Letter - Westrom's bulb idea is not so brightI read with great amusement Don Davis’ dispatch from the Capitol regarding Representative Torrey Westrom’s bill to exempt Minnesota from federal law regarding the phase-out of incandescent light bulbs.
To the editor:
I read with great amusement Don Davis’ dispatch from the Capitol regarding Representative Torrey Westrom’s bill to exempt Minnesota from federal law regarding the phase-out of incandescent light bulbs.
Westrom’s head-in-the-sand approach is typical “tea party” politics. Firstly, Westrom evidently failed to do even the most cursory research. Had he done so, he would’ve found that the phase-out only affects bulbs between 40 and 150 watts, with exceptions allowed for appliance bulbs, “rough service” bulbs, three-way bulbs, colored bulbs, plant lights and a few other types. Far from a total ban. Face it, folks. Edison’s invention is well over 100 years old and has seen its day. An incandescent bulb produces more heat than light – a highly inefficient device. A common CFL (compact fluorescent light) bulb consumes approximately 13 watts of electricity while producing the amount of light an ordinary 60-watt bulb does, not to mention considerably longer life.
Westrom’s main thrust seems to be “federal government? Evil!” It’s unfortunate that sometimes, to do the correct thing, citizens need a bit of prodding with a government stick but that’s the way it is. The most laughable part of the article was at the end.
The bill’s designed to allow the use of bulbs manufactured in Minnesota to be used in Minnesota yet Westrom states that he knows of no light bulb plant in the state but that his bill could lead to one opening. To me, that’s much like noting that there are horses in Minnesota and that it would be a good idea to open a buggy whip factory.
I hope Westrom’s bill fades into the obscurity it so richly deserves.