When the greater good outweighs personal benefits, that's when they step in. Is the choice to use incandescents really that much more beneficial than energy conserved from using fluorescents? And what rights are you really taking away from someone by saying that they have to use a fluorescent?
It's kind of like seatbelts and airbags on cars. Sure, the consumers could have chosen to buy cars with seatbelts (back in the day) or airbags if they wanted them, but it was deemed necessary to require them for the greater good.
I personally have been changing over to fluorescents as I need to. They are still too expensive right now for me to arbitrarily change
ALL my lightbulbs at the same time, but as I have to replace them, I've been buying the 3-packs and replacing 3 more bulbs.
I'm not saying that this bill is a great idea and
should become law, but if it did pass, it would help ALL Americans in that the market demand for these bulbs will increase and once supply catches up like it always does, the price on these things will drop significantly. Hooray for cheaper fluorescents!
I know that one law that has helped all Americans, heck even the whole world if you think about it, was the laws limiting emissions on new cars. Car manufacturers had to develop cars that could meet the strict standards in CA, which in return, we all get cars that had lower emissions. If I can have the car I want, and have it pollute less, I don't see the harm in that.
