Proof a Republican Can Be Pro-Choice, on Some Issues…
Minnesota congresswoman Michelle Bachmann is suggesting a bill in opposition to the phase-out plan intended for incandescent light bulbs in favor of compact fluorescent light bulbs(CFLs). Her bill essentially states that people should be free to choose what kind of bulbs they want. Not that I’m against choice. My question is the argument of such a bill.
First, and I’m positive I’ll get some backlash for these sort of comments, let me say that I do find an interesting relationship here between this bill, its opinions, and the idea of abortion. The arguments among certain members of the public that I’ve been reading from blog to blog state that the government shouldn’t get involved in all aspects of people’s lives, leading to this phase-out process. Well, I’ll be. Sounds like something pro-choicers have been saying for years, or maybe I’m reading to much into this. Or am I?
The major reason for Bachmann’s proposition of this bill is environmental in nature. She put it this way, as quoted in the Star Tribune, “This is an issue of science over fads and fashions.” She called any of the global warming information and concern “voodoo, nonsense, hokum, a hoax.” Imagine her crazy eyes when she spouts that sort of information. Oddly enough, light bulb companies are siding with environmentalists in this situation. They’ve said that Bachmann’s position on mercury content in CFLs, the big issue when discussing these bulbs, is far too overblown. Albeit, there is an issue with disposal, and energy companies as well as light bulb producers discuss the proper methods. The standing that a broken bulb is something that needs to be handled by toxin abatement specialists and men in space suits is pure fiction.
The truth behind the matter is that these bulbs save energy and money. They last much longer than traditional incandescent bulbs and cause the power companies to produce less energy due to decreased demand. In all accounts, this difference in energy production decreases the amount of mercury emission overall since the plants are emitting more than the bulbs ever could.
When it comes down to it in the end, I can’t say that I care whether Bachmann’s bill goes into effect or not. People should have the option to choose and I would hope they make the best decision, picking the bulb that will kill their planet less slowly. Do I think this is just making a big stink over nothing at all? Sure I do. As far as I’m concerned, Bachmann is simply trying to make herself better known to hold onto her seat in the 2010 elections. What will happen to the incandescent light bulb? Well, only Edison knows, or maybe Buddha. In all likelyhood, they will probably go the way of the antiquated VHS, Betamax, 8 Track, or Cassette Tape.