An informational meeting to organize Bobby Jindal’s gubernatorial campaign, here, will take place on Tuesday, April 17, at 6 pm, in the upstairs Board Room of the Noles-Frye Building, 4615 Parliament Drive.
Be there!
Monday, April 16, 2007
Friday, April 13, 2007
Breaux: I will not be a candidate for LA. Governor
Breaux: I will not be a candidate for La. governor
by DOUG SIMPSON - Associated Press (LA) (excerpt)
BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — Former U.S. Sen. John Breaux declined to enter the race for Louisiana governor Friday, saying questions about his eligibility would hamper his ability to run an issue-based campaign.
The announcement followed a decision by Attorney General Charles Foti not to get involved in determining whether Breaux, a Maryland resident since 2005, is eligible for the Oct. 20 primary.
Breaux, in a statement issued late Friday through the Louisiana Democratic Party, said the failure of a "clear declaration of my status as a (Louisiana) citizen greatly inhibits my ability to conduct a campaign based on the issues instead of the law."
"I said I would be guided by the Attorney General's opinion," Breaux said, "and therefore will not be a candidate for governor."
A spokeswoman for the Louisiana Democratic Party said Breaux asked the party to distribute the statement on his behalf. Breaux's spokesman Brian Hale confirmed the announcement and said the senator would not comment further.
Louisiana Republican Party Chairman Roger Villere Jr. said Breaux's decision not to run shows that "our position was correct all along, that John Breaux really wasn't qualified."
"He was hoping he'd get a 'Hail Mary' catch, but instead our attorney general punted," Villere said. "I think we've seen kind of the end of the politics of old and can now look forward to something new."
[ E-mail This Story | Printable Version | Read More ]
BREAKING NEWS: FOTI PUNTS
by DOUG SIMPSON - Associated Press (LA) (excerpt)
BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — Former U.S. Sen. John Breaux declined to enter the race for Louisiana governor Friday, saying questions about his eligibility would hamper his ability to run an issue-based campaign.
The announcement followed a decision by Attorney General Charles Foti not to get involved in determining whether Breaux, a Maryland resident since 2005, is eligible for the Oct. 20 primary.
Breaux, in a statement issued late Friday through the Louisiana Democratic Party, said the failure of a "clear declaration of my status as a (Louisiana) citizen greatly inhibits my ability to conduct a campaign based on the issues instead of the law."
"I said I would be guided by the Attorney General's opinion," Breaux said, "and therefore will not be a candidate for governor."
A spokeswoman for the Louisiana Democratic Party said Breaux asked the party to distribute the statement on his behalf. Breaux's spokesman Brian Hale confirmed the announcement and said the senator would not comment further.
Louisiana Republican Party Chairman Roger Villere Jr. said Breaux's decision not to run shows that "our position was correct all along, that John Breaux really wasn't qualified."
"He was hoping he'd get a 'Hail Mary' catch, but instead our attorney general punted," Villere said. "I think we've seen kind of the end of the politics of old and can now look forward to something new."
[ E-mail This Story | Printable Version | Read More ]
BREAKING NEWS: FOTI PUNTS
Attorney General denies Breaux's Request for Pre-Qualification
(Baton Rouge) – “The Attorney General Opinion released today denies John Breaux’s request for a pre-qualification and upholds the established law that all challenges must be determined by the court after qualification. The opinion states that the issue of ‘whether Mr. Breaux has remained a Louisiana citizen for the preceding five years is an issue of fact’ and must be decided by the courts after the candidate qualifying period in September.
“When looking at all of the facts, it is obvious that John Breaux does not meet the clear requirement to be a Louisiana citizen for the preceding five years: 1) he is registered to vote in Maryland, 2) his primary residence is in Maryland, 3) he has a Maryland Drivers license, 4) his homestead exemption is not in Louisiana, 5) he applied for and was granted a non-resident hunting License 6), he cancelled his Louisiana voter registration under penalty, 7) he has performed notarial acts in Maryland, and 8) his principal place of employment is in Washington D.C. These are facts and they are not in dispute,” stated Republican Party Chairman, Roger Villere, Jr.
“All of these facts point to a clear common sense conclusion that John Breaux does not meet the Constitutional requirements to run for Governor of Louisiana. He is desperately looking for some way around the law of Louisiana, but he did not find one today. Mr. Breaux was obviously counting on the good ole boy network he has been a part of for so long, starting with his days as an understudy to Edwin Edwards, to disregard the facts about his citizenship; but he has failed to recognize that the 2007 Governor’s race is about the future, not the past,” declared Villere.
