Posted by Doug Bandow on 11/11/09 12:53 PM [Newer: Another Reason to Bring the Troops Home] [Older: Up, Up Goes the National Debt]

The energy fascists remain busy, working to limit Americans' freedom.  Big screen TVs are the latest target of environmental wrath.  But the American people are not amused.

According to the Rasmussen Reports:

California is expected to implement energy-conserving regulations any day now that manufacturers and retailers say will in effect ban the sale of big-screen TVs in the state. Other states are likely to follow the Golden State's "green" initiative in the months ahead.

But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 66% of Americans oppose a law that would effectively ban the sale of big-screen televisions to save energy. Sixteen percent (16%) favor the idea, and 18% are not sure.

Most adults (53%) say being able to buy whatever kind of TV they want is more important than conserving energy. However, 37% rate conserving energy as more important.

A modern translation of the venerable slogan, "Don't Tread on Me," might be "Don't Take my Big Screen TV"!  Individual liberty comes in many forms.  Choosing which television to buy is one of them.  It's time the American people finally and firmly said "No more."

Doug Bandow, American Conservative Defense Alliance

Posted 11/11/09 1:25 PM ThomDevine Parkesburg, PA

Energy costs are rising and will continue to do so. Given time, consumers will look at their energy bills and realize for themselves that their big screens are sucking them dry. We don't need a law to force manufacturers to make green TVs; when the market for them grows, the manufacturers will make the change on their own. A smart company will read this survey, see that 37% more interested in conserving energy, realize that there is already an untapped market of energy-conscious consumers, and start researching a green bigscreent TV. I wouldn't be surprised to hear it's already in the works.

Posted 11/11/09 1:28 PM sequoiahugger Portland, OR

Save some energy! Close government buildings!

Posted 11/11/09 1:30 PM Daamien Ridgefield, CT

Let's not use the term "fascist" on the front page please. It tarnishes our image as an educated, rational, and peaceful organization of like-minded individuals in support of liberty.

Posted 11/11/09 2:20 PM steve5044 New York, NY

Daamien - could not agree more

Posted 11/11/09 3:06 PM kroysc Reynoldsburg, OH

If this goes through then electronics stores near the boarder in Arizona, Nevada and Oregon will receive their own stimulus. California will suffer even more job losses, see a decrease in tax revenue ($82.50 per every $1,000) and people will burn thousands of pounds of additional carbon emissions during their driving to other states to make their purchases. Wait a minute, I thought that these are three things the tree huggers are against. When the people demand efficiency the manufactures will respond. CRT based TV's use more energy than today's models so the industry is already moving in that direction. Let the free market take care of itself instead of the iron hand of the state dictating terms. Market intervention will always lead to unintended consequences.

Posted 11/11/09 5:40 PM nowls Atlanta, GA

I am a grad student at a large research university with a strong electrical engineering department. I can tell you that the "green initiative" has not been lost on researchers. There is an enormous focus on designing low-power technology in circuits and optics. Many of these efforts have direct applications in mobile devices and display technology. I don't know whether this "green" focus is due to massive Federal investment or new markets being created by growing public awareness of conservation. It's probably a combination of both. Either way, it takes time for technology to catch up, but it will get there. We don't need to jump the gun by pushing through legislation that outlaws consumer electronics. I don't know how anyone can ignore the absurdity of that idea. Only the market is equipped to solve the problems efficiently; thankfully, consumer electronics is a largely unregulated market (for now).

Posted 11/11/09 9:32 PM LizLiz Brooklyn(or Cresco,PA!) , NY

Let them ban large televisions - This will wake people up a lot more than other 'bans'

Posted 11/12/09 12:58 AM JohnF Lake Mary, FL

AC power wastes energy. If we wanted to be more energy efficient, we would immediately work toward converting our appliances to 12V DC power. Wall warts burn off a ton of energy as heat while they convert energy for the various appliances in our homes. Also, as someone else pointed out, CRT TVs are being phased out by more energy efficient flat screen LCD and LED TVs. The market is doing this. The government is only enacting these current measures so it can further its stranglehold on our resources. The government is one of the most environmentally destructive forces on the planet, why should it care about being "green?" @Daamien Being a censorial reactionary tarnishes our image as an educated, rational, and peaceful organization of like-minded individuals in support of liberty. The economic system which fuses the state and big business and which allocates resources by governmental fiat is known as fascism. Fascist-lite is an accurate description of the US state. FDR was criticized for being a fascist (even by Hoover). It was a valid criticism. Mussolini praised his policies as being analogous to his own. The cartelization of American industry under FDR is now only accelerating. To call it anything besides fascism is to misrepresent it. I suggest you listen to the latest podcast on LRC with Gerald Celente: http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2009-11-09_14 2_is_the_government_too_big_to_fail.mp3

Posted 11/12/09 11:32 AM Daamien Ridgefield, CT

Government restrictions on consumer purchases does not equate to corporatism or fascism by any means. We probably agree that they should let electronic innovation and informed consumer behavior work towards greater energy efficiency. The term "energy fascist" is a mischaracterization because private enterprise is not receiving special benefits from the government specific to this case. Its use is purely an appeal to emotions rather than logic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_fear http://en.wikipedia.org/w iki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum I'm not seeking censorship, but I am seeking greater objectiveness and level-headed behavior. The article would have been just as effective without using such over-the-top language in presenting it on this site. Do you disagree with that?

Posted 11/12/09 11:44 AM aliciala gas hills, WY

This kind of reminds me of a 20/20 or 60 minutes or one of those news mags that did a story on a town in some communist country, I want to say either China or N Korea. Any ways, they were really "green" they had one tv that got one state-sponsored channel. One week one family had it, the next week it was passed to the next family and so on. If that is the direction we are taking, yep, I'd say fascist.

Posted 11/12/09 4:12 PM jeremy esposito Bellflower, CA

This would be funny if it weren't true.

Posted 11/12/09 5:09 PM Independence Praha, Czech Republic

Daamien and Steve5044 - Wholeheartedly agree! One of the things about C4L that got my full attention was the lack of politcal "yahooness" that you get from the GOP (Steele), the Democratic party HQ and other "wacksites." Avoid blatant fanaticism in your posts - its just shooting us in the knees. As for energy, please! Bans? This is the flip-side of Government allocation. No Bans! Let them charge their fees! Just do not subsidize it and make sure we have real choice in selecting a provider!