The Re-Ignition of Choice
The heat is on. Conservatives are under fire for their energy agenda and under scrutiny for their efforts to unwind the ban on 100-Watt incandescent bulbs.
Advocates for the ban argue the loss of the choice to light your life as you see fit is small and benign, but the ban actually illuminates a greater problem in the current debate about the environment and climate.
The fundamentals of public policy permit ranking of instruments when solving problems – varying from command and control regulation at one extreme to providing superior information on the other. But more important is legislating the right instrument and solving the right problem. In the case of our environmental security, the problem is total emissions, not a cheaper bulb or an inefficient dryer.
Virginia Postrel, a columnist on Bloomberg View reminds us, “…policy makers shouldn’t care how households get to that total. They should just raise the price of electricity, through taxes or higher rates, to discourage using it.”
What we’re suggesting is a market-based, traditionally conservative, policy that promotes the greatest amount of choice. Some choices would simply become more expensive, and Americans have the choice of what we use in our homes. Postrel later writes, "Maybe I want to burn a lot of incandescent bulbs but dry my clothes outdoors and keep the air conditioner off. Maybe I want to read by warm golden light instead of watching a giant plasma TV." Relying on consumers to respond to appropriate incentives is a proven policy winner, both popular and efficient.
Meaningful federal environmental policies employ markets for good reason. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments demonstrated that creating a marketable asset – pollution reduction – incentivizes environmental performance. The acid rain program not only achieved 100 percent compliance in reducing sulfur dioxide emissions but power plants took it upon themselves to reduce emissions 22 percent below mandated levels.
This is a conservative environmental innovation.
Conservatives are characterized by the willingness to take on tough and unpopular issues now, to preserve freedom for the future. Conservatives fought for a proud environmental legacy. In the case of the acid rain program, liberals were the ones drawing lines in the sand for what proved to be a widely successful program aimed at preserving our environment.
Here we are again. Liberals have not been leading on environmental stewardship but have instead eliminated freedoms and choice. Limitless EPA regulations freeze business investment - at present, utilities in particular cannot make sensible decisions regarding long-lived investment without knowing precisely the energy policy regime under which they will be operated. Furthermore, Americans have clearly had enough (see, Resurgent Republic and American Action Forum polling).
Conservatives have jobs in mind as they un-wind light bulb bans and economically damaging EPA regulations – neither of which tackle serious environmental issues efficiently or help our economy. As with the Acid Rain legislation of the 1990’s, the people of this country have shown, that given the right incentives, they will act to the benefit of the nation.