I want to make one thing very clear: If Mr. Breaux chooses to continue looking for a way around the law, we will challenge him every step of the way, and will challenge him in court right after qualifying this fall. We would be doing the people of Louisiana a great disservice if we allowed John Breaux to disregard the Constitutional requirements for Governor,” said Villere.
###
“When looking at all of the facts, it is obvious that John Breaux does not meet the clear requirement to be a Louisiana citizen for the preceding five years: 1) he is registered to vote in Maryland, 2) his primary residence is in Maryland, 3) he has a Maryland Drivers license, 4) his homestead exemption is not in Louisiana, 5) he applied for and was granted a non-resident hunting License 6), he cancelled his Louisiana voter registration under penalty, 7) he has performed notarial acts in Maryland, and 8) his principal place of employment is in Washington D.C. These are facts and they are not in dispute,” stated Republican Party Chairman, Roger Villere, Jr.
“All of these facts point to a clear common sense conclusion that John Breaux does not meet the Constitutional requirements to run for Governor of Louisiana. He is desperately looking for some way around the law of Louisiana, but he did not find one today. Mr. Breaux was obviously counting on the good ole boy network he has been a part of for so long, starting with his days as an understudy to Edwin Edwards, to disregard the facts about his citizenship; but he has failed to recognize that the 2007 Governor’s race is about the future, not the past,” declared Villere.
I want to make one thing very clear: If Mr. Breaux chooses to continue looking for a way around the law, we will challenge him every step of the way, and will challenge him in court right after qualifying this fall. We would be doing the people of Louisiana a great disservice if we allowed John Breaux to disregard the Constitutional requirements for Governor,” said Villere.
###
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
LAGOP Launches Website
IMHO, this may be overkill, but…
From: James Quinn, Executive Director LAGOP
LAGOP Launches a Website Exposing the Truth About Lobbyist John Breaux’s (D-MD) Citizenship
John Breaux Is Not Above the Law
(Baton Rouge) – “The Republican Party of Louisiana has just created a new website, http://www.breauxisnotabovethelaw.com, to keep an up-to-date account of John Breaux’s attempts to qualify as a gubernatorial candidate and subvert the Louisiana Constitution. The site has culled together reports, editorials, multimedia, and articles from across Louisiana detailing Breaux’s ineligibility to run for governor. This website will stand as a firm testament to the Republican Party’s firm commitment to the Louisiana Constitution,” stated Republican Party of Louisiana Executive Director, James Quinn.
“We firmly believe that Lobbyist John Breaux does not meet the requirements to run for Governor of Louisiana. We will let the public know the great lengths he has taken since he left office to distance himself from this great state. Facts about his citizenship include changing his voter registration to Maryland, claiming a homestead exemption in Maryland and Washington D.C., getting an non-resident hunting permit, having a primary residence in Maryland. John Breaux is not above the law, and we must fight to keep it that way!” Quinn said.
From: James Quinn, Executive Director LAGOP
LAGOP Launches a Website Exposing the Truth About Lobbyist John Breaux’s (D-MD) Citizenship
John Breaux Is Not Above the Law
(Baton Rouge) – “The Republican Party of Louisiana has just created a new website, http://www.breauxisnotabovethelaw.com, to keep an up-to-date account of John Breaux’s attempts to qualify as a gubernatorial candidate and subvert the Louisiana Constitution. The site has culled together reports, editorials, multimedia, and articles from across Louisiana detailing Breaux’s ineligibility to run for governor. This website will stand as a firm testament to the Republican Party’s firm commitment to the Louisiana Constitution,” stated Republican Party of Louisiana Executive Director, James Quinn.
“We firmly believe that Lobbyist John Breaux does not meet the requirements to run for Governor of Louisiana. We will let the public know the great lengths he has taken since he left office to distance himself from this great state. Facts about his citizenship include changing his voter registration to Maryland, claiming a homestead exemption in Maryland and Washington D.C., getting an non-resident hunting permit, having a primary residence in Maryland. John Breaux is not above the law, and we must fight to keep it that way!” Quinn said.
Special Guests!
At this Thursday’s (April 12) RPRW luncheon meeting, our special guests will be U.S. Representative Rodney Alexander and his wife, Nancy. It will be so good to see them.
