CA Proposes Light Bulb Ban

[280plus]

Yup, they'll just make it illegal to import and sell in the state. In addition to black market bulbs you'll see plenty of people leaving the state for incandescent bulb forays. Just like we do here in CT to buy booze after 8 pm or on Sunday. 

[Gewehr98]

Yup.  Just like Gawd knows how many Kalifornians who simply decided to ignore the gun bans there already.  There aren't enough resources to enforce the onerous provisions that DOJ sets forth out there.  An incandescent light bulb ban will be even tougher to enforce (assuming it would even pass into law).   

[wingnutx]

Stupid law, but I like the flourecent bulbs better.

[Manedwolf]

Someone needs to tell them that broken fluorescent bulbs release toxic material. 

Though maybe they'd restrict people to candles. Wait, no, that pollutes. Soy candles? Still smoke! Solar-charging lights? No, those use batteries that are toxic.

SIT IN DARK! That's it. Low-impact.

[K Frame]

You don't think California could mandate such a law without the big, bad, Federal government to hold their hand?

Think again...

In the 1960s California passed emissions standards where none existed Federally. The auto industry went ape, but the courts largely upheld California's requirements, and California has very successfully enforced its laws over the years, and in 1970 EVERY automobile manufactured for sale in California had to meet that state's emissions requirements.

No Federal legislation existed allowing California to do that, no Federal legislation existed that supported those actions.

States are perfectly capable of regulating the sale of commercial products inside their own borders, and there are dozens, if not hundreds, of ways that California can enforce a ban on commercial sales of incandescent light bulbs if it comes to that -- ranging from pulling business licenses to issuing compliance fines to physically shutting down a store for violating state laws.

[HankB]

We've sunk very low to be discussing a LIGHT BULB ban.

Actually, I figured we were in serious trouble when I found out there was a Federal agency that had the power and the mission to ban toilets that used "too much" water per flush.

Think about it - some 'crats, sitting around one day with nothing better to do, decided that they should start regulating toilet flushes!

I'm only surprised it took Kali this long to get on the light bulb bandwagon.

Someone needs to tell them that broken fluorescent bulbs release toxic material.

Mercury. Ban it. For the children.

[K Frame]

Someone needs to tell them that broken fluorescent bulbs release toxic material. 

California has adopted some pretty strict rules regulating the heavy metals and chemicals contained in fluorescent bulbs.

The state also mandates that fluorescent bulbs be disposed of at special disposal centers, NOT in the trash.

[Ben]

The state also mandates that fluorescent bulbs be disposed of at special disposal centers, NOT in the trash.

Oops. 

 

[mtnbkr]

You don't think California could mandate such a law without the big, bad, Federal government to hold their hand?
Think again...
In the 1960s California passed emissions standards where none existed Federally. The auto industry went ape, but the courts largely upheld California's requirements, and California has very successfully enforced its laws over the years, and in 1970 EVERY automobile manufactured for sale in California had to meet that state's emissions requirements.
No Federal legislation existed allowing California to do that, no Federal legislation existed that supported those actions.
States are perfectly capable of regulating the sale of commercial products inside their own borders, and there are dozens, if not hundreds, of ways that California can enforce a ban on commercial sales of incandescent light bulbs if it comes to that -- ranging from pulling business licenses to issuing compliance fines to physically shutting down a store for violating state laws.

The difference is that to operate an auto on Cali roads, you have to jump through several hoops (licensing, taxes, inspection, etc).  That makes it more difficult to own/operate a non-mandated car on Cali roads.  Until Cali starts checking homes for rogue incandescents, there's no way they can enforce this ban against end users.  As for stores, they only have power against stores located inside california.  Since there's no residency check when you buy light bulbs (unlike guns), a person can simply go to Oregon or Nevada, buy their bulbs and go home.  Cali doesn't yet have border security between it and other US states.  That was my entire point.  Since there's no law regulating bulbs on a federal level and because California isn't yet checking house to house for rogue bulbs, there's not much they can do other than ban the sale of such bulbs internally. 

Chris

[wingnutx]

They'll just enforce it against retailers.

[mtnbkr]

They'll just enforce it against retailers.

I thought that's what I said twice.  But only against retailers in Ca.  Without a background/residency check for lightbulb purchases nationwide, a Nevada retailer won't know if the purchaser in front of them is a Nevada resident or Cali resident (and wouldn't care either way).  Cali resident buys bulbs from Nevada and drives home in their Cali-approved vehicle of choice.

The reason the gun ban and cali-emissions thing worked was because of registration of the item in question.

Chris

[K Frame]

Chris,

Please tell me where in the write up on the proposed law that the end user/consumer would be targeted?

I don't see that being in there, and I sincerely doubt if that's the case at all.

Why?

Because California has passed similar legislative packages in the past, and they have NEVER solely targeted the end user, not even with firearms.

The proposed law will target retail outlets that sell the bulbs in California -- the SOURCE of the product, not the end user. I have no clue why you're talking about the end user.

This is exactly how California enforced its emissions control standards in the 1960s and 1970s.

They didn't walk around the state and tell individual drivers (end users) "hey, that car isn't compying get out we're taking it," they told the auto manufacturers (source) and the thousands of dealerships (source) in the state that after 1970 if they didn't comply with California emissions laws the California market would be closed to them, and if I remember correctly the state market DID close to several manufacturers -- AMC being one of them -- until the new cars were available.

Tell me, do you really think that were California to pass this law that Wal Mart or Safeway or any of the thousands of other chain stores would pull out of the state?

