At the White House petition site:

We petition the Obama Administration to:

Give us back our incandescent lightbulbs! We, the undersigned, want the freedom to choose our own lightbulbs.

In the spirit of liberty and freedom we believe that decisions, such as what kind of lightbulb we use, should not be made by the government but by the individual. The federal government is phasing out incandescent lightbulbs by law and the last incandescent lightbulb factory in America has closed. This is not the role of the government. Not only did this move shift jobs to China (since CFLs are too dangerous to manufacture in America) it has limited the freedom of Americans to make their own choices in how they will light their homes and businesses. The free market should decide which lightbulbs succeed, not the government.

Created: Nov 15, 2012

Issues: Civil Rights and Liberties, Climate Change, Energy

Signatures needed by December 15, 2012 to reach goal of 25,000 24,454

Total signatures on this petition 546

Seriously. This must be the new prime in right wingnut dogma.

Previously:

HB 2468: Rep. Cynthia Davis (r) – another not so bright idea from a dim bulb (April 2, 2010)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): what’s the number of working bulbs in that chandelier? (July 11, 2011)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): we’re running out of light bulb puns (July 12, 2011)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): fiddling with bulbs while the economy is about to burn (July 23, 2011)

HB 1146: still not too bright (January 7, 2012)

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) was really pleased with her vote on HR 2551 (via Twitter):

@RepHartzler Rep. Vicky Hartzler

Are voting on Legislative branch approps bill. Am voting to reduce our office budget by 7%. We all must do w/ less to balance our budget! 22 Jul

What she didn’t mention was her vote on a right wingnut amendment to the bill to prohibit the House of Representatives from using compact fluorescent (energy saving) light bulbs in their capitol facilities:

H.AMDT.707 (A011)

Amends: H.R.2551

Sponsor: Rep Thompson, Glenn [PA-5] (offered 7/21/2011)

AMENDMENT PURPOSE:

An amendment numbered 15 printed in House Report 112-173 to prohibit use of funds to purchase, acquire, install, or use any medium screw base compact fluorescent lamp or light bulb (CFL).

STATUS:

   7/21/2011 9:03pm:

       Amendment (A011) offered by Mr. Thompson (PA). (consideration: CR H5367-5369; text: CR H5368)

   7/22/2011 10:56am:

       On agreeing to the Thompson (PA) amendment (A011) Failed by recorded vote: 130 – 283 (Roll no. 626).

Seriously, they’re that petty? Yep.

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 626

     H R 2551      RECORDED VOTE      22-Jul-2011      10:57 AM

     AUTHOR(S):  Thompson of Pennsylvania Amendment No. 15

     QUESTION:  On Agreeing to the Amendment

—- AYES    130 —

Graves (MO)

Hartzler

Long

Luetkemeyer

—- NOES    283 —

Akin

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

Emerson

[emphasis added]

That’s telling, the amendment was too nutjob even for Rep. Todd Akin (r) and Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (r).

Previously:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): what’s the number of working bulbs in that chandelier? (July 11, 2011)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): we’re running out of light bulb puns (July 12, 2011)

The dim bulbs truly believe. But no, there’s no “ban” on incandescent heaters which generate some light as an afterthought.

Previously:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): what’s the number of working bulbs in that chandelier? (July 11, 2011)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): we’re running out of light bulb puns (July 12, 2011)

You know, these right wingnuts had their recorded vote with HR 2417. Though the bill did fail, they can take it back to their teabagger constituencies as proof of their mutual insanity. Their posturing didn’t fail.

Burgess Amendment Keeps Light Bulb Law Repeal Alive

By Elizabeth McGowan at SolveClimate

Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:50pm EDT

….WASHINGTON-Opponents of a proposal to switch off energy-saving progress on lighting technology are still lauding House Republicans for soundly snubbing legislation they refer to as “dim BULB” legislation…

…To give it another chance at passing, Rep. Michael Burgess, another Texas Republican who also serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, floated a similarly worded amendment Wednesday.

Burgess’s amendment, which would limit efficiency standards for incandescent light bulbs, would be considered as part of the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill that the House is mulling over. It’s one of 12 appropriations bills designed to fund the entire federal government for the fiscal year beginning this October.

If approved, the amendment would bar the Department of Energy from enforcing lighting efficiency standards Congress enacted via an overarching 2007 energy law. It has little chance of surviving a Senate vote….

