To add to the legislature-bashing, the truth is worse than you may think. The legislators do not sit around dreaming up legislation and thinking lofty but erroneous thoughts. The legislation is submitted to the "author" in a package prepared by a lawyer who works for a lobbyist who works for a paying client. The legislation usually does not get introduced by the nominal "author" until a campaign contribution hits the author's re-election fund. This is not corruption -- it is just how the world really works.
The legislators who then vote on the bill in committee have no clue what the legislation says -- they depend on their legislative counsel, who borrows the analysis from the lobbyist's package. Once the bill makes it out of committee, the same thing happens when the legislature as a whole reviews the bill.
There are exceptions to these rules -- sometimes, things make it out of committee without a campaign donation. Sometimes, the legislative counsel pays attention to the bill and alerts the committee to a glitch. Sometimes, opposition groups reveal flaws in the legislation. Not often, though.
Please do not ask how I know all of this is true, but I surely do. I have not worked on bulb-related legislation, but I have worked (a lot) on legislation regulating financial issues. And my description of the process applies to legislators of both parties.
My point is that the mess in the Calif. legislature is not just a function of legislators who enact bills without really understanding the underlying subject matter. Often, they do not even know what the subject matter is, except on the most basic level.
And while I am ranting, I am thrilled that we are moving out of the CFL bulb era, with their greenish glare. The latest bulbs, although pricy, are far superior, at least for someone who depends on good lighting in order to be able to read fine print.