No. They'd stop selling the bulbs because incandescent bulbs are a miniscule part of a store's profit structure.

Of course people can go out of state to buy their bulbs, but how realistic do you think it would be that everyone in the state would simply pick up on a Saturday, drive anywhere from a few, to a few hundred, miles, simply to buy light bulbs?

Even if some people did that, the number of incandescent bulbs that would be removed from the state would be enormous.

Even if California were suggessful in removing only 50% of the incandescent bulbs in the state, and the other 50% were maintained by people doing mail order or going out of state, the savings would be monumental, and all for very little money invested by the state.

This isn't rocket science.

California has done this very thing with at least cars and aerosol products, and they've always targeted the source, not the end user. And it's been incredibly effective.

[wingnutx]

I really don't think most people are attached enough to one make of lighbulb to start buying them out of state. Most people will buy whatever is most convenient. Nobody is likely to care a whole lot if there is a small group of people using lighbulbs from Arizona.

How many people have high-flow toilets smuggled in from Canadia? I can only think of one.

[280plus]

I really don't think most people are attached enough to one make of lighbulb to start buying them out of state.

This all reminds me of the low flow shower head episode on Seinfeld. "Low flow? I don't like the sound of that." 

and in 1970 EVERY automobile manufactured for sale in California had to meet that state's emissions requirements.

How well I remember having to put the emmisions kit on my 1971 351 4V before going to emissions in Kali, and then taking it back off after the inspection. 

Now that I'm thinking of it one of the things was you disconnected the vacuum advance and capped the hose off. The thing ran like a dog like that.

[wingnutx]

Most of the low-flow showerheads at Home Depot have a little insert in them, with a label that says "Don't remove this or it won't be low-flow anymore, nudge nudge hint hint"

[280plus]

Wink wink...

 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I really don't think most people are attached enough to one make of lighbulb to start buying them out of state. Most people will buy whatever is most convenient. Nobody is likely to care a whole lot if there is a small group of people using lighbulbs from Arizona.

How many people have high-flow toilets smuggled in from Canadia? I can only think of one.

I have a high-flow toilet!!!  You can take my toilet when you pry it from my cold, dead...  umm

 

[wingnutx]

Now I can think of 2, you and Al Bundy.

[mtnbkr]

I think we're arguing the same point in different ways. 

I never made the claim that they wouldn't target in-state vendors.  And I never claimed venders would leave the state.  My only point was that the folks that want incandescent bulbs will be able to get them elsewhere and California can't do a thing about it.  Will folks drive hundreds or even tens of miles?  Probably not, but the folks that live right on the border or travel out of state regularly and want those bulbs will get them.  Folks do stranger things for personal taste every day.

Dunno what I was thinking about the car thing.  I conveniently forgot about the millions of classic autos that still exist there.

How well I remember having to put the emmisions kit on my 351 4v before going to emissions in Kali, and then taking it back off after the inspection

Every time I get my 4Runner inspected, I have to put covers on the offroad lights and remove the bars protecting the headlights.  This last time, I had to remove some non-functioning fog lights (they sit right behind the brushguard uprights!) even though they've been installed and non-functional for 3 years.

Chris

Chris

[cosine]

have a high-flow toilet!!!  You can take my toilet when you pry it from my cold, dead...  umm

 

That provoked quite an unpleasant mental image... 



As for California, what will they try to do next? Geez.

Actually, on second thought, I don't want to know.

[Gewehr98]

Again, assuming such legislation actually passes into law there, Kalifornians will have no problems getting incandescent light bulbs if they want them.  Nor will the DOJ have the resources to go house-to-house and enforce it.  Sounds like a potentially nice business to set up, say, in Reno or Lake Tahoe, or boosting sales in the typical Ace Hardware.  Folks will want their high-wattage halogens, sewing machine lights, and 4 watt hallway nightlights. 

I thought it was hilarious when they had to refund me $300.00+ for the environmental impact fee they charged for my non-Kalifornia vehicle.  I protested at registration because the vehicle had the same emissions equipment as those sold there, as do all vehicles after 1997. (ie, no more "49 state" vs. Kalifornia specs)

Smog Check II implemented dynamometer testing for smog testing of Kalifornia vehicles.  They also tried having spectrometer sensors check tailpipe emissions at those regulated interstate on-ramp stop lights. They coupled a camera with the spectrometer, and vehicles not passing tailpipe tests would get a letter in the mail.  I hit the choke on my Harley and purposely gave them a good sample - it had Wisconsin registration, I waited for the postcard...   The legislation was planning to crack down on a lot of the older classics, until a certain senator discovered his Packard Straight Eight was in jeopardy. 

That state runs in spite of itself. 

[DJJ]

I'm paying for the electricity - what business is it of the State's how I'm using it?

[Car Knocker]

Only a matter of time until permanantly scheduled rolling blackouts.

[Tallpine]

And how, exactly would they enforce this ban? 

SWAT teams busting down your door to inspect your light bulbs, of course!

 

[Thor]

Most of the low-flow showerheads at Home Depot have a little insert in them, with a label that says "Don't remove this or it won't be low-flow anymore, nudge nudge hint hint"

I ALMOST always remove that insert. I've found that on some of them I had to increase the orifice size, easily accomplished with the proper sized drill. One of the "low flow" toilets, I had to replace the flapper valve. For some reason, during that repair, a razor knife found it's way inside the tank and mysteriously cut out that plastic insert.