….”Barton’s bill is a foolish piece of legislation,” DiPeso said. “It’s a daffy solution in search of a non-existent problem. There is no ban and there never has been one. It’s the same quality of service, lower costs and more consumer choices than ever. What is not to like?”

The BULB Act, DiPeso said, was based on the false premise that the 2007 law establishing efficiency standards for general-service, screw-in light bulbs bans incandescent bulbs and forces consumers to purchase compact fluorescent lighting. Instead, that law phases out inefficient bulbs in favor of upgraded versions of incandescents, compact fluorescents and light-emitting diodes….

[emphasis added]

But, no, they had to try again, and passed the same thing in an amendment by a voice vote.

CURRENT HOUSE FLOOR PROCEEDINGS

LEGISLATIVE DAY OF JULY 15, 2011

112TH CONGRESS – FIRST SESSION

….10:31 A.M. –

On agreeing to the Burgess amendment Agreed to by voice vote.

Vacating Proceedings – By unanimous consent, at 10:31 a.m., the request for a recorded on the Burgess amendment numbered 70 was vacated and the Chair put the question de novo. Subsequently, the amendment passed by voice vote….

[underline emphasis added]

They really believe in this stuff.

So, how did Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r) and Rep. Todd Akin (r) vote? Were they even there? Sometimes it’s kind of hard to tell in the dark with these dim bulbs. They were there close to a half hour later for Roll Call 538 at 11:07 a.m.

Previously: Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): what’s the number of working bulbs in that chandelier? (July 11, 2011)

Thank goodness, the bill failed – we’re running out of light bulb puns for our headlines:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 563

     H R 2417      2/3 YEA-AND-NAY      12-Jul-2011      6:45 PM

     QUESTION:  On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass

     BILL TITLE: Better Use of Light Bulbs Act

—- YEAS    233 —

Akin

Emerson

Graves (MO)

Hartzler

Long

Luetkemeyer

—- NAYS    193 —

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

[emphasis added]

The entire republican delegation from Missouri covered themselves in glory on this one – striking a blow for Luddites everywhere.

From House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D):

Today’s GOP Waste of Energy – Voting to Roll Back Bill Which Would Save American Consumers $12.5 Billion

It’s been 189 days since the GOP took control of the House and rather than working on legislation which will foster job creation and strengthen our economy, Republicans are taking American families another step backward and voting on a bill rolling back bipartisan energy standards which will save consumers $12.5 billion when fully implemented.

That’s right – House Republicans, standing still on jobs bills, are up-in-arms over a provision encouraging the production of more energy efficient light bulbs which was written by Republicans, signed into law by a Republican president, and is supported by both light bulb manufacturers and American consumers.

[….]

….EISA, with Rep. Upton’s efficiency measure, passed the House in 2007 by a bipartisan vote of 319-100, with support from 49.7 percent of Republicans who voted and 98 percent of Democratic votes. President George W. Bush signed it into law…

This is but the latest example of House Republican leaders promoting a right-wing, dirty energy agenda that harms families and businesses rather than investing in innovation, new products, and jobs-even if they came up with the idea in the first place….

[….]

….The bill failed to pass on the House floor under suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority….

[emphasis added]

Oh, the republicans will try this again. They want to go down in history as the “dim bulb” Congress.

We’ve seen this dim idea before:

HB 2468: Rep. Cynthia Davis (r) – another not so bright idea from a dim bulb (April 2, 2010)

….No, we’re not making this up. And we can’t really venture to call this an elaborate “April Fools” joke because it is coming from the poster child for the batshit crazy wingnut segment of the Missouri body politic….

Energy efficient light bulbs are apparently some kind of an affront to right wingnuts. You’ve got to wonder if the irony escapes them.

Definitely yes.

Who knew that Congress would run with it? Uh, better question, why did it take the current republican controlled U.S. House so long?

It didn’t:

H.R.91 — Better Use of Light Bulbs Act (Introduced in House – IH)

[….]

A BILL

To repeal certain amendments to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act with respect to lighting energy efficiency.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,



SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

   This Act may be cited as the `Better Use of Light Bulbs Act’.

SEC. 2. LIGHTING ENERGY EFFICIENCY.

   (a) In General- Subtitle B of title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140) is repealed.

