It took an army of lobbyists to kill CA ban on plastic Bags

Boxes&BooksBoxes&Books USA Posts: 2,672
edited September 2010 in A Moving Train
I'd been in contact with Heal the Bay's Mark Gold before, during and after the vote on the proposed plastic-bag ban, which on Tuesday night sank to the bottom of the swamp in Sacramento.

So what now?

I'll get to that in a minute. Gold, after months of lobbying, was devastated by the 21-14 defeat in the California Senate. The statewide ban at supermarkets and convenience stores would have been the first in the nation and was supported by the governor and key legislators as well as grocers and environmentalists.

It would have made neighborhoods cleaner and waterways safer for wildlife, but Sacramento is often where good ideas go to die. "The failure reflects more on the competency of the Legislature than it does on the policy itself," Gold said in an e-mail the morning after.

The American Chemistry Council spent millions opposing the bill, which the bag-making industry called a job killer and a hardship for shoppers, who would have had to bring their own totes or pay for recyclable bags.

Critics also said the bill would cost $4 million to implement, while environmentalists argued the state spent far, far more disposing of millions of discarded bags.

Gold was particularly ticked off by one of the hired guns who helped kill the bill -- former Assembly Speaker Fabián Núñez, who passed himself off as an environmentalist while in office, is now a lobbyist for the Chemistry Council.

"Because he is no friend of urban rivers or marine life, can he return all of the environmental awards he received for that effort?" Gold asked on his blog, Spouting Off.

So what's the next step for Heal the Bay, now that a state with an international reputation for environmental leadership has rejected a simple, straighforward effort to clean California? Keep fighting, said Gold, whose blog was titled "We Will Win the War." "

"Already, L.A. County, Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Manhattan Beach are planning to move forward with bans," he said, and Heal the Bay will back those efforts.

Would you support bans in those cities and others? Let us know.
-- Steve Lopez

Yes!I would support a ban in my City!! I think it cost CA 21+ million a year to dump this crap!....
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • __ Posts: 6,651
    What??!! They didn't pass the ban?? That's crazy! I thought for sure it would pass. Yep... America - bought & paid for. :(
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    In Toronto, there is no ban of plastic bags but there is a charge for each bag used. has that been discussed in CA? or would just look at it as another tax?
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,158
    fife wrote:
    In Toronto, there is no ban of plastic bags but there is a charge for each bag used. has that been discussed in CA? or would just look at it as another tax?
    I would prefer a ban but that doesn't sound like a bad solution. I'm guessing at least 70% of people would not spend extra for a plastic bag.

    I know certain states like Michigan will charge you a 10 cent deposit for glass and cans. I don't know if they have seen an increase in recycling, but I'm sure I would be a lot more motivated to collect cans along the side of the road!
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    Jason P wrote:
    fife wrote:
    In Toronto, there is no ban of plastic bags but there is a charge for each bag used. has that been discussed in CA? or would just look at it as another tax?
    I would prefer a ban but that doesn't sound like a bad solution. I'm guessing at least 70% of people would not spend extra for a plastic bag.

    I know certain states like Michigan will charge you a 10 cent deposit for glass and cans. I don't know if they have seen an increase in recycling, but I'm sure I would be a lot more motivated to collect cans along the side of the road!

    one of the main reason that there was not a ban on plastic was that many activists saw it as a tax on the poor and homeless. it cost 5 cent per bag. what you have notice now is that many charities are giving canvas bags to the homeless so that they don't have to pay that 5 cents.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    fife wrote:
    Jason P wrote:
    fife wrote:
    In Toronto, there is no ban of plastic bags but there is a charge for each bag used. has that been discussed in CA? or would just look at it as another tax?
    I would prefer a ban but that doesn't sound like a bad solution. I'm guessing at least 70% of people would not spend extra for a plastic bag.

    I know certain states like Michigan will charge you a 10 cent deposit for glass and cans. I don't know if they have seen an increase in recycling, but I'm sure I would be a lot more motivated to collect cans along the side of the road!

    one of the main reason that there was not a ban on plastic was that many activists saw it as a tax on the poor and homeless. it cost 5 cent per bag. what you have notice now is that many charities are giving canvas bags to the homeless so that they don't have to pay that 5 cents.

    How would banning plastic bags amount to a tax on poor and homeless people? Because it would initially require an investment in reusable bags?
  • I'm confused. Why is California paying $21M+ to dump these plastic bags. Is that how much it costs to gather up the littered bags? People litter more than just plastic bags... how do they figure out the $21M? Also, aren't they recyclable?
    I really screwed that up. I really Schruted it.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    I would prefer a ban but that doesn't sound like a bad solution. I'm guessing at least 70% of people would not spend extra for a plastic bag.

