Campaign launches to repeal incandescent light-bulb ban

A nationwide grassroots campaign launched this week asking Congress to repeal the ban on incandescent light bulbs. The effort is being pushed by FreedomAction, a self-described “web-based gathering of activists.”

The ban on incandescent light bulbs is scheduled to begin Jan. 1, 2012. It was included in a comprehensive energy bill that President George W. Bush signed into law in 2007.

One of the ban’s chief sponsors, Republican Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, is now the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. He’s promised a hearing on the ban, but so far no such hearing has been scheduled.

In December, when Upton was vying for the chairmanship, he changed positions on the mandatory switch from incandescent to CFL light bulbs. At the time, Upton said, “The last thing we wanted to do was infringe upon personal liberties — and this has been a good lesson that Congress does not always know best.”

Myron Ebell, director of FreedomAction, said in a statement announcing the campaign, “The light bulb ban is an outrageous government limitation on consumer choice and intrusion into the home of every American.”

Bills to repeal the ban have been introduced before. One, by Republican Reps. Joe Barton of Texas, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Michael Burgess of Texas was introduced last fall. A similar bill is expected later this month from Republican Senator Mike Enzi of Wyoming.

Supporters of the repeal can sign FreedomAction’s petition at

  • Pingback: Turn In Your Toxic Waste

  • Pingback: Senator Working to Repeal Incandescent Light Bulb Ban

  • Sproing

    Initially I was as upset as anyone else over yet another intrusion into my life by an over-active regulatory arm of the government. I have to admit however that after more then a year of using them I must say that they last many time longer, their cost has dropped a bunch, and continues to do so as more competitors come into the market. Their light output isn’t bad and is improving (I saw an instant on the other day)and on balance I’ve become somewhat of a supporter. I won’t fight to ban the old style so that people can go on wasting their money if they choose, but for me I’ll stick with the new style as they are much more cost efficient.

  • scorpioman

    I support the efforts to bring back the bulb. Because those CFL things suck. Their light is horrible. And when they break they throw mercury all over the room. What good is that?

    • thephranc

      They don’t throw mercury all over the room. But thanks for being a dishonest fool. Now go be a victim of your own existence.

  • teff

    goon you just dont get it. Its not whether its banned or not its the fact that we have to even look at the stupid regulation in the first place. The federal government is toooooo big and anyone that cannot see it just doesn’t want to.
    We should be just soooooo grateful that the great leaders in DC are allowing us to use BULBS…. think about it.
    And to your comment about the outhouses and the GOP, if my neighbor wants to use an out house thats their business. You will NEVER understand this isn’t about bulbs, outhouses, healthcare its about government regulation in our lives.

    • gooners

      Your neighbor putting an open sewer in his backyard wouldn’t bother you? Really?

      • didacticrogue

        … and the beat goes on.

        Your pitiful and arcane attempts at point-making continue as a source of slight amusement.

        • gooners

          Sure, get mad at me because that guy doesn’t think through his comments. Open sewers for everybody, keep the gub’mint out!

          • didacticrogue

            “Mad?” … Um … no.

  • mapletree

    There are many devices that were designed and require incandescent bulbs to operate properly. These include most appliances, picture lights, track lights, outdoor lights, garage door openers and some specialty equipment. In addition, the vast majority of CFLs will not work with dimmers, in ceiling fans with remote controls, in three way sockets, or in cold environments. I’ve been using CFLs for a long time, way before it was the “in thing”. Let me as an adult decide what light bulb I want to buy and stop being a nanny and micromanaging every aspect of my life.

    • gooners

      All those things are exempted in the bill. The bill that doesn’t ban incandescent bulbs.

      • flips

        Goon, your “facts” don’t help keep fear alive very well.

        Come on, freak out Teabagger-style!

        • gooners

          For people who insist they are wary of any encroachment on their freedoms, they are incredibly gullible.

          • mapletree

            Maybe the government can save even more energy by imposing a one car per household rule and you can only drive every other day. That would save energy and encourage mass transit, both of which many local governments have monopolies on.

