Senator Rand Paul to Obama energy official: Leave my toilets and lightbulbs alone

Or something like that. This video actually is a good narrative on why so many Americans find greater government control on our personal lives antithetical to the American way. Watch the whole thing as Paul takes on another busy body from the left.

Like AP at Hot Air, I am not sure the abortion/choice argument holds water but the libertarian Senator from Kentucky is correct. In America we let people choose … not the government choosing for us.

Enjoy the video. The question/statement runs just 3 minutes and is worth every minute. The fumbling answer is classic liberalism. “I’m not restricting choice … it’s light you want.”

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELDHaeEsNF0&feature=player_embedded

Senator Rand Paul’s toilets don’t work, and he blames the Department of Energy.

At a hearing of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on Thursday, Mr. Paul lambasted Kathleen Hogan, deputy assistant secretary for energy efficiency at the Energy Department, telling her that the department’s “hypocrisy” and “busybody nature” has “restricted choices” for consumers rather than made life better for them.

“You don’t care about the consumer really,” Mr. Paul said. “Frankly, my toilets don’t work in my house, and I blame you.”

The hearing was called not to examine toilet policy, but to consider two proposed bills, one that would update energy efficiency standards for appliances and a second that would repeal a measure passed in 2007 to phase in new efficiency standards for light bulbs beginning next year.

The new standards would make the current form of 100-watt incandescent bulbs obsolete. Those bulbs have long been known to be particularly inefficient, emitting far more heat than light.

AP has an interesting and sarcastic but unfortunately true take at Hot Air.

Abortion is protected by a constitutional right of privacy and/or bodily autonomy whereas consumer goods like toilets and lightbulbs — and health insurance! — aren’t, and are therefore subject to whatever regulation the feds can dream up in the name of the common good. Paul’s confusion stems from his quaint notion that there are conceptual limits on congressional/executive power even if those limits aren’t specifically enumerated.

One word about the light bulbs. Florescent bulbs will soon be the only ones you can buy, as Paul states. But fluorescent light flares LUPUS. Has the WH really thought this one through?

30 replies
  1. winnie888
    winnie888 says:

    Dear Government:  Please stay out of my wallet, my bedroom, my kitchen, my light fixtures, my appliances, my plumbing and everything else that I can handle just fine on my own without YOUR interference.  GOD BLESS.

  2. Don Lombardo
    Don Lombardo says:

    The new light bulbs have MERCURY in them. This crap comes from the same fools that gave us ETHANOL. The inmates are running the asylum.

  3. WagTheDog
    WagTheDog says:

    I find it interesting that the lo-flow toilets are the way to go.  Normal toilets – 5 gallons/flush, and you flush once.  Lo-flow, 3 gallons/flush and you flush twice.  So, 5 x 1 = 5 whereas 3 x 2 = 6.  Where's the savings?

  4. Cliff G
    Cliff G says:

    Headpiece filled with straw…… 

     This is the way the world will end

     This is the way the world will end 

      This is the way the world will end

      Not with a bang but a whimper

    ("The Hollow Men" by T.S. Eliot)

  5. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    "We the unwilling, led by the unqualified, are doing the impossible, for the ungrateful."

     

    The GI's lament becomes the taxpayer's lament.

    • Cliff G
      Cliff G says:

      I think to "tax-payer" we need to add "citizen".   Then instead of dividing us into "tax-payer" vs. "servant";  we need to think "top" & "middle" and" labor" & "managment".  Do you think we might see that some "tax-payers" don't have it so bad; and some of our "servants" don't have it quite as good as we originally imagined?

  6. NH-Jim
    NH-Jim says:

    My 50 year-old toilet works fine.  And, like all Yankee ingenuity, to save water one only has to remember the ole motto, "if it's yellow – let it mellow, if it's brown – flush it down."  It conserves.

     

    Ask any plumber/contractor how they feel about the low flush fixtures, they'll give you a bowl-full of complaints.  Take a look at the new building codes instituted in the past decade.  This is what happens when bureaucrats believe they can dictate, design and engineer our way to "utopia".  Would you climb aboard a bus driven by a toddler?

     

    Side note, Jim:  I am a chronic migraine sufferer for 34 years and fluorescent lighting is a major nemesis.  Entering department stores brings on severe headache and vertigo, now, I will have the "pleasure" of having them in my own home.  Hey, maybe like the Health Reform exemptions, I can get a light bulb exemption.

    • GdavidH
      GdavidH says:

      I'm with you Jim. I have two 21 year old toilets that always function in one flush. I have an 11 year old low use toilet that can't handle certain jobs without plunging, sometimes flushing 3-4 times.  I do wish I had a bi-flush system on my old toilets to save water. That type of mechanism is worthwhile.

       By the way… they know that  "Utopia" is out there and they are willing to crush anyone who gets in the way of getting there. And we do  find ourselves on a bus driven by a toddler. We were already on it when they switched drivers.

  7. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    If you live in water-soaked New England, you don't "care" about saving water. But, a HUGE portions of the US (the fastest growing) is water poor. But then New England is a self-contained heaven that believes it can still wag-the-dog.

    • Lucinda
      Lucinda says:

      Of course we care, because saving water equals saving money (at least those with city water and sewer).

      I am reminded of the line parents used to give to their children, "Clean your plate. Don't you know there are starving children in [insert name of 3rd world nation/continent here]?"

       

  8. NH-Jim
    NH-Jim says:

    A nationwide mandate on all states collectively is not the answer.  Let's leave it to the individual states to control water usage, not the federal government for it's not the federal government's role.

  9. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    And let us not forget that "saving" sometimes costs more, i.e. when you cut your electric bills significantly, then the utilities have to ask for rate hikes to continue to cover their costs.  You end up paying the same for less!

