• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • If Congress Botches Bulbs, What Will It Do to Health Care?

    Why trust Congress with health care when it messes up simple things like light bulbs?

    The new mandated light bulbs don’t save as promised; produce inferior quality light; and 90% of them are made abroad. The old ones were mostly made in America. The new law has led to General Electric’s August announcement that it was shutting down incandescent bulb factories in Kentucky, Ohio and Virginia.

    Light bulb researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute confirm that “A CFL can appear dimmer than expected.” It’s because the “equivalence” information on the packaging (comparing compact fluorescent lights—CFL’s—to incandescent bulbs) usually overstates significantly the amount of light they put out.

    The new bulbs are “falling short” according to director Michael Siminovitch of the California Lighting Technology Center at the University of California, Davis—who has been an advocate of them. He admits, “In the pursuit of the holy grail, we stepped on the consumer.” Says Siminovitch, the CFL’s are “not lasting quite as long as consumers have been led to believe. . . . they don’t last very long.”

    The whole premise was that consumers would pay significantly more to buy bulbs, but ultimately would save on electric bills. It appears the lifespan and energy figures touted by Congress don’t match up well with the products being sold to consumers.

    Other problems include dimmer than expected light even after the bulbs warm up; a lesser quality of light that contributes to eye strain plus off-color appearances; and aesthetics suffer in fixtures intended for shaped bulbs, such as flame or globe shapes.

    Bulb-makers, however, can earn bigger profits by selling bulbs that typically cost six to ten times more than the old variety. A typical markup is said to be 30% for the wholesaler and another 30% for the retailer.

    Even electric companies are accused of taking advantage of consumers. Ohio’s First Energy had ordered millions of new CFL bulbs to deliver to its customers, but had to back off when its plan to bill them $21 for a pair of bulbs was reported by the media.

    Most of us screw in light bulbs; Congress screws them up. Can these people be trusted with redesigning a full one-sixth of America’s economy through “health care reform”?

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    10 Responses to If Congress Botches Bulbs, What Will It Do to Health Care?

    1. Jo,Mich says:

      Hey, I'm stock piling regular bulbs but only those made in the

      USA. Not buying anything with the GE logo and made in China.

      Old eyes need a lot of light.

    2. Todd, Iraq says:

      …"Congress screws them up" then they screw U.S.

      "Change" 2010/2012 wake up America

      Just A Point of View

    3. Bobbie Jay says:

      government's brand contains mercury. Mercury is a poison. Now, why would this be a mandate and not a choice? It's easy to break a bulb.

      Today a man mentioned his daughter brought home a consent form for the h2n1. He said it asked if she was allergic to "MERCURY." How would anyone know if they are allergic to "Mercury?"

    4. Bonnie Goode Venice says:

      We,too, are stocking up with the old very good light bulbs. We are in our 70's and these new type of light bulbs give us less quality eyesight. I remember the issue of toys coming from China containing above safe levels. Now we have more issues with unsafe levels of mercury because we are being mandated to use them. It does seem that the top administrations really care about our health. It seems strickly political.

    5. zach says:

      Just because you bought a 60 watt incandescent bulb doesn't mean you have to buy a 60 watt equivalent CFL they go much brighter, and believe me they are bright. They still use much less energy, and DO last much longer. The only down side is the mercury, I do agree with that, and yes the American quest for "cheap" has pushed factories overseas.

    6. Bobbie Jay says:

      I must have pushed the wrong button?

      Anyway, I'd like to add that it takes a 60w CFL, minutes to reach it's capacity. It doesn't take me less time to go to the bathroom. I wouldn't be able to turn it off when not needed as CFLs use much more energy turning it on and off and lessens the life of it. And doing a variety of things that only takes a second of light, is impractical, waste to have florescent everywhere.

      There was a recent report that stated CFL's do not last as long as claimed. CFL's are good for business, schools and government but the people should have their choice based on practicality.

      I have one in the cooking area of our kitchen. It throws off enough light in other areas to avoid turning on any other light(s).PRACTICAL. The other lights are used but never for the period of time of the money saving cfl's. Impractical!

      Mercury is dangerous. Why would government ever want to mandate this? Seems in this area and others they are focusing much on effecting our health in a negative way…

    7. Bobbie Jay says:

      Correction: silly me: It takes me less time to go to the…

    8. Ken Oregon says:

      You forgot to mention that the disposal of CFL bulbs are to be treated as TOXIC WASTE! Read the instructions on how to clean up a large broken CFL, saying the person should use a mask so they will not inhale the mercury and dispose of it in a proper toxic waste container! These bulbs as they burn out will be included in everybody's garbage and contaminate current disposal sites. Way to go, Congress!

    9. Bobbie Jay says:

      Good one, Ken. Also they costs 5x more (even while tax subsidized.) Extremely inefficient.

      All to boost GOVERNMENT CONTROL AND THEIR FAVORITE, BIAS BUSINESS GE AND GOVERNMENT DOLE.

    10. Robert Arnold says:

      I cannot believe very little has been discussed about the negative effects of CFL lightbulbs. Health wise, it will cost us more. Problem? Florescent lighting is a pulsating kind. Incandescent lighting emits a steady light. Like the sun giving off steady light… our body, eyes (eyes and vision is everything!), mind, and nerves live better under this condition. Pulsating kind of lighting has caused some health problems to many people: headache, vision fatigue, and more. Energy savings? How about health savings? Unbelievable …. wait, I forget, health care is never that important in our beloved country. Okay, so let's wreck us up some more by saving the electric bills by some hundred dollars a year while we spend a whole lot more on medicine and doctor visits. Environmentally safe? no. Pulsating versus steady lighting. Think about it!!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×