US GOVERNMENT SAY BAH HUMBUG! to Christmas lights
The Comment period ends December 30th on the new regulations that will outlaw affordable Christmas lights including indoor and outdoor lighted decorations of any type. See link below.
From the Washington Times via Gail Combs:
Christmas lights have become so affordable that even the humblest of homes often are lit like the Star of Bethlehem. Federal bureaucrats are working to end this. They claim it will make us safer, but the facts don’t back them up.
It’s not uncommon to find strings of mini-lights priced at $1 for a hundred lights, sometimes even less. To cure this excessive affordability, the feds are rushing to save Americans from mass holiday displays. They seem to believe we all are like Clark Griswold, the bumbling father figure in National Lampoon’s “Christmas Vacation” (played by Chevy Chase), who nearly electrocutes himself, starts fires, falls off the roof and short-circuits power in his whole neighborhood as he tries to create a home display that would outdo Rockefeller Center.
The Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) has created an example of regulate first and explain why later. In October they proposed new regulations to outlaw strings of bulbs, lighted lawn figures and similar items that would be declared as hazardous. The red tape deals with certifying wire sizes, fuses, and tensile strength of all “seasonal decorative lighting products.”
This includes Christmas tree lights, lighted wreaths, menorahs, outdoor strands, lawn figures of Jesus, Mary and Joseph, or Santa or Rudolph or Frosty the Snowman. Yes, Kwanzaa, too. CPSC is an equal opportunity Scrooge. The agency estimates that their proposed regulations will impact 100 million items per year with a market value of $500 million.
Of course, those items already are covered by safety regulations and also by industry standards and oversight. CPSC admits that 3.6-million unsafe lights were recalled under existing safeguards in place since 1974.
So what is CPSC’s justification for adding red tape to the red, green, blue, yellow, white and other colored displays? They report 250 deaths from fires or electrocutions by Christmas lights. That’s not 250 deaths per year; it’s 250 deaths since 1980. They had to add together 33 years of statistics to misportray danger.
You can comment here:
Is there anything left to regulate?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I wonder what Gail Combs thinks on this question: Does responding to the CPSC validate the use of that bureaucracy to pass these sweeping regulations?
Would it be better to contact Congress?
Thanks Gail.
It does not matter what I think what matters is the US Supreme Court and they ruled that as long as there was a comment period Regulations are LAW. (Can’t find the link I looked at years ago.)
Once a course is set by the powers in D.C. it doesn’t matter what the peons want. You WILL end up with the reg even if they have to change the name.
NAIS (National Animal Identification System) when it was proposed not only got over 5,000 comments (an unheard of number.) 99% were HE!! NO!! (And yes I did read them) So the USDA rewrote it and got another HE!! NO!! despite pulling some underhanded tricks trying to hide the comment period. Seems the third time is the charm. So we now have Animal Disease Traceability instead of NAIS. Same reg different name but “The will of the People” prevailed and the USDA ‘listened to our concerns” and shafted us anyway.
It took them over 10 years to get the farm regulation the UN and the World Trade Organization wanted passed. (The WTO and UN wrote the draft of the bill.) It finally passed as “the Food Safety Modernization Act” during the lame duck session Christmas time 2010. (It started out as a bill promoted by a democrat, Rosa DeLauro and ended up as a bill sponsored by a republican, Robert Burr.)
How many years have we been fighting CAGW? Was the defeat of The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (the Waxman-Markey Bill) enough to Kill the beast? Or are we still having to try to stamp out a ridiculous idea that will crash our economy and hand control of world economics to China. An idea that has killed 10s of thousands or more and dealt a deathblow to the EU economy.
I find the older I get and the more I learn about the US government the more I find myself in agreement with Mark Stoval.
Yes ma’am, I believe the federal bureaucracies involved in regulating agriculture, energy, and education are now very nearly directly controlled by foreign interests. The majority of UN member states are not economically, politically, or religiously free.
Inre US gov’t – there are not a lot of open societies that are able to withstand treachery and betrayal to foreign interests from within.