  10. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    P.S. Lucinda: if you want to be near a lot of water do not complain about flooding (who pays for levees: the taxpayer, even those in the desert) or getting creamed by a hurricane (who pays: the taxpayers, even those in the desert). Streets tend to be 2-way.

  11. Lucinda
    Lucinda says:

    ??? Who's complaining about flooding or hurricanes?

    However, I will complain about a government that mandates things without thinking through the unintended consequences, such as low flow toilets that require multiple flushes in order to clear the bowl, and that's just for liquid waste. Where's the savings there? 1.6 gal. flush x 2 = 3.2 gal. or x 3 = 4.8 gal. vs. 3.5 gal. flush x 1.

    And what of light bulbs? The government wants to force us to use CFLs, which contain a known hazardous substance,  not to mention the fact that CFLs, or fluorescent bulbs in general, are not recommended for use by people with certain health conditions (epilepsy, lupus to name a few).

    To paraphrase Senator Paul, persuade me, don't force me.

    • sammy22
      sammy22 says:

      I think that returning to out-houses and candles could also address your ( and Mr. Paul's) concerns.

      • PatRiot
        PatRiot says:

        Nice way to turn the conversation sammy22.  Makes it sound like you will not be subject to the same conditions / products.

        BACK TO THE POINT   These wizards of smart are controlling what does not need to be controlled.  They like it that way and most of us do not.

        If the low flows worked properly this would not be a topic of discussion.

        If the environmentalists had forethought and consistancy, we would not have removed lead from our paint just to replace it with murcury in our light bulbs.

        And broken bulbs are more common than paint chips.

        Jeez – I get the impression they would rather be babysitters than leaders – and they do like spending our money and wasting our time.

      • Dimsdale
        Dimsdale says:

        Classic reductio ad absurdum, sammy!
        ?
        The only people that would be proponents of “outhouses and candles” would be the lefties.? Wanting functioning plumbing (or toilet paper, for that matter) does not seem to be one of their major concerns.

  12. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    My low-flow toilet works just fine, thanks. I keep reading that if I don't like something I should leave, do something else, etc. Why doesn't it work for the bloggers here? You don't like low flow toilets? Get a high flow one, if you want it they'll make it. Get an exception, do something other than complain.

    • GdavidH
      GdavidH says:

      Sammy says…"if you want it they’ll make it. Get an exception, do something other than complain."

       The fact is they cannot legally MAKE them anymore. I've been told there is actually a black market for older toilets ( I've been in the building industry for 25+ years). Problem is, you can only put them in your own house and must change back in order to pass the inspection to sell. You cannot put them in a rental.

  13. Murphy
    Murphy says:

    Too many damn laws – every idiot that gets elected wants his name on a bill! That's the real root of it. As for the toilets ask San Francisco how that's working  http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/01/low-flow-toi… .

    As for them dang Mercury time bombs.. get them out of here!! Friends of mine installed them a year ago.

    1st they whine/buzz  not everyone hears but 4 out of 5 did and two of those could not stay in the room and avoid a headache.

    2nd It gets cold around here any CFLs do not like the cold! A neighbor put up CFL spots outside his house. Thanksgiving I went over to tend to his dogs, I turned the lights on let the dogs out, played with them a little fed them let them out again. And finally by the time I left the outside CFLs were 70% lit. 3rd China makes the majority of CFLs because Mercury is dangerous!  "Nanhai Feiyang lighting factory 68 out of 72 employees were so badly poisoned that they required hospitalization. At another CFL factory 121 out of 123 employees were found to have excessive mercury levels, with one employee's mercury level 150 times the accepted standard.

    4th Broken CFLs present a Mercury hazard & in a form that easily becomes airborne. Does everyone have a environmentally friendly mercury removal device? Will you remember not to vacuum it and spread it through the air? Will Todd at Walmart or Gramps care or know that the debris requires special handling?

    I give up Mercury and Abortion is good but Salt and Trans-fats need to be outlawed? GMAFB

  14. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    @GdavidH: then lobby Congress to pass legislation that will allow the manufacture of high flow toilets. That could be constructive counter to the regulation you object to.

  15. GdavidH
    GdavidH says:

    “Lobby congress”….Good one.
    Sammy, all these regulations have unintended consequences that never occur to the “This makes me feel good” reps pushing them. The result is regulations that are nearly impossible to get rid of by changing majorities in congress, ?let alone the actual consumers. The only?way I or any of us?can “lobby” congress is to continue to VOTE ?for reasonable, ?rational people. Whether or not they get elected depends on how many reasonable, rational people vote as opposed to the?needy, uninformed….Oh, never mind. And here we are.

  16. TomL
    TomL says:

    When low flush toilets were first mandated all they did was restrict the amount of water that flowed into the tanks. They didn’t work properly requiring 2-3 flushes to work. The ones that have been on the market for the past 4 years have been re-engineered and work fine.? Now the problem is that there’s not enough liquid in the sewerlines to get the solid waste to flow properly and creating? an odor. As?someone posted there are always unintended consequences when the useless make the laws.?

  17. Murphy
    Murphy says:

    Dang them toilets

    And water conservation in Germany can be harmful — particularly when it comes to the sewage systems beneath German cities. The lack of waste water flowing through the canalization means that fat, faeces and discarded food aren't getting flushed out enough, and are corroding the walls. To compensate, utilities are forced to pump hundreds of thousands of liters of fresh water through the system to keep it operable.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Platform of Pro-Choice for lightbulbs and toilets that work: Senator Paul (R-Big Baby) is considering a run for President.? As long as it’s not against his […]

Comments are closed.