TAPPER: The deal on the omnibus takes away funding from the Department of Energy for the provision that would essentially eliminate, effectively ban, old incandescent light bulbs. Senator Barbara Boxer has called this a poison pill. I’m wondering first of all if you share her concern. I understand you’re not going to draw any lines, it’s a fluid situation, but do you share her concern? And since the president has talked so much in the past about the new lightbulbs, how significant a step backwards is this, from the perspective of the White House?
CARNEY: Well, it’s certainly not something that we’ve supported, this — removal of this provision, but I would point out that it was something that was put into the law by the previous administration. But beyond that, I’m not going to, again, get into specifics about what’s — what provisions are acceptable or not.
TAPPER: What — do you not even have a — an opinion?
CARNEY: Well, no, I — we don’t support that.
TAPPER: That’s not an opinion. That’s, I mean, when the president — when the president has expressed concern –
CARNEY: That’s a statement of fact. Yeah, we don’t — we think it’s a — we think it’s a bad thing to do, but I’m not going to make a statement about — again, I’m not going to go through single, individual provisions of the omnibus or the payroll tax cut deal, such as it is, and say this is an — you know, this is a deal-breaker and this isn’t.
TAPPER: I’m not asking for that.
TAPPER: Is this a — how significant a step backwards would this be for energy efficiency considering the president has talked about this at length?
CARNEY: Well, that I would — for that assessment, I would refer you to the Department of Energy.
TAPPER: The president has talked about this issue.
CARNEY: Well, I know he has, but I don’t have an assessment of the impact it would have on energy efficiency.
– Jake Tapper