I provided the following comment to the Federal site:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=CPSC-2014-0024-0001
From your own analysis of this proposed regulation, this regulation will serve no meaningful purpose.
From the proposed regulation:
“As detailed in this notice, the Commission determines preliminarily that:
Minimum wire size, sufficient strain relief, and overcurrent protection are all readily observable characteristics of seasonal and decorative lighting products;
these three readily observable characteristics are addressed by a voluntary standard, UL 588;
conformance to UL 588 has been effective in reducing the risk of injury from shock and fire associated with these readily observable characteristics; and
seasonal and decorative lighting products sold in the United States substantially comply with UL 588.”
The analysis concludes that the subject light products already substantially conform the UL 588, and that risk of injury and fire has substantially decreased over the past 30 years. Why then are you suggesting this regulation? This is yet another example of regulation just because….
We have a serious national debt issue, and hundreds of thousands of pages of regulations, very likely most of which serve no substantial purpose except to encumber our economy with pointless regulatory burden.
Please direct your attention to issues where is can be unequivocally shown would actually result increased public safety with efficient requirements.
This proposed regulation is a waste of tax payers dollars.
The link to the CPSC doesn’t work for me: the double dash just before “Standards” has been converted to a ‘long dash’ (or &mdash).
Fixing that, the link works.
Also, the Federal Register link is:
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/10/16/2014-24378/substantial-product-hazard-list-seasonal-and-decorative-lighting-products
=> with only 4 submitted public comments
I’m guessing some of those deaths were Darwin award candidates to begin with.
I’m guessing the majority were Darwin award candidates.
When Christmas lights are outlawed only outlaws will have Christmas lights.
But, you can’t defend your family with Christmas lights.
We don’t need lights, reds and greens
We just need our M16s
(UK version)
We don’t need lefties with their tricks,
we just need MI6.
Before there were electric lights, people put candles on their Christmas trees, that was far less safe than today’s lights. People will go back to candles if they have to.
Or when you make criminals out of law abiding citizens, you make enemies from allies.
Very true!
If I’m not mistaken, wasn’t Carter the first to turn out the lights at Christmas?
(Carter always struck me as someone who would make a great neighbor. But he was a lousy President.)
A side note;
Glad to see Gail Combs name here again. It just seems like it belongs.
All the best to you, Gail.
Billy was a better neighbor…
He is a lousy neighbor as well.
Ironically, a giant light bulb will feature on the Sydney Harbour Bridge to welcome in the new year.
Is this a ‘spit in the face’ for Obama after his embarrassing put down at the G20?
“Is there anything left to regulate?”
Yes. The banking industry.
No the Banking industry is the most regulate industry in this country. It been that way since the 1930s. When I started the in banking a a compute tech, twenty and yes our work is check at least once every two years generally by morons. They do not pay well enough so they end up with people who are happy with the paperwork, it irrelevant that what you are doing makes and sense since they would not know if it did or not, just as long as you have the paper work done the way they want it done! Seem to me when I started over twenty years ago the binders of Fed regulations use to take up four feet of desk space now it is over twelve. Chris you oblivis don’t know the sad joke called Dodd Frank, not only does it create more regulation it also move oversight away from congress, so not there is no oversight and it was basically a pay off to the big banks since they can better afford to cop with it regulations, small community banks are the ones that law was design to get rid over after all the big banks cannot have too much outside competition. That not the sadist part of the bad joke called Dodd Frank, the joke is that the primary architects of the bank meltdown in 2008 were Fannie and Freddie and since Dodd and Frank had fought for years against regulation them the quasi government home loan organizations, the Dodd Frank bill does nothing to regulate them.
The banks are doing exactly what the politicians want.
@ur momisugly James the Elder “The banks are doing exactly what the politicians want.”
With respect, sir, you sure it’s not the other way ’round instead…
…or maybe as well?
exactly otherwise they would be riling against them. trying to regulate them out of existance.