As well, Greta Jones, from Monroe, will address us about Power PAC. Greta is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, so her talk should be very informative.
The luncheon is open to all, although a $5 fee will be – ahem – assessed. Please join us for lunch, between 11:30 am and 1:00 pm, in the 2nd floor board room of the Rayford Building.
As well, Greta Jones, from Monroe, will address us about Power PAC. Greta is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, so her talk should be very informative.
The luncheon is open to all, although a $5 fee will be – ahem – assessed. Please join us for lunch, between 11:30 am and 1:00 pm, in the 2nd floor board room of the Rayford Building.
Monday, April 9, 2007
I’d love to see the internals of the latest Kennedy poll.
Pollster Verne ain’t releasin’ ‘em, though. Well, of course not. We’ll just have to *believe* that what would-be Republican challenger, John Georges, said is true, “Blanco’s getting out has Jindal dropping like a lead balloon,” to say, 39%. Really? Kennedy said, “It’s wide open now.”
Prove it!
Prove it!
A very sad note…
Last night, Easter Sunday, at Methodist Hospital, in Houston, a very fine young man, Andrew Hilleke, departed this life. He had been extremely ill for the last few months and he, his parents and family have been in the thoughts and prayers of many in this community.
Andrew’s parents are Laura and Jim Hilleke, his aunt and uncle are Pam and Steve Ayres and his grandparents are Jo Anne and Dick Ayres. Please keep these wonderful folks in your prayers. They always have been of extraordinary help to us, in myriad ways, and it is now our turn to do all we can to support them.
If you would like to educate yourself about Andrew’s difficult months, please go here.
Andrew’s parents are Laura and Jim Hilleke, his aunt and uncle are Pam and Steve Ayres and his grandparents are Jo Anne and Dick Ayres. Please keep these wonderful folks in your prayers. They always have been of extraordinary help to us, in myriad ways, and it is now our turn to do all we can to support them.
If you would like to educate yourself about Andrew’s difficult months, please go here.
Friday, April 6, 2007
Powerful rebuke of Nanny Nancy
… by Syrian-American, Emilio Karim Dabul. His piece is a *must read*.
That urged, some are calling for the Speaker’s resignation; others are calling for her prosecution for Treason; still others, like I, prefer that she be prosecuted for violating the Logan Act. And, no Special Prosecutor, please. Handle this through the DoJ.
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Resident, non-resident, resident, non-resident…
I guess when dat Breaux hunts dem duck, he’s a non.
LDWF Reveals Lobbyist John Breaux’s
“Non-Resident” Hunting License
(Baton Rouge, LA) - Lobbyist John Breaux (D-MD) obtained a “non-resident” hunting license in 2006 when he visited the Sportsman’s Paradise of Louisiana.
Documentation obtained today by LAGOP Deputy Chairman Dan Kyle from the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries shows the following:
“Our records indicate that Mr. John Breaux acquired the following licenses, Nonresident Migratory Bird 3-day, Nonresident LA Duck Stamp and HIP Certification on January 3, 2006.”
LDWF Reveals Lobbyist John Breaux’s
“Non-Resident” Hunting License
(Baton Rouge, LA) - Lobbyist John Breaux (D-MD) obtained a “non-resident” hunting license in 2006 when he visited the Sportsman’s Paradise of Louisiana.
Documentation obtained today by LAGOP Deputy Chairman Dan Kyle from the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries shows the following:
“Our records indicate that Mr. John Breaux acquired the following licenses, Nonresident Migratory Bird 3-day, Nonresident LA Duck Stamp and HIP Certification on January 3, 2006.”
Roger F. Villere, Jr., Chairman of the Republican Party of Louisiana said “the evidence is mounting against Breaux being even remotely considered a citizen of Louisiana. The non-resident hunting license is in addition to his voter registration, homestead exemption, primary residence, and drivers license all being in Maryland.”
“This is one more embarrassing development that clearly indicates that Lobbyist John Breaux is a citizen of Maryland,” Villere said. “He obviously has not met the requirements for running for Governor of Louisiana, but he does have a great case for Maryland.”
Hat tip: James Quinn, Executive Director LAGOP
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Nanny Nancy stumbles a bit during her diplo-dance.
Israeli PM Ehud Olmert ain’t too happy about it, either. Nevertheless, should peace suddenly start “bustin’ out all over,” you can book it Nanny Nancy will get, or take, the credit.
