makers.
Good jobs strategy, guys.
I think American bulb makers are kind of like the tooth fairy.
They don't exist.
Quote from: Conan71 on December 17, 2011, 05:06:39 PM
I think American bulb makers are kind of like the tooth fairy.
They don't exist.
In an effort to lighten the mood, here's some Marshall schwag just so I can say
we I drifted this thread and got the obligatory Marshall reference in..
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lVXSkEB1cww/Tuz3DWjOkNI/AAAAAAAABz4/S7IQ29lz0ko/s1440/2011-12-17_13-53-42_231.jpg)
Ok, carry on.
;D
Awesome! I'm sure Eric would be proud!
Quote from: Conan71 on December 17, 2011, 05:19:24 PM
Awesome! I'm sure Eric would be proud!
He was up there today; I got a chance to talk with him for a while before I checked those out. Ultra nice guy. Taller than he looks in pictures; I'm guessing about 6'4". He's trying to find his second in the 'el loco gringo' series of beers (the one that started with the El Cucuy).
Quote from: Conan71 on December 17, 2011, 05:06:39 PM
I think American bulb makers are kind of like the tooth fairy.
They don't exist.
I think Aerolights is still making bulbs in Illinois, and for some reason Texas representative Michael Burgess frantically rushed a bill to Governor Perry's desk to exempt Texas bulb manufacturers from federal laws.
Interesting to see how this is being reported by different factions:
Washington Times:
"When the American people gave Republicans control of the House in January, one of the major issues involved was the Democratic ban on the 100 watt bulb," said Rep. Michael Burgess, who fought to preserve the incandescent bulb. "Republicans have fulfilled our promise to the American people by allowing them to continue to be able to choose what type of bulb they use at home.New York Times:
"This was one of those things that resonated with a lot of people, especially in the election of 2010, where so much personal liberty had been eroded," said Representative Michael C. Burgess, Republican of Texas, a state that recently passed a law to exempt bulbs made and sold within its borders from the federal standards.
Yet in some ways, despite all the heated rhetoric and political brinksmanship, the delay hardly matters. The looming possibility of the new standards, signed into law by President Bush in 2007 — and the fact that places like Europe, Australia, Brazil and China have already put similar measures in place or intend to do so — has transformed the industry. A host of more efficient products already line store shelves and poke out of light sockets. USA Today:
The light bulb rules were approved with bi-partisan support and signed by President George Bush in 2007. Yet this year, House Republicans and conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh have attacked them as a ban on all incandescents and an infringement on individual rights.
"Another Omnibus Spending Bill" has resulted in 2 pages of discussion on light bulbs. Oh how I love TNF. Honestly I am happy that we won't be dealing with this crap in 2 months... or will we? Did congress only pass a 2 month extension on the payroll tax break and unemployment, and they want Obama to make a decision on the Keystone Pipeline? This is the crap that should be settled before the election. I am an O supporter, but I want him to make a decision, either way, on this topic. Ruffle some dang feathers! Approve the pipeline, or don't... Just Do It.
Quote from: JCnOwasso on December 19, 2011, 10:33:53 AM
"Another Omnibus Spending Bill" has resulted in 2 pages of discussion on light bulbs. Oh how I love TNF. Honestly I am happy that we won't be dealing with this crap in 2 months... or will we? Did congress only pass a 2 month extension on the payroll tax break and unemployment, and they want Obama to make a decision on the Keystone Pipeline? This is the crap that should be settled before the election. I am an O supporter, but I want him to make a decision, either way, on this topic. Ruffle some dang feathers! Approve the pipeline, or don't... Just Do It.
There was a brief segue into Marshall's, don't forget.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 16, 2011, 09:50:15 PM
We have 2 bulb, 60w (each) max incandescent fixtures on both the back porch and front porch. Except when they burn out, they light instantly. They also require horizontal mounting. Heiron says that doesn't matter. I haven't checked lately but the last time I did, CFL didn't like horizontal.
The ones that didn't fit were the flood/spot fixtures.
Edit: added "each"
I said I have put them in upside down and sideways and they seem to work the same. But then I am a contrarian when it comes to someone telling me how to do stuff. I figure if it works, I don't care what they say. So far, they work fine. (Have 3 upside down and only one sideways, so that is not much of a representative sample.)
Quote from: JCnOwasso on December 19, 2011, 10:33:53 AM
"Another Omnibus Spending Bill" has resulted in 2 pages of discussion on light bulbs. Oh how I love TNF. Honestly I am happy that we won't be dealing with this crap in 2 months... or will we? Did congress only pass a 2 month extension on the payroll tax break and unemployment, and they want Obama to make a decision on the Keystone Pipeline? This is the crap that should be settled before the election. I am an O supporter, but I want him to make a decision, either way, on this topic. Ruffle some dang feathers! Approve the pipeline, or don't... Just Do It.
No, they passed a two month extension to the time before light bulbs are banned.
Listen to this adult rant:
Quote from: guido911 on December 20, 2011, 11:41:35 AM
Listen to this adult rant:
McDermott looks like he's about ripe for the eternal dirt nap.
Talk about some bad hyperbole.