In 1972 when the agency was created, it had a budget of $34.7 million and 786 staff members. By 2008 it had 401 employees on a budget of $43 million, but the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act passed in 2008 increases funding $136.4 million in 2014 with full-time employees to at least 500 by 2013
This is difficult for younger people to comprehend. Young people are easily convinced that using the government to raise the minimum wage, or put ID stamps on every single egg (!), or increasingly regulate food at every stage is just a little trifle. It isn’t. Young people do not see the harm in red tape; they have no reference point or experiences to warn them of death by red tape, or “death by a thousand cuts.”
In the end, these regulations and “red tape” result in a huge layer of bureaucracy and higher expenses. This then makes running a business extraordinarily difficult, because of regulatory mazes, tax law, and unnavigable environmental rules. Extra lawyers are needed to simply comply with all the regulations, and examples of selective and vicious enforcement are already plentiful. Small competitors to larger suppliers are easily drowned by red tape. Perhaps even a child can understand that increasing red tape and environmental regulations only helps the Large Businesses favored by the government, and greatly decreases choices.
Nicely summed up.
Federal regulations not only cost up front in tax payer dollars to pay the salaries of Government employees, they also are a huge cost in higher prices, lower wages and loss of whole industries that have given up and are now overseas where the regulatory climate, corporate taxes and the labor costs are less.
Federal regulations have lowered real GDP growth by 2% per year since 1949 and made America 72% poorer
Federal Regulations Have Made You 75 Percent Poorer — U.S. GDP is just $16 trillion instead of $54 trillion
Can we also get the opinion of the CSPA before we rush to conclusions?
Is WUWT even a science blog anymore, it seems like nowadays it would have a better fit in the politics section of whatever wordpress blog directory is out there. It’s very disappointing to see that the skeptical side has lowered themselves to the same level of name-calling and ad-hom statements as the warmists (and who knows, the climate could remain stable which would disappoint both sides).
Adam:
??????
I went and reread the comments because I do not have a clue what you’re ranting about.
No ad-homs.
No name calling.
Perhaps you have some other understanding of what constitutes ad-hominems or name calling? Or were you referring to the very generalized adjectives leftist, conservatives, right, peasant?
Or maybe the descriptive noun Congress; now that one can be insulting.
Anyway, I suggest you actually read the thread before vilifying people in a general manner.
Everything can, and in the eyes of legislators and bureaucrats, MUST be regulated. It’s what they do. Length of shoe laces? Strength of coffee? CO2 in the atmosphere? Height of the oceans?
Adam, there is ONE (1) death a year.
Consider the fact that most towns will not install a traffic light at an intersection until there are a certain number of deaths. You won’t find that written any where but it was the point blank reason given to me and the lady who hit me after my car was totaled at a blind four way stop with one of the stop signs over grown with tree branches.
You seem to think people must be completely wrapped in regulations ‘For their own good.’ Where the heck is it going to stop?
This is the size of regulations written in 2013. Have you read all 800,000 pages? Are you ready to comply with each one?
http://imgur.com/48tp5Jg
The small stack of papers on top of the book case are the laws passed by our elected officials. The three large stacks are the regulations written in 2013 by unelected bureaucrats.
You are required to have read and understood all that paper and comply with it. Not to mention all the similar stacks going back over 200 years.
… and under our system of jurisprudence, ignorance of the law is no defense so saying “I didn’t know it was illegal as I only read to page 72,123, paragraph 37 in the Register” doesn’t cut it. Not to mention the fact that a fair percentage of those regulations contradict each other… Catch 22. Actually, I would defy anyone to go through a normal day and not somehow violate some Federal rule or regulation. Most people are in constant violation.
I’ve read that some Euro towns have done away with traffic controls, and the accident rate plummeted. When you know you could die at the next intersection, you do tend to look.
Lawyers, Politicians and Judges are permitted to be Ignorant of the existence and meaning of laws. An exclusion that they claim every day. And like all mental incompetents can not be held responsible for their actions. pg
nielszoo
December 28, 2014 at 4:05 pm
“Actually, I would defy anyone to go through a normal day and not somehow violate some Federal rule or regulation. Most people are in constant violation.”
