Make Lightbulbs Great — And Safe — Again

The worst thing George W. Bush did while president wasn’t the war with Iraq. It was signing the “Energy Independence and Security Act,” which, among other ill effects, produced today’s ban on incandescent light bulbs. Our most fervent hope is that Republicans will correct this mistake while they still have the chance.

Those inexpensive incandescent bulbs, invented right here in the good ol’ U.S. of A. by Thomas Edison, were deemed by our Washington masters to be too inefficient. And, because the public was told we needed to “save energy,” the law mandated efficiency standards that traditional bulbs could never meet.

And so, despite the fact that millions of consumers prefer traditional lightbulbs for regular home use, they aren’t made anymore. Now, buying replacement bulbs has transmogrified from a simple process of deciding what wattage you needed to an overly complicated exercise in deciding which of an array of different types of lighting devices – all wildly more expensive than the old Edison bulbs – will suit your lighting needs.

Buyers today have to consider things such as lumens, the color “temperature” measured in Kelvin (the higher the Kelvin value, the harsher the light), whether the bulb will work with a dimmer switch (you also have to make sure your dimmer switch will work with the bulb), and something called CRI, which measures how accurately a light source displays colors compared to natural light. (You’re advised to look for bulbs with a CRI of 80 or higher.)

Everyone following this?

But fear not, we are told, those complicated, pricey LED bulbs last far longer and use much less electricity than those bad old Edison-style bulbs, more than paying for themselves over their lifetimes. Except they often fail long before their promised expiration date because, unlike incandescents, LEDs require a circuit board with parts that can easily, and often do, fail before the diodes die. So any claim of lifetime savings from these bulbs can’t be trusted.

Worse still, it appears that this massive uncontrolled government experiment in a heretofore unknown lighting source could be having severe health effects on the population.

Here’s how Newsmax reported it recently:

The energy-efficient LED bulbs now commonplace in American homes, schools, and offices could carry hidden health risks, according to a neuroscientist who is sounding the alarm over their potential effects on the body’s cells.

Glen Jeffery, a professor of neuroscience at University College London, has gone so far as to compare concerns over LED lighting to asbestos, calling the issue a ‘clear and present public health emergency.’

Jeffrey says that “LED lighting is damaging mitochondria [tiny parts inside cells that turn food into chemical energy] and therefore there is no question you’re damaging systemic health.”

Then there’s the fact that killing off Edison bulbs shuttered domestic manufacturers that made them, shifting light-bulb production overseas mainly to … you guessed it … China, which makes something like 85% of the world’s LEDs.

The good news is that there’s a chance, however slim, that common sense will prevail.

Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee last year introduced the “Liberating Incandescent Technology Act” and this year a broader “Energy Efficiency Reform Act of 2026” which would set strict limits on the Energy Department’s ability to mandate efficiency standards for consumer products, including light bulbs.

At a recent hearing, Alex Fitzsimmons, associate deputy secretary at the Energy Department, said that the administration backs both bills, asking a question that should be rhetorical: “Why would we centrally plan which lighting technologies people can use?”

But any change to the current light bulb standard will face a gauntlet of opposition, including from manufacturers who benefit from the lack of cheaper alternatives to LEDs.

Incredibly, Democrats who claim to be obsessed with “affordability” oppose letting people buy cheaper bulbs. At that same hearing, Nevada U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto used the excuse that “the infrastructure needed to manufacture incandescent light bulbs has been dismantled, repurposed, and restarting that production would not make economic sense.”

Umm, yes it would, senator, if consumers started demanding more Edison bulbs. That’s how the market works.

— Written by the I&I Editorial Board

Support Independent Journalism

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists from the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left.

We are 100% reader supported!!

If you like what you see, please feel free to donate.

And be sure to tell your friends!