She’ll probably get credit for a cameo role, at the very least, in the recent release of the British hostages, as well. Hey, it’s not too much of a stretch given she just had a nice chat with Assad. Now, his Foreign Minister has publicly allowed, "Syria exercised a sort of quiet diplomacy to solve this problem and encourage dialogue between the two parties."
If things begin to get stupid, don’t be surprised. “Useful idiots” are great for rogues looking for good PR.
She’ll probably get credit for a cameo role, at the very least, in the recent release of the British hostages, as well. Hey, it’s not too much of a stretch given she just had a nice chat with Assad. Now, his Foreign Minister has publicly allowed, "Syria exercised a sort of quiet diplomacy to solve this problem and encourage dialogue between the two parties."
If things begin to get stupid, don’t be surprised. “Useful idiots” are great for rogues looking for good PR.
Please pass the aspirin… again.
“Bush success vs. al Qaeda breeds long-term worries.”
The kids at Reuters are serious, folks. Unbelievable.
The kids at Reuters are serious, folks. Unbelievable.
Jeff Sadow
… weighs in on Breaux’s *probable* candidacy and, like Vitter, makes note of the partisan nature of the Louisiana judiciary.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Pelosi’s “diplomacy” unconstitutional?
If I’m reading my dog-eared copy of the U.S. Constitution correctly, methinks Nanny Pelosi’s unsanctioned “diplo-dance” in the Middle East may be unconstitutional.
To wit:
The last paragraph of Article I, Section 6 plainly states that, “No senator or representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either house during his continuance in office.”
Article II, Section 2 says, “He [the President] shall have the power, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the supreme court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law.”
Hmmm. Nanny’s Speaker of the House, so she’s obviously a member of that body and, not only has she not been nominated by the President to be his ambassador, he went so far as to caution her not to sip tea in terror-sponsoring Syria with the good doctor.
Alternative foreign policy conducted by a “useful idiot.” Dare we hope that Henry Waxman will call for an investigation of her brazen violation of the U.S. Constitution? Pfft.
To wit:
The last paragraph of Article I, Section 6 plainly states that, “No senator or representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either house during his continuance in office.”
Article II, Section 2 says, “He [the President] shall have the power, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the supreme court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law.”
Hmmm. Nanny’s Speaker of the House, so she’s obviously a member of that body and, not only has she not been nominated by the President to be his ambassador, he went so far as to caution her not to sip tea in terror-sponsoring Syria with the good doctor.
Alternative foreign policy conducted by a “useful idiot.” Dare we hope that Henry Waxman will call for an investigation of her brazen violation of the U.S. Constitution? Pfft.
More congressional lunacy.
From The American Thinker:
April 03, 2007
Ban the Bulb?
By Luminus Maximus
In a few weeks the US Congress is likely to vote to phase out the standard incandescent lightbulb within a decade. The frantic race to see who can best appease the global warming alarmists will claim another victim, the friendly glow of the direct descendant of Thomas Edison's filament-based light bulb.
Why would the humble lightbulb, a staple commodity that has raised the standard of living throughout the world, be in the bull’s-eye? It was the incandescent electric light bulb that abolished the tyranny of the night. Our 19th and 20th century ancestors believed it one of the greatest gifts of civilization because they had directly experienced life before electric lighting changed everything. In 2002, former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld briefly reminded us of this blessing when he commented on the satellite imagery revealing the nighttime darkness in North Korea, but other than this brief moment, we seem to have forgotten what we owe to Edison's first invention.
Ironically, the lowly lightbulb became one of the icons of the New Deal, forever connected with the Rural Electrification Act of 1936. The REA and the TVA enabled cheap electric power to be available everywhere, even on the remotest farms and ranches. And a substantial part of the American people fell in love with big government because it brought this fruit of civilization, the rollback of the night, to all Americans.
But today, more than anything else, the humble lightbulb is altogether another sort of convenient symbol for big government-a technology dinosaur, perpetrator of evil crimes against the planet. Stopping the wasteful use of kilowatts by American households in the war on greenhouse gases is the new battle cry of the lovers of governmental control over our lives.
There are about 4 billion conventional screw-in light bulb sockets all across America; the vast majority are in homes and apartments. Incandescent light bulbs are in most of these sockets, with some 2 billion or more replaced every year. It is estimated at least $15 billion of electricity is consumed by these inefficient anachronisms, and that by replacing them with more energy efficient types of lightbulbs-primarily post-modern compact fluorescents--that $15 billion could be cut in half.