Yes, but look at the bright side: It’s getting harder and harder for your bureaucrats to find out.
That stack of paper may look like a lot of laws and regulations — but it is not. The fact is, there is only ONE law, and it is one that Mao Tse-Tung wrote: “Political power flows from the muzzle of a gun.”
I wish it were not so, but the law today is whatever the most powerful gang says it is, and today, the most powerful gang is based in Washington, D.C.
If you do not believe me, find someone, anyone, who has been recently caught up with any serious charge in the judiciary system. Ask them whether the rule of law and the search for justice is still taking place. Ask them.
Adam,
CAGW was NEVER about science. It has always been about the politics of money and power.
Regards,
Steamboat Jack (Jon Jewett’s evil twin)
If we are to use the opinion of the CSPA then extension cords will be banned, hammers will be banned, screwdrivers will be banned, any and all knives will be banned, ladders will be banned, cars will be banned etc. as each and every one of those things has killed more people per year than Christmas light strings.
By the way they have had integral fuses installed in them for decades by the manufacturers who, in the interest of safety, started making better products back in the 1970’s. The CSPA is about 40 years behind the curve and getting further behind with the advent of LED lighting. You used to be able to string 3 sets of lights end to end before you went over the current limit for the small lights, something like 5 amperes at 120vac. The new lights my wife got at Walgreens, (UL listed and only couple of dollars) recommended not putting more than 45 sets together. They’re drawing miniscule amounts of current now and are safer than ever… all due to the manufacturer’s desire to create a better product without government interference.
In addition, Led lights generally run from 12 or 24 volts. Not much chance of electrocution there.
Maybe the problem is being strangled by the wires when you fall off the ladder; whilst three sheets to the wind.
Do you hate Christmas, Christians ?
Adam, I see your point. But ad-hom is a bit over the top here at least, can’t see anyone coming near the SkS standards. A critical look at authorities is never a bad thing. And in the holiday season a bit of light entertainment is surely acceptable?
Christmas lights are Religious Speech
Then Obama’s Progressive CPSC will ban them for sure and have them replaced with Satanic art illuminated bongs and Planned Parenthood votive candles.
NOt sure of the religion, but still, religion speech is free speech.
Only when they work.
I don’t see they are trying to ban Christmas lights. It could be that they find some cheep and possibly dangerous China produced lights that actually could pose a danger. Without regulation, they can’t stop crappy dangerous products from being sold. This is the problem. Without some regulative rules, if someone gets lit up (electrified or Christmas tree catches fire) by their Christmas lights because of faulty cheep wiring, there is no way to sue the product maker. It may not be consumers who pushed this but insurance companies who want the light makers to pay the damages caused by faulty lights. It may not just be about deaths but the cost of fires. It might be good to question who pushed for the regulations.
That is a problem with CFLs from China, which are known to leak and spontaneously combust. Yet they are the result of mandates against incandescent bulbs!
That is another example of passing environmental laws against products that are safe and work, which people buy voluntarily. It results in expensive products, inferior in performance, and often genuinely toxic or totally unreliable.
“That is another example of passing environmental laws against products that are safe and work, which people buy voluntarily. It results in expensive products, inferior in performance, and often genuinely toxic or totally unreliable.”
My mother (God rest her soul) said it best: “God protect me from my friends, I can protect myself from my enemies”.
“It’s very disappointing to see that the skeptical side has lowered themselves to the same level of name-calling and ad-hom statements as the warmists…”
This is nothing. But you had better not look, because someone might eventually say something “uncivil” about regulating Christmas lights (and our cultural celebration of Christmas) out of existence. You may want to avert your eyes for the rest of the day.
I’ve been reading this blog since the interesting posts on how to measure surface temperatures, the ratio of science-based to politically-based articles was much higher back then and it was more pleasant to read.
