Early yesterday we explained that the sociopaths and nihilists who can exercise considerable control over the House Republican caucus off on to their latest crusade into the Dark Ages--
killing lightbulb efficiency standards.
[T]hey have a vote scheduled today that would repeal energy efficiency standards for light bulbs set in 2007 with strong bipartisan support. Republicans no longer support anything that makes sense and will surely vote en masse to take a giant step backwards. The standards the Republicans plan to gut today will save consumers about $100 per family per year, or about $12 billion nationally, when fully implemented. They will also reduce energy demand, avoiding the need for 30 large power plants. The standards will prevent more than 100 million tons of carbon pollution per year-- the equivalent of taking 17 million cars off the road. And the new standards are sparking investment in American jobs-- prompting manufacturers to build new U.S. plants and create new U.S. jobs making more energy efficient lighting technologies. For example, TCP, a bulb maker that traditionally has done all of its manufacturing in China, plans to open its first U.S. plant, in Ohio, where it will make new CFL bulbs. When’s the last time you heard of something like that happening? Does that explain their opposition? Progress is a horrible thing for reactionaries; it always has been-- which is why they are always on the wrong side of history.
With bought-off and cynical luddites like Rush Limbaugh and
Oily Joe Barton, along with social Neanderthals like Michele Bachmann and Glenn Beck leading the way, no one couldn't have predicted the
shameful and embarrassing circus this has turned into.
The House started debating the bill yesterday and it doesn't appear likely to garner the two-thirds it needs to be sent along to the Senate, where it would be laughed into oblivion anyway. Looks like the House vote will be today.
Originally the bipartisan lightbulb efficiency legislation was co-sponsored by Fred Upton (R-MI) and then-Speaker Denny Hastert (R-IL) and 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, the House by a vote of 314-100, and was signed by 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.
Barton, the bill’s sponsor, turned his attention to the lightbulb law last fall, when he found himself pitted in a bitter contest with Upton for chairmanship of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. The rivalry played out in the weeks after the November elections, when Republicans were giddy with excitement over their tea party-fueled takeover of the House.
The conservative Barton, who has declared that he was “tea party before tea party was cool,” rode that wave in his campaign against Upton, digging up pieces of his opponent’s record that he believed would show that Upton was too moderate to hold a prominent leadership post. Among them: Upton’s sponsorship of the lightbulb standards.
Barton turned Upton’s support of the lightbulb standard into one of his key pieces of ammunition against the moderate Michigander, launching the “Save the Lightbulb” campaign. It was promptly picked up by Beck, Limbaugh, and Bachmann. Barton ultimately lost the contest for Energy Chairman, but his lightbulb campaign became a top talking point for conservatives.
By February, it had gained steam and a Senate companion bill, introduced on February 17 by Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyo. In a sign of its momentum, 27 other Republicans signed on to the bill that day.
All of that alarmed manufacturers, who had begun producing the new bulbs, and feared the rollback of the standards would undermine their investments in developing energy-efficient bulbs. Bulb-maker Philips began an aggressive lobbying campaign, meeting with lawmakers and staffers on Capitol Hill, urging them not to roll back the lightbulb law. They brought along samples of the new bulbs, similar in appearance from the old bulbs.
“The new energy efficient incandescent bulbs look and feel just like the old lights that consumers are used to. The only real difference Americans will notice with the new lightbulbs is their lower electricity bills. Electricity savings per family will be about $100 per year,” said Randy Moorhead, Vice President of Government Affairs for Philips Electronics, reprising the pitch he’s been making tirelessly to GOP lawmakers.
After meeting with Philips, some Republican energy policy staffers privately admitted that rolling back the lightbulb law seemed like a bad idea, especially when they saw that the efficient bulbs looked exactly like the old bulbs, and learned that manufacturers feared they would hurt their bottom line.
Despite the quiet heartburn that the bill is now generating in some moderate Republican offices, GOP leaders are still driving it forward, in hopes that Monday’s House floor debate will generate campaign talking points for tea party candidates across the country-- including Bachmann.
UPDATE: GOP Fails To Turn Out The LightsCantor needed two-thirds to turn back the clock. The vote was
233-193, so he failed. Nancy Pelosi: "It’s lights out on the Republicans’ latest bright idea: ignoring jobs, making light bulbs less energy efficient, and asking American families to foot the bill. After 6 months in the majority, it’s time Republicans shined a spotlight on Americans’ top priority-– jobs. Republicans can’t stay in the dark forever; they must abandon their ideological assault on the environment, the economy, and the middle class, and get to work creating jobs and strengthening our economy."
I wonder if she noticed that five of those reactionary "Republicans" are members of her own caucus: Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN), Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Nick Rahall (WV), Jerry Costello (IL), and Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT). 10 Republicans voted for the energy-efficient bulbs with the rest of the Democratic caucus.