   (b) Application- The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.) shall be applied and administered as if subtitle B of title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (and the amendments made by that subtitle) had not been enacted.

[emphasis in original]

And some of the co-sponsors?:

Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] – 1/5/2011

Rep Hartzler, Vicky [MO-4] – 1/19/2011

[emphasis added]

The bill text doesn’t give much detail for the uninitiated. There is another which does and which is supposedly going to be voted on by the House today:

H.R.2417 — Better Use of Light Bulbs Act (Introduced in House – IH)

HR 2417 IH

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2417

To repeal certain amendments to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act with respect to lighting energy efficiency, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES



July 6, 2011

[….]

A BILL

To repeal certain amendments to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act with respect to lighting energy efficiency, and for other purposes.

   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

   This Act may be cited as the `Better Use of Light Bulbs Act’.

SEC. 2. LIGHTING ENERGY EFFICIENCY.

   (a) In General- Sections 321 and 322 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140) are repealed.

   (b) Application- The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.) shall be applied and administered as if sections 321 and 322 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (and the amendments made by those sections) had not been enacted.

SEC. 3. MERCURY-CONTAINING LIGHTING.

   No Federal, State, or local requirement or standard regarding energy efficient lighting shall be effective to the extent that the requirement or standard can be satisfied only by installing or using lamps containing mercury.

SEC. 4. STATE REGULATION.

   No State or local regulation, or revision thereof, concerning the energy efficiency or energy use of medium screw base general service incandescent lamps shall be effective.

SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

   In this Act, the terms `general service incandescent lamp’, `lamp’, and `medium screw base’ have the meanings given those terms pursuant to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.), as applied and administered pursuant to section 2.

[emphasis in original]

“…No State or local regulation, or revision thereof, concerning the energy efficiency or energy use of medium screw base general service incandescent lamps shall be effective…”

So much for state’s rights.

And some of the co-sponsors?:

Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] – 7/6/2011

Rep Hartzler, Vicky [MO-4] – 7/8/2011.

[emphasis added]

What’s the reason for and purpose of this republican bill? Take a wild guess:

Battle of the Bulb

House Takes Aim at Efficiency Standards

By Coral Davenport

Updated: July 11, 2011 | 2:12 p.m.

July 8, 2011 | 6:03 p.m.

….At the time it was introduced, the legislation was championed by Democratic and Republican leaders alike. The original 2007 lightbulb efficiency language was cosponsored by Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., and then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Ill. It passed easily through the House Energy and Commerce Committee and was added as an amendment to a bill that passed the Senate by a vote of 86-8, passed the House by a vote of 314-100, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

So how did Republicans get from there to here on the lightbulb law?        

The answer has very little to do with energy policy and everything to do with tea party politics….

Oh, I get it. The republicans in the House were for more efficient light bulbs before they were against them.

Teabaggers. You know, the most rational segment of the American political scene.

What do significantly more reality based individuals say about the bill?:

Energy chief defends light bulb standards

By Andrew Restuccia – 07/08/11 01:36 PM ET

Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Friday defended a series of light bulb efficiency standards that are coming under attack from House Republicans….

“….I want to take this opportunity to dispel a myth,” Chu said. “These standards do not ban incandescent bulbs.”

The standards, which were passed as part of a landmark 2007 energy law, require that incandescent bulbs be 30 percent more energy efficient beginning in 2012.

“You’re still going to be able to buy halogen incandescent bulbs,” Chu said. “They’ll look exactly like the ones you’re used to. They can dim. They cut out instantly. They look and feel the same. The only difference is they will help American consumers save money….”

The usual suspects behave in the usual manner:

Republicans Set To Repeal Light Bulb Efficiency Standard That Would Save Consumers $12 Billion A Year

By Stephen Lacey on Jul 8, 2011 at 9:09 am

“….When this bill was passed, it was passed by people who knew how to make light bulbs,” says Randall Moorhead, vice president of government affairs at Philips, a leading light bulb producer. “Everyone supported it. And since then, it’s created more choice for consumers – we have two incandescent bulbs on the market that weren’t there before.”

But in an effort to score political points in the 2012 election cycle, Republican lawmakers have made patently false statements about the law – calling it a ban on incandescent light bulbs. Michigan Republican Fred Upton, who supported the law in 2007, is now back peddling and claiming that the efficiency standard is an example of “federal overr
each….”

Because we can’t have energy companies sell less energy?