Let us choose light bulbs

Re "Roll back bulb standards? Not a bright idea" (Editorials, July 11): "The sky is falling, the sky is falling." So said Chicken Little, and so you have said in your editorial regarding compact fluorescent light bulbs.

The House does not want to take us back to "horse-and-buggy days" or the "dark ages." Rather, the House wants to give back to the American people the freedom to choose whether or not they want to buy CFLs.

You dismiss the 31 percent of us who like our freedom to choose by calling us names. Well, we "dim-bulbed," freedom-loving Americans want the government to stop telling us how to live our lives, notwithstanding the efficacy of "saving the environment."

Congress' job is to represent us, the people, not to dictate to us what it thinks is best for us.

– Jan Denny, Lincoln

New bulbs are horrible

As usual, The Bee editors are wrong! The CFL bulbs are awful – they cast a yellow light that is almost impossible to read by. I made the mistake of buying them for my entire house, only to go back to regular bulbs so that I could see. As for getting folks to dispose of the mercury-filled toxic bulbs at different redemption centers – good luck with that! What makes you think that most people will save the burned-out bulb to bring it elsewhere for disposal?

Besides, what gives government the right to dictate what bulbs I use? I have gone back to the very good regular bulbs, and no one is going to make me give them up.

– Donna McCloskey, Auburn

Not a conspiracy theorist

For years, as our home's incandescent bulbs burn out, we've replaced them with more energy-efficient ones. We did this because it made economic sense, not because the government mandates it. This is the same reason the horse and buggy and ice boxes went out of favor. It was a choice made freely by the marketplace. Apparently The Bee doesn't understand that many of us are upset about the government forcing us to do something just because some people feel it's for our own good. The short-term impact of high-priced bulbs on those with limited incomes is also a factor.

Not all of us are irrational and fearful of conspiracies. Some of us are concerned with conserving both our energy and our personal freedoms.

– Dave Terrill, Cameron Park

'Made in China' a problem

My main issue with this editorial is that you left out an important item concerning the "new wave of super-efficient, power-saving light bulbs." It is my understanding that they are not made in the United States and that we have to import them from China. When I checked the packaging on all the ones I own, it says they are distributed from Irvine, but are "Made in China."

I don't feel it is "an unnecessary distraction" or "part of a series of anti-environment bills" put forth by the Republicans. I think we need to look at the whole picture here and ask ourselves if it really defies logic, taking us back to the "horse and buggy days."

And besides, if you stop and think about it, in the "horse and buggy" days, we usually supplied our own country with things that were "Made in the USA"!

– Debbie Stollery, Sacramento

Make them in U.S.A.

Can anyone help me past my great obstacle to energy-efficient lighting? Though the light bulb switch is a small step, I wholeheartedly agree that we need to demonstrate a market for more intelligent ways to satisfy our needs and desires. For me, though, sustainability must address all aspects of social life. So to me, how products are made matters as much as the energy they use after purchase.

I've searched diligently, in stores and online, but have yet to find a source for energy-efficient bulbs manufactured anywhere other than in China. And I just cannot see strengthening the grip of the people's so-called republic as any part of the way to a sustainable future. Please, someone, direct me to a source of efficient light bulbs made by workers with effective recourse against abuse. I'll be their most faithful customer.

– Louise Mehler, Sacramento

Cartoon insults Mormons

Re Jerry Holbert editorial cartoon, July 11: Even as a non-Mormon, I find quite offensive the cartoon about Mitt Romney's fundraising prowess. The problem is the label: "The BOOK of MORe MONey." Yes, Romney has raised more campaign money than any other Republican presidential hopeful. But what does this have to do with his religion? What nefarious message are we supposed to get from this?

Surely The Bee had the option not to publish this image, since Holbert is not one of your regular cartoonists. Shame on whoever made the unwise decision.

– Al Sokolow, Davis

The road to financial ruin

Re "State wants the option to borrow from UC, CSU" (Page A4, July 12): This is the gateway drug, the same one the U.S. Congress mainlined when the Social Security trust accounts were hooked up to the government's general fund. It turned what was a secure investment paid for by taxpayers for their own security into a Ponzi scheme for Congress to manage. If not for that, Social Security would have been a stable account for perpetuity. Now we get talk about what must be done to save it.

Make no mistake, that's the road now being paved with the UC and CSU accounts. It doesn't matter what safeguards they assure us will be built in. Once the linkage is made, legislators and clever lawyers will find ways to get around, walk-through or trample over those "safeguards" as if they weren't there.

– Red Slider, Sacramento

Work in China costs jobs here

Re "China sending final 4 pieces for Bay Bridge" (Business, July 12): Simple logic tells us that the state didn't save $400 million by outsourcing the bridge work to China. If the state had spent the money in California, many of the jobs created would go to those receiving public assistance or unemployment benefits, not to mention the taxes that would have been generated back to the state.

Our government is clearly not run in the best interest of its citizens. One can only imagine the lobbying that went into this decision. It is time to kick the corporate and special interest groups out of "our" government. After all of the American lives lost fighting the communists, I am disgusted that "our" government does business with them.

– John Freeman, Sacramento

Young rich set good example

Re "This is a multimillionaire?" (Business, July 11): It's refreshing to read that some of our CEOs are not caught-up in mega-millions lifestyles. Some aren't out flaunting their wealth while many Californians still suffer this poor economy.

A recent article about how much this country's top 400 CEOs made in 2010 had me depressed. I wonder how many of them have created jobs in California. I bet most of them simply move money around without generating one advancement to improve our daily lives.

The young generation of newly self-made millionaires in your article impressed me because they aren't taking on the trappings of the super-rich. Some have even committed to giving away their wealth and are already establishing foundations to help others.

Our top 400 CEOs could learn something from these kids – like social and environmental consciousness.

– Sandi Russell, Elk Grove

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

WRITE US A LETTER

Include: Name, mailing address and phone number.

Length: 150 words or less.

BEST WAY TO SUBMIT

Online form: www.sacbee.com/sendletter

E-mail: letters@sacbee.com Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852

• Read more articles by