We are told that as kilowatts could be reduced, we would need fewer nasty coal-fired power generating plants, while winning a major battle against global warming with little pain and even less effort. Everybody wins!
Well, not exactly. Once again, a nice-sounding theory overlooks significant details of the practical outcomes.
Energy conservation lobbyists conveniently overlook the obvious fact that household lightbulbs are primarily used at night-exactly opposite the time of day in which utilities experience peak load demands for daytime heating, air conditioning and commercial lighting. Peak load shedding is what is most necessary for taking coal fired power plants out of commission.
Reducing nighttime lightbulb consumption of kwhs will do almost nothing to shave peak demand. Moreover, with non-peak kwhs reduced at night, utilities will now have fewer revenues on which to earn a return on their invested capital. Utilities must build up their physical plant to meet the peaks, and the capital to finance that equipment has to be paid for 24 hours a day. Thus, utilities will have to raise rates on the remainder of the kwhs we use for everything else, from washing machines to hair dryers to computers.
Household power used by lightbulbs is actually dwarfed these days by major appliances and high tech consumer electronics- such as wide screen TVs, computers and video games along with internet servers, the biggest energy hogs besides cars and trucks.
And since the new CFLs produce inferior light compared to incandescents, we'll need more of them to read, shave, comb our hair and brush our teeth. Assuming literacy and personal hygiene are still hallmarks of civilized life after the global warming alarmists are done with their crusade to rid us of the blessings of the evil civilization that rapes Mother Gaia.
By banning the incandescent lightbulb Congress will forcibly remove a staple commodity from the marketplace, replacing it with products that are far more expensive, less reliable and more hazardous, notably the much ballyhooed compact fluorescent lightbulb (CFL).
CFL lightbulbs have been around for well over a decade. Only recently have they come in enough varieties and flavors to capture about 10% of the available sockets. But they are still at least 5 times more expensive than regular incandescents, which if replaced in their entirety would cost consumers an extra $4 to 5 billion at the cash register. No doubt millions of Americans will enthusiastically embrace this new technology and be willing to pay extra to get it.
But millions more will not fare so well. This ban will be a tax on poor people and the silent majority-retirees on fixed incomes, single working parents, low wage earners working double shifts or two jobs along with the average Joes and Marys who live each week paycheck-to-paycheck. They don't have cable TV to watch the Home and Garden channel, and can't afford to replace their functional if drab table lamp fixtures, much less employ a green ideology-toting residential lighting designer. For these Americans, burdens come in large packages. Relief arrives less often, and then in small envelopes, such as reduced inflationary pressures on staple commodities like lightbulbs and all the necessities of life purchased at low prices from Wal-Mart. Of course Wal-Mart is yet another enemy of the trendy affluent class that wants to dictate how the rest of us lead our lives.
And guess where the extra purchase prices for these CFLs will wind up? In the pockets of Chinese manufacturers, because not a single CFL is produced in the US.
And it gets worse. As Chinese manufacturers add enough manufacturing capacity to produce ten times as many CFLs , they will need several new coal-fired power plants to run the new factories. This comes on top of the already breathtaking pace today of construction in coal fired electric power plants in China - at a clip of one new plant every week. Don't even think about asking about what kind of pollution control will be operating on those Chinese plants.
A tax on poor people in the US so the Chinese can add more coal fired power plants. Now there's a bright idea.
There's even more to this story: one more dirty little secret that the greens won't tell you about. CFLs contain mercury. You didn't know that? Just a drop you say? How about up to 5 milligrams per lightbulb. If all 4 billion incandescent sockets were filled with CFLs we'd have 20 billion milligrams of mercury spread around every single US household. By the way, 20 billion milligrams is nearly 50,000 pounds.
That 50,000 pounds of mercury amongst 300 million people, if indiscriminately thrown away, will eventually find its way to your favorite landfill and public drinking water supply. Knock over a table lamp and shatter a CFL in your house, and you have a toxic waste situation on your hands right in the living room, bedroom or dining room.
On the other hand, at least half of all mercury emissions from coal fired power plants currently is captured by scrubbers, and clean coal technologies promise to eliminate 2/3rds of what remains. Not so for CFLs-- which can't operate without mercury.