          • gooners

            Maybe…but that’s not what they did, is it?

        • The_anniebanannie

          ….says the looneybird that screamed “the sky is falling” and it’s raining outhouses!!!

  • flips

    Can’t wait for the GOP campaign to bring back outhouses.

  • russ311

    My family’s experience with those pig-tail CFL bulbs is that when they leak they cause your eyes to itch and water and irritate your throat. It also would cause the smoke/gas detector alarm to blare every other minute. After figuring out the source of the problems, I replaced the leaky bulb with another and a week later the same problems began again. I went back to using only incandescent bulbs. That was about two years ago. The CFL bulbs are a biohazard and another ill-conceived “green energy” regulatory scam.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Campaign launches to repeal incandescent light-bulb ban « The Daily Caller – Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment --

  • gooners

    There is no ban on incandescent light bulbs.

    • SargeH

      Where do you get your information?

    • The_anniebanannie

      No, but “ban” would sound better than the truth – which is “bring the full weight of the federal government down on a particular product by imposing unrealistic regulations, in order to force it out of production, so that some company with big campaign donations can get a new product, that is worthless, onto the market.” See? Doesn’t “ban” sound much better now?

      • pink

        Funny annie thinks quoting herself is convincing. Keeping the fear alive — any fear — furthers your cause, doesn’t it? Scared people can’t think.

        Incandescents are not going to go out of production. There’s a boom as the gullible & fearful stockpile them like crazy. They have a lot of storage in their underground bunkers next to the rifles and MREs.

        • gooners

          MREs take up too much room. I stock survival seeds, and Glenn Beck commemorative gold coins.

          • pink

            Barnum was right.

        • The_anniebanannie

          HAH…you’re the one that must have thought it was really convincing if you think what I said could “keep fear alive”. Humor eludes the ignorant – you’re proof of that.

          “Scared people can’t think.”

          If scared people can’t think, you must be scared sh!tless, because you, once again, go off into the weeds about stuff I never said and into lala land about underground bunkers, rifles and MRE’s that don’t exist — except in your crazy version of paranoid delusions. Or maybe you and gooners share one in your fantasies, since you both seem to be fixated on it.

          “furthers your cause”

          What “cause” would that be exactly? hahah…you’re an idiot to derive a conclusion like that from a one paragraph joke. Drama queen much?

          • pink

            My you go on and on, don’t you? The personal attacks make it clear to me that you have nothing to say of any relevance. As you so very clearly demonstrate, angry people can’t think either.

            You’re promoting fear with your statement “imposing unrealistic regulations, in order to force it out of production” as if there is some plot to drive corporations out of business.

            Your cause? You’re Republican Party operative. Is that supposed to be a secret?

          • gooners

            “so that some company with big campaign donations can get a new product, that is worthless, onto the market”

            But I thought Obama hated business?

          • pink

            Anger and fear-mongering, you betcha. When you and others on the right change your schtick, I will stop talking about it.

            annie, annie, annie, the rest of your rant isn’t worth responding to, because as usual you put words in your opponent’s mouths, then twist them so you can make your argument. Nice try, but I’m on to you.

  • The_anniebanannie

    Look at the ankle-biters with their incoherent answers. Pink decrying personal attacks after posting personal attacks….gee, how original. Everybody that disagrees is “angry” “fear mongering” blah, blah, blah…jayzus, give it up! Seriously, get a new whine – you’ve worn that one out.

    “plot to drive corporations out of business. ”

    Nothing like spoutin’ off and showing everybody how truly naive you are. We’ve heard from the left, for the past 10 years, about how the big donations from the corporations were forcing the little guys out of business ( who the left is SOOOOO big about come election time) NOW, you claim there’s no such “plot”. Make up your mind, would ya? Are the corporations evil, conniving and out to get us or not?

    “Republican Party operative”

    LOL – BOO! That’s right — we secretly worship the incandescent bulbs at the great alter of Tea . After all, we work hard to keep our sheets white – we want the best lighting to show them off.

    Gooners – here’s a clue – “government” doesn’t mean Obama. He’s not the king, yet.