    I know certain states like Michigan will charge you a 10 cent deposit for glass and cans. I don't know if they have seen an increase in recycling, but I'm sure I would be a lot more motivated to collect cans along the side of the road![/quote]

    one of the main reason that there was not a ban on plastic was that many activists saw it as a tax on the poor and homeless. it cost 5 cent per bag. what you have notice now is that many charities are giving canvas bags to the homeless so that they don't have to pay that 5 cents.[/quote]

    How would banning plastic bags amount to a tax on poor and homeless people? Because it would initially require an investment in reusable bags?[/quote]

    yes and also if a person is homeless and living on the streets or in a shelter many reusable bags get lost or stolen.
  • Boxes&BooksBoxes&Books USA Posts: 2,672
    I would rather be taxed at the market.....people need to wise up- If you don't want to pay for a plastic bag, then freaking bring your own reusable bag or carry the damn goods in your hands! This is BS! I now have reusable bags, but before that my Kitchen would fill up with hundreds of plastic bags.... I didn't want to simply put them in the waste basket so I would reuse them in some way at home......Where are all the freaking conservatives on this issue or do they always side with the corporations?? ...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/3 ... 01055.html


    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Using plastic shopping bags could join indoor smoking and behind-the-wheel texting as the latest discouraged activity in California if lawmakers succeed in passing the country's first statewide ban on disposable bags.

    The state Senate is schedule to vote Tuesday on the bill, which has been the subject of a furious lobbying campaign by the plastic bag manufacturing industry. It calls the legislation a job killer.

    Supporters of AB1998 say the 19 billion plastic bags Californians use every year harm the environment and cost the state $25 million annually to collect and transport to landfills.

    "California is poised to lead a national movement against plastic bag pollution that is injuring and killing marine life and imposing a costly blight on our land," said the bill's author, Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica.

    The ban, if eventually signed into law, would take effect in supermarkets and large retail stores in 2012. It would apply to smaller stores in 2013.

    The bill must be rejected or sent to the governor by midnight Tuesday, the final day of the legislative session. Final action was being delayed into the evening by procedural tactics.

    In the days leading to Tuesday's vote, Brownley amended the bill in an effort to gain more support. Most significantly, she removed a provision that would have imposed 5-cent fee for customers who forget to bring their own bag and need to buy a recycled paper one. The proceeds would have gone entirely to the retailer.

    Under the revised bill, retailers would be allowed to charge only what it costs them to buy paper bags. Stores would be required to provide free bags to shoppers who rely on government assistance.

    The amended bill also designates $2 million from an existing recycling-promotion fund to be used to help manufacturers modify their plants to produce reusable plastic bags using recycled content. A state law that took effect in 2007 requires supermarkets and other large retailers to place plastic bag recycling bins in easily accessible locations and have reusable bags available for customers to buy.
  • I'm still confused as to why the state pays $25M to collect these bags! I pay for my trash & I recycle everything else. Who's bags is the state paying for?!
    Also, Trex decking is made of recycled plastic bags. They use 1.5 recycled grocery bags every year. If we ban plastic bags, decks will be made of redwood again. Clear-cutting all our trees.
    I really screwed that up. I really Schruted it.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    tonifig8 wrote:
    I would rather be taxed at the market.....people need to wise up- If you don't want to pay for a plastic bag, then freaking bring your own reusable bag or carry the damn goods in your hands! This is BS! I now have reusable bags, but before that my Kitchen would fill up with hundreds of plastic bags.... I didn't want to simply put them in the waste basket so I would reuse them in some way at home......Where are all the freaking conservatives on this issue or do they always side with the corporations?? ...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/3 ... 01055.html


    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Using plastic shopping bags could join indoor smoking and behind-the-wheel texting as the latest discouraged activity in California if lawmakers succeed in passing the country's first statewide ban on disposable bags.

    The state Senate is schedule to vote Tuesday on the bill, which has been the subject of a furious lobbying campaign by the plastic bag manufacturing industry. It calls the legislation a job killer.

    Supporters of AB1998 say the 19 billion plastic bags Californians use every year harm the environment and cost the state $25 million annually to collect and transport to landfills.

    "California is poised to lead a national movement against plastic bag pollution that is injuring and killing marine life and imposing a costly blight on our land," said the bill's author, Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica.

    The ban, if eventually signed into law, would take effect in supermarkets and large retail stores in 2012. It would apply to smaller stores in 2013.

    The bill must be rejected or sent to the governor by midnight Tuesday, the final day of the legislative session. Final action was being delayed into the evening by procedural tactics.