So there you have it. Congress will soon enact legislation to impose a tax on poor people that will directly pass to Chinese companies, contribute to lower literacy and less personal hygiene while making industrial policy that will increase greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and spread a hazardous heavy metal into the environment.
Ban the bulb is a no-brainer, only this time the empty-headed variety.
Update: Again, forget congressional mandates and CFLs. LEDs that never need to be replaced, that never break and contain no mercury will be coming to a store near you – soon, I hope. If they are practically designed and priced, everyone will be clamoring for them, so who’ll need to be forced to make the transition? Of course, we’re still left with low flow showerheads and toilets…
April 03, 2007
Ban the Bulb?
By Luminus Maximus
In a few weeks the US Congress is likely to vote to phase out the standard incandescent lightbulb within a decade. The frantic race to see who can best appease the global warming alarmists will claim another victim, the friendly glow of the direct descendant of Thomas Edison's filament-based light bulb.
Why would the humble lightbulb, a staple commodity that has raised the standard of living throughout the world, be in the bull’s-eye? It was the incandescent electric light bulb that abolished the tyranny of the night. Our 19th and 20th century ancestors believed it one of the greatest gifts of civilization because they had directly experienced life before electric lighting changed everything. In 2002, former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld briefly reminded us of this blessing when he commented on the satellite imagery revealing the nighttime darkness in North Korea, but other than this brief moment, we seem to have forgotten what we owe to Edison's first invention.
Ironically, the lowly lightbulb became one of the icons of the New Deal, forever connected with the Rural Electrification Act of 1936. The REA and the TVA enabled cheap electric power to be available everywhere, even on the remotest farms and ranches. And a substantial part of the American people fell in love with big government because it brought this fruit of civilization, the rollback of the night, to all Americans.
But today, more than anything else, the humble lightbulb is altogether another sort of convenient symbol for big government-a technology dinosaur, perpetrator of evil crimes against the planet. Stopping the wasteful use of kilowatts by American households in the war on greenhouse gases is the new battle cry of the lovers of governmental control over our lives.
There are about 4 billion conventional screw-in light bulb sockets all across America; the vast majority are in homes and apartments. Incandescent light bulbs are in most of these sockets, with some 2 billion or more replaced every year. It is estimated at least $15 billion of electricity is consumed by these inefficient anachronisms, and that by replacing them with more energy efficient types of lightbulbs-primarily post-modern compact fluorescents--that $15 billion could be cut in half.
We are told that as kilowatts could be reduced, we would need fewer nasty coal-fired power generating plants, while winning a major battle against global warming with little pain and even less effort. Everybody wins!
Well, not exactly. Once again, a nice-sounding theory overlooks significant details of the practical outcomes.
Energy conservation lobbyists conveniently overlook the obvious fact that household lightbulbs are primarily used at night-exactly opposite the time of day in which utilities experience peak load demands for daytime heating, air conditioning and commercial lighting. Peak load shedding is what is most necessary for taking coal fired power plants out of commission.
Reducing nighttime lightbulb consumption of kwhs will do almost nothing to shave peak demand. Moreover, with non-peak kwhs reduced at night, utilities will now have fewer revenues on which to earn a return on their invested capital. Utilities must build up their physical plant to meet the peaks, and the capital to finance that equipment has to be paid for 24 hours a day. Thus, utilities will have to raise rates on the remainder of the kwhs we use for everything else, from washing machines to hair dryers to computers.
Household power used by lightbulbs is actually dwarfed these days by major appliances and high tech consumer electronics- such as wide screen TVs, computers and video games along with internet servers, the biggest energy hogs besides cars and trucks.
And since the new CFLs produce inferior light compared to incandescents, we'll need more of them to read, shave, comb our hair and brush our teeth. Assuming literacy and personal hygiene are still hallmarks of civilized life after the global warming alarmists are done with their crusade to rid us of the blessings of the evil civilization that rapes Mother Gaia.
By banning the incandescent lightbulb Congress will forcibly remove a staple commodity from the marketplace, replacing it with products that are far more expensive, less reliable and more hazardous, notably the much ballyhooed compact fluorescent lightbulb (CFL).
CFL lightbulbs have been around for well over a decade. Only recently have they come in enough varieties and flavors to capture about 10% of the available sockets. But they are still at least 5 times more expensive than regular incandescents, which if replaced in their entirety would cost consumers an extra $4 to 5 billion at the cash register. No doubt millions of Americans will enthusiastically embrace this new technology and be willing to pay extra to get it.