If this blog loses all sense of the moral high ground, it will become that much harder to rebuff the critics, as they can now use the “hey pot, meet kettle” argument (if it’s not already there that is).
I believe AW has been receiving this exact same advice for the last 5 years. But I am sure he appreciates all the advice he can get on how to run a highly informative and wonderful blog.
But you have to admit, reading a couple of these noop posts every now and then sure gives a good laugh. I think everyone seems to be a bit punch-drunk this far into the holidays.
Whatever made you think any of this had anything to do with the “moral high ground” ?
Personally, I’m just having fun.
So, thank you.
From the land of OZ, meet Adam from Kansas. Tornadoes or just bad dreams?
We heard you the first time…
Do you actually think that the advocates of ever- increasing bureaucratic power over our lives are occupying the moral high ground?
The proposal is sorely lacking comments; they could certainly use a few more.
This CPSC page will get you to where a comment button is available.
I left the following. Not that the governmental rule making bodies have ever paid my comments any real attention:
So no matter how cheap-o the string of lights is, I can be assured it is 20 or 22 gauge, can withstand a 20-pound pull, and has fuses.
The government has codified many UL standards, and this one looks like a no-brainer. Am I missing something?
UL standards are based on actual testing. US regulations today are based on ideology.
Yes, government has no business or authority to regulate them. No where in the Constitution is the Federal Government given authority to regulate products. That “power” is a fiction made up out of whole cloth by the courts starting with Wickard v. Filburn in 1942 and Congress went along with the massive power grab it represented… and we follow along like good government sheep. We don’t need to spend tax dollars trying to enforce standards that private industry keeps up to date all by itself.
You have a large set of employees. They need busy work.
In the meantime perhaps candles would be a safe alternative…
I commend particularly: –
Jimbo December 28, 2014 at 1:25 pm – and his immediately-following two posts.
and
markstoval December 28, 2014 at 12:52 pm
regulation just for the sake of regulation – per markstoval’s quote – is killing much of the productive economies of the West.
Auto
Is there anything left to regulate?
CANDLES. Matches. Christmas crackers http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2888595/Pull-one-Thanks-EU-directive-crackers-banned-12s-classified-fireworks.html
The mind-set of the regulator …
…. I know what’s best for you silly peasants
…. just submit and obey us, your betters
http://www.elfishing.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/EbenezerScrooge.jpg
Killjoy was here. Whatever next? Are they going to ban champagne on New Year’s Eve because the CO2 causes global warming?
Don’t give them ideas…
It’s ok with small bubbles.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/28/tiny-bubbles-to-lower-global-temperatures-agu14/
“Bleak House” comes to USA.
I’m surprised they haven’t thought to regulate Santa’s sleigh yet. Oops.
These folks sort of assumed they were over-regulated.
Fight Over Alcohol Ban Ends When Town Learns It Doesn’t Have One
http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/10/fight-over-alcohol-ban.html
That is classic. Thanks for posting it.
I’m glad I put my glass of wine down before reading that 🙂 It is indeed, classic.
Here in Tasmania we have a classically stupid law. It is illegal to pick for consumption any of the 26 or so hallucinogenic mushrooms that grow here. However, it is not illegal to consume them. So, if the consumer gets down on hands and knees, sticks their nose in the cowsh!t and eats those little goldtops, they are abiding by the law.
In another life I was in law enforcement and the State I lived in decided to rewrite and update all the criminal code. The “sex crimes” section for statutory crimes was gridded out by the age of the “victim” and age of the “perpetrator” as the State decided what age a person could give consent and the severity of the crime diminished as the age of the youngest “victim” increased. Two 15 year old kids having sex was illegal, two 17 year old kids having sex was illegal, a 16 year old and a 15 year old having sex was illegal and a 17 year old and 16 year old was illegal. In all those circumstances the oldest partner, even if only a day older, was the criminal and was charged according to the chart. Two 16 year old kids could do whatever they wanted to do and no law was broken. Madness…
That was 40 years ago… it’s done nothing but get worse.