    In the days leading to Tuesday's vote, Brownley amended the bill in an effort to gain more support. Most significantly, she removed a provision that would have imposed 5-cent fee for customers who forget to bring their own bag and need to buy a recycled paper one. The proceeds would have gone entirely to the retailer.

    Under the revised bill, retailers would be allowed to charge only what it costs them to buy paper bags. Stores would be required to provide free bags to shoppers who rely on government assistance.

    The amended bill also designates $2 million from an existing recycling-promotion fund to be used to help manufacturers modify their plants to produce reusable plastic bags using recycled content. A state law that took effect in 2007 requires supermarkets and other large retailers to place plastic bag recycling bins in easily accessible locations and have reusable bags available for customers to buy.

    while i understand your anger i don't understand why you asked just where are the conservative on this. its not like the environment has just been an issue for only 8 years.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    I'm still confused as to why the state pays $25M to collect these bags! I pay for my trash & I recycle everything else. Who's bags is the state paying for?!
    Also, Trex decking is made of recycled plastic bags. They use 1.5 recycled grocery bags every year. If we ban plastic bags, decks will be made of redwood again. Clear-cutting all our trees.

    I don't think its just for picking up the bags. i think it also involves transporting the bags to dumps, paying for those the land that we use as landfills. but i could be wrong on that one.

    also, i do agree with you about the uses of plastic bags but i don't know if we could just say that just because we ban plastic bags would mean going back to clear cutting but again who knows.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    fife wrote:
    scb wrote:
    How would banning plastic bags amount to a tax on poor and homeless people? Because it would initially require an investment in reusable bags?

    yes and also if a person is homeless and living on the streets or in a shelter many reusable bags get lost or stolen.

    Well that's a good point and something to consider. But I don't think it should hold up a ban; I think it just necessitates a free bag program or some other such solution.
  • I don't need a tax or ban to get me to do the right thing. I'll use my reusable bag when I have it with me. I'll recycle my plastic bags when I get them. I'd rather save our redwoods than ban plastic bags.
    I really screwed that up. I really Schruted it.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    I don't need a tax or ban to get me to do the right thing. I'll use my reusable bag when I have it with me. I'll recycle my plastic bags when I get them. I'd rather save our redwoods than ban plastic bags.

    I don't have any reason to believe these two efforts are mutually exclusive.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    scb wrote:
    fife wrote:
    scb wrote:
    How would banning plastic bags amount to a tax on poor and homeless people? Because it would initially require an investment in reusable bags?

    yes and also if a person is homeless and living on the streets or in a shelter many reusable bags get lost or stolen.

    Well that's a good point and something to consider. But I don't think it should hold up a ban; I think it just necessitates a free bag program or some other such solution.

    the free bag program is something which i don't think is possible in a state which has more people than my whole country. I think that are other ways inwhich we could resolve this issue. for example, America (as always) should just follow what Canada did. 2) educate people about not just recycle but stress reuse. i have plastic bags in my office and at home right now, i used them for those times in which i forget my reusable bags. there is nothing wrong with that.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    fife wrote:
    scb wrote:
    fife wrote:
    yes and also if a person is homeless and living on the streets or in a shelter many reusable bags get lost or stolen.

    Well that's a good point and something to consider. But I don't think it should hold up a ban; I think it just necessitates a free bag program or some other such solution.

    the free bag program is something which i don't think is possible in a state which has more people than my whole country. I think that are other ways inwhich we could resolve this issue. for example, America (as always) should just follow what Canada did. 2) educate people about not just recycle but stress reuse. i have plastic bags in my office and at home right now, i used them for those times in which i forget my reusable bags. there is nothing wrong with that.

    But we're only talking about providing bags for people who can't afford them, not for everyone. Of course someone would have to work out the details of how to do that. Let's be honest though: America can educate people 'til kingdom come but, as a whole, we're not going to do it unless we have to. There are people around here who think reusable bags are for communists, for God's sake! And reusing and recycling are still not as good as just never producing the bags in the first place.
  • haffajappahaffajappa British Columbia Posts: 5,955
    People just need to smarten up when it comes to bags

    You know how many people want a bag for ONE dvd rental? ARE YOU SERIOUS you can't carry that?
    When I used to work at Sears people were idiots there too. It wasl ike the bags I gave them just weren't enough. I got so pissed with this one lady who demanded the two baby sleepers (probably which took up about 5 x 10 cm worth of space) be bagged seperately. So I gave her 2 small, perfectly fitting bags. She snarls at me that she wants BIGGER bags! So i gave her the biggest bag I had... one that would fit 3 large pillows. "Is that big enough for you?" If she was going to be ridiculous, so was I.
    live pearl jam is best pearl jam
Sign In or Register to comment.