But millions more will not fare so well. This ban will be a tax on poor people and the silent majority-retirees on fixed incomes, single working parents, low wage earners working double shifts or two jobs along with the average Joes and Marys who live each week paycheck-to-paycheck. They don't have cable TV to watch the Home and Garden channel, and can't afford to replace their functional if drab table lamp fixtures, much less employ a green ideology-toting residential lighting designer. For these Americans, burdens come in large packages. Relief arrives less often, and then in small envelopes, such as reduced inflationary pressures on staple commodities like lightbulbs and all the necessities of life purchased at low prices from Wal-Mart. Of course Wal-Mart is yet another enemy of the trendy affluent class that wants to dictate how the rest of us lead our lives.
And guess where the extra purchase prices for these CFLs will wind up? In the pockets of Chinese manufacturers, because not a single CFL is produced in the US.
And it gets worse. As Chinese manufacturers add enough manufacturing capacity to produce ten times as many CFLs , they will need several new coal-fired power plants to run the new factories. This comes on top of the already breathtaking pace today of construction in coal fired electric power plants in China - at a clip of one new plant every week. Don't even think about asking about what kind of pollution control will be operating on those Chinese plants.
A tax on poor people in the US so the Chinese can add more coal fired power plants. Now there's a bright idea.
There's even more to this story: one more dirty little secret that the greens won't tell you about. CFLs contain mercury. You didn't know that? Just a drop you say? How about up to 5 milligrams per lightbulb. If all 4 billion incandescent sockets were filled with CFLs we'd have 20 billion milligrams of mercury spread around every single US household. By the way, 20 billion milligrams is nearly 50,000 pounds.
That 50,000 pounds of mercury amongst 300 million people, if indiscriminately thrown away, will eventually find its way to your favorite landfill and public drinking water supply. Knock over a table lamp and shatter a CFL in your house, and you have a toxic waste situation on your hands right in the living room, bedroom or dining room.
On the other hand, at least half of all mercury emissions from coal fired power plants currently is captured by scrubbers, and clean coal technologies promise to eliminate 2/3rds of what remains. Not so for CFLs-- which can't operate without mercury.
So there you have it. Congress will soon enact legislation to impose a tax on poor people that will directly pass to Chinese companies, contribute to lower literacy and less personal hygiene while making industrial policy that will increase greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and spread a hazardous heavy metal into the environment.
Ban the bulb is a no-brainer, only this time the empty-headed variety.
Update: Again, forget congressional mandates and CFLs. LEDs that never need to be replaced, that never break and contain no mercury will be coming to a store near you – soon, I hope. If they are practically designed and priced, everyone will be clamoring for them, so who’ll need to be forced to make the transition? Of course, we’re still left with low flow showerheads and toilets…
Monday, April 2, 2007
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Jindal Event
You are cordially invited to a reception with
Bobby Jindal
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
6:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m.
Alexandria Golf & Country ClubHighway
165 SouthAlexandria
Business Attire
Host: $1,000 / Ticket: $500 per couple
Please make checks payable to:
Friends of Bobby Jindal
P.O. 82860
Baton Rouge, LA 70884
Bobby’s Campaign Sponsorship Levels:
· Bobby’s Club: Individuals who make the maximum contribution of $5,000 to Friends of Bobby Jindal.
· Committee for Louisiana’s Future: Individuals who commit to give and/or raise $25,000 for Friends of Bobby Jindal. (Maximum contribution per individual or legal entity is $5,000).
· Governor’s Council: Made up of key friends and supporters who commit to give and/or raise $50,000 for Friends of Bobby Jindal. (Maximum contribution per individual or legal entity is $5,000).
· Committee for Louisiana’s Future: Individuals who commit to give and/or raise $25,000 for Friends of Bobby Jindal. (Maximum contribution per individual or legal entity is $5,000).
· Governor’s Council: Made up of key friends and supporters who commit to give and/or raise $50,000 for Friends of Bobby Jindal. (Maximum contribution per individual or legal entity is $5,000).
For information on this event or to RSVP, please call Sally Nungesser at 225-235-2745, email sanunge@aol.com. For other events or general campaign information, please call Bobby’s Finance Director, Allee Bautsch, at 225-756-7969, email allee@bobbyjindal.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)