Wiles

David Wiles Professor Miner ENGL 2010 2/3/2014 Michele Bachmann and Light Bulb Freedom The attempt to repeal the governments decision on banning the production and use of incandescent light bulbs in America is an idea that many have decided to disagree with. Fiftyseven year old Michele Bachmann, however, has chosen to learn the truth about the potential consequences of using the new replacement bulbs chosen by the government. Bachmann is a republican representative who sponsored a bill that would become a most powerful opponent to another bill known as the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which was signed by former president, George W. Bush. The removal of the incandescent bulb was an action of compliance with the 2007 act.

Important Facts on Bringing Light to the Bulb

The 2007 bill was said to be created out of attempts to assist America in producing cleaner products, finding more efficient sources of energy, and to protect consumers (govtrack.us). The truth is, Bachmann wouldnt be concerned if these purposes were being fulfilled, especially if independence was really involved. She made a statement on the matter while speaking to an audience in New Hampshire, I think Thomas Edison did a pretty patriotic thing for this country by inventing the light bulb and I think darn well, you New Hampshirites, if you want to buy Thomas Edisons wonderful invention, you should be able to. (nbcnews.com).

Wiles

Although she may have been speaking to a specific audience at the time, the idea can be applied to all. This representative is known as one of President Obamas strongest political opponents, and she certainly lives up to the title in this issue. Bachmann also expresses fear in her concern that the governments idea of saving energy is escalating to a stage that prevents officials from recognizing the hazards that these new bulbs can cause. For example, it is true that the incandescent light bulb uses more energy than fluorescent bulbs. In an incandescent bulb, the electricity being channeled inside dedicates only 10% of what is entering the bulb into light, while the other 90% simply becomes heat, which is why they tend to burn out within six month to a year after installation, while the fluorescent bulb uses 80% less energy, allowing the bulb to last up to ten times longer than the incandescent (eartheasy.com). Incandescent energy usage has an estimated cost of $7.23 per month (based on using 60w bulbs), and fluorescent has an estimated amount of $1.57 per year (based on using 13w bulbs) (eartheasy.com). These statistics provide an idea of how much energy will be saved in America, and would convince many to begin using these new bulbs. The estimated yearly costs provided are shown on every light bulb box currently in distribution. The question that Bachman has, however, is how this attempt to save money will cost the consumer in a physical sense. Something the government has not mentioned is the existence of mercury in these new bulbs, a most poisonous metal to the human body if exposed (bulbs.com). She proposes that the mandate should only stay in place if, its shown that the alternate bulbs would not lead to a health risk for consumers, particularly those in hospitals, schools, day care centers and nursing homes (cbsnew.com) Bachmanns thought on innocent and helpless people being harmed by these mandatory bulbs has helped her readers develop an even stronger desire to learn the facts. What if a bulb

Wiles

was somehow broken in a classroom, or a lamp accidentally pushed off the nightstand next to a hospital bed? On their boxes, manufacturers of fluorescent light bulbs state, Contains Mercury. For more on clean up and safe disposal, visit epa.gov/cfl. Why would it be so important for these manufacturers to label such a statement? It is because of the mercury fumes that immediately omit upon impact. The instructions on the website provided give the steps to cleaning up after a bulb breaks. It says, have people and pets leave the room, air out the room for about ten to twenty minutes by opening a window or door to the environment, shut off the heating/central air-conditioning system, if you have one, and collect materials such as sticky tape or damp paper towels to remove broken glass properly. This is a very lengthy process that not everyone will be able to perform, especially certain hospital patients. Reality Reveals Itself The consequences of breaking a light bulb have somehow managed to leave the field of reason. If a proper ventilation tactic is not performed within the first 20 minutes of exposure, the affected individual could begin to notice effects within that time range (epa.gov/cfl). If a child were to accidentally slip and bump into his or her study desk, causing the desk-lamp to fall onto the floor, with the fluorescent bulb shattering upon impact, is the consequence of serious illness or even eventual death if exposed for too long really necessary? Bachmann does not seem to believe so. Not only is she concerned for the children of others, but for her own as well. She has openly battled against state-mandated educational laws for children, for example, the

Wiles

school-work policy, but these new bulbs have developed a strong danger of their own that would require her attention as well. In Bachmanns biography, it is read that, she is a self-proclaimed constitutional conservative, and that she is committed to fixing Washingtons broken ways by advocating for Americas adherence to the constitution. She has become known on capitol hill as a member who champions tax reform, works to cut wasteful government spending and supports limiting the size of the American government. (Bachmann.house.gov). Bachmann is most certainly working in her field of career in regards to the light bulb concern. For example, although the cost of using a more energy efficient light bulb will turn out to be positively less than staying with Edisons invention of incandescent-type bulb, the cost to treat and care for individuals whom develop any kind of health issue from not following the proper instructions for the disposal of a fluorescent light bulb will certainly prove to be more devastating than if Americans were to simply keep using the incandescent bulb. These medical costs would affect not only the afflicted individual, but all current tax-payers, which would inflict another devastating blow to the economy that could have been avoided. Along with Bachmanns concerns of physical health, comes her strong belief in freedom of choice being taken away slowly, but surely. In other words, she feels that the government is deciding what we can and cant have without seeing if we agree first. Hence, the title Light Bulb Freedom of Choice for her sponsored bill. Looking back upon Bachmanns statement on how we should be able to use Edisons invention, not only brings back the remembrance of the incandescent light bulb being a treasured item to America, but it also allows readers to recognize part of what the government is doing, which is no longer allowing the use of an item that connects us to American history that is healthier to use than the modernized version.

Wiles

On the contrary, many Americans have already chosen to use the fluorescent bulb of their own free will and choice. It is important to understand that Bachmann does not wish to take away the ability to choose what she opposes, but to simply allow Americans to have choice after learning potential outcomes, in hopes that Americans will continue to make the correct choices. It is understood that there will always be inventions that can and will cause harm to the people of America, but the fact that people such as Michele Bachmann are here to help bring understanding on these matters, gives hope to all who read her words in having someone who has the potential to prevent as many casualties as possible along the way.

Wiles

Works Cited Bachmann.house.gov: About Michele. Republican Study Committee. Web. 2 Feb. 2014 Bulbs.com: Compact Fluorescent (CFL) Bulbs. Energy Star Partner, Jan. 2014.Web. Feb 2014. Eartheasy.com: Comparison Charts. BBB, Green America. Web. 2 Feb 2014. Epa.gov/cfl: Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 2 Feb 2014. H.R. 6(110th): Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Govtrack.us. Civic Impulse LLC, 12 Jan. 2007. Web. 2 Feb. 2014. Johnson, Grace: Stocking up on light ahead of phase-out. Nbcnews.com. NBC News Digital, 25 Aug. 2011. Web. 2 Feb. 2014. Montpoli, Brian: Bachmann to Democrats: Dont tell Americans what light bulbs to buy. Cbsnews.com. CBS Interactive Inc, 2 Mar. 2011. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.