On the recordJuly 21, 2011
I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman for laying out his points there. I couldn't disagree more though. These are a result of those standards that were created in previous Congresses, long before I got here. These are energy-efficient bulbs that meet the standards today that were set forth by this body. This amendment I'm putting forth is a commonsense amendment that recognizes the innovation of American manufacturers. These folks delivered what Congress put out there for an issue to do. And I disagree when it comes to mercury. What I quoted you was from the EPA in terms of, if this bulb were to break in this Chamber, we would be forced to evacuate, simply from breaking one bulb. The EPA tells us that a room would have to be evacuated. It would have to be cleared and ventilated. So that's from the Environmental Protection Agency. These are energy-efficient bulbs, and this is not the only one. Many manufacturers in the United States have risen to the challenge of meeting those new energy-efficiency standards. {time} 2110 Why would we not recognize and utilize American-made bulbs that meet those energy efficiency standards that, frankly, contain no harmful chemicals in terms of mercury, as opposed to one--these bulbs, there is no place in the United States where CF bulbs are manufactured. This bulb is about foreign jobs. And so I appreciate the gentleman's point. I just couldn't disagree more. I reserve the balance of my time.
