Category Archives: Freedom and Liberty

Arizona Governor Signs Bill to Prohibit Plastic Bag Bans

Bag Ban Repeal, Citizens Fighting Back, Economic Costs, Freedom and Liberty, LandFill Impacts, Litter Issues, Local Ordinances, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Recycling Impacts, , , , , ,

Phoenix-Arizona_State_CapitalOn April 13, 2015 Arizona’s Governor Ducey signed Senate Bill 1241 that would prohibit cities, towns, and counties from passing ordinances that ban or tax the use of plastic shopping bags, Styrofoam and other containers. (Gardiner, 2015) (Rau, 2015)

The bill’s author, Rep. Warren Peterson, R-Gilbert, cited concerns that plastic bag bans and similar regulations raise costs and create a regulatory nightmare for businesses. He stated that he is concerned about economic freedom and that he supports the right of individuals to make their own decisions. (Gardiner, 2015)

Cities and counties across the country have passed legislation to ban the use of plastic carryout bags. Bag Ban Proponents and environmental advocates claim that plastic bags are a major litter item; they needlessly contribute to landfills, generate greenhouse gas emissions, and clog recycling machinery. Readers of this blog, will know that plastic carryout bags are a minor litter item (See article: San Jose Litter Surveys Examined – Plastic Bag Ban Completely Unjustified ), contribute much less material to landfills that paper and reusable bags (See article: California Landfills Impacted By Bag Bans), generate smaller amounts of greenhouse gas emissions than paper and reusable bags (see article: Plastic Bags – Greener Than Alternatives).

The problem with clogging recycling machinery is real, but what bag banners do not tell you, is that banning plastic grocery (or carryout) bags will not prevent all jams of sorting machinery at recycling facilities or expensive breakdowns. The sorting equipment at these facilities are being jammed not only by plastic carryout bags, but by all sorts of plastic bags (newspaper bags, produce bags, frozen food bags) and plastic wrap (wrap from toilet paper, bottled beverages, bottled water, packaged products), and from all sorts of materials (blankets, hoses, ropes or other strapping materials) which are all responsible for jamming sorting machinery. (Terry, 2007)

Educating the public that plastic bags and wraps and other prohibited materials may not be put in the curbside recycling bin would be a much better solution to the problem. Furthermore, the public needs to be educated about bringing unused and clean plastic bags and wraps to the retail stores’ In-Store Recycling Bin for recycling vice the curbside recycle bin.

Bibliography

Gardiner, D. (2015, March 28 ). Arizona bill would block bans on plastic bags. Retrieved from The Republic: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2015/04/14/ducey-signs-travel-plastic-bag-bills/25752817/

Rau, A. B. (2015, April 13). Ducey signs travel-ID, plastic-bag bills. Retrieved from The Republic: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2015/03/27/arizona-bill-block-bans-plastic-bags/70529702/

Terry, B. (2007, October 8). Recycling Part 2: Lessons from the Davis Street Transfer Center – See more at: http://myplasticfreelife.com/2007/10/recycling-part-2-lessons-from-davis/#sthash.ojyGOAe8.dpuf. Retrieved from My Plastic Free Life: http://myplasticfreelife.com/2007/10/recycling-part-2-lessons-from-davis/

 

Related articles
Advertisement

San Jose Litter Surveys Examined: Plastic Bag Ban Completely Unjustified!

Bag Ban Myths and Misinformation, Bag Ban Repeal, Citizens Fighting Back, Economic Costs, Freedom and Liberty, Litter Issues, Local Ordinances, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Statewide Bag Ban, , , ,
The new City Hall of San Jose, California. The...
The new City Hall of San Jose, California. The perspective is west down East Santa Clara Street towards Fifth Street.  (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The City of San Jose, to their credit, is one of the few cities that conducted litter surveys both before and after the city’s bag ban. Results showing the percentage reduction of single-use plastic carryout bags (i.e. plastic grocery bags) as a component of litter have been cited by the city as proof that the city’s bag ban is effective. Likewise, environmental groups nationwide have touted these same results as a justification for promoting new bag bans and opposing repeal efforts. Unfortunately, the City of San Jose did not conduct litter surveys in a controlled and scientific manner, did not correctly analyze survey data, and did not put survey results into proper perspective. As a result, the data collected is unreliable for computing a meaningful figure of merit, such as the percent reduction in plastic carryout bag litter resulting from the city’s plastic bag ban.

Yet, despite these shortcomings, the litter surveys did reveal several surprising facts that have escaped the notice of city officials, the media, and those in other cities who cite San Jose’s claims:

  • That only half of ALL plastic bag litter found in sampled areas on city streets and creeks consists of single-use plastic carryout bags; hence, a bag ban would at most eliminate only about half of all plastic bag litter.
  • That only about 10% of litter in creeks consists of single-use plastic carryout bags; hence, a bag ban affects at most 10% of ALL litter in creeks, leaving the remaining 90% unresolved. Therefore, all of the cost and cleanup efforts still need to be implemented since this will not meet the 100% reduction goal required under the federal Clean Water Act.
  • That the number of single-use plastic carryout bags found during all of the litter surveys in 2009, 2010, and 2011 (prior to the bag ban) average only 1,000 bags per year, or less than 1 for every 1,000 people, or the equivalent of what two (2) people out of a population of more than 1 million would use annually!

The use of unreliable and questionable survey data to project large percentage reductions of an insignificant number of littered plastic grocery bags combined with a complete lack of evidence of any cost savings to the city or to the people show that the bag ban was never justified from the beginning, and that the ongoing cost burden to San Jose families is likewise unjustified.

To read the entire article, click the following link: San Jose Litter Surveys Examined – Plastic Bag Ban Completely Unjustified

Huntington Beach City Council Votes to Repeal Plastic Bag Ban

Bag Ban Repeal, Carryout Bag Fees, Citizens Fighting Back, Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, Litter Issues, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Reusable Bag Health Hazards, Reusable Shopping Bags, , , , , ,
Flag of Huntington Beach
Flag of Huntington Beach

On 20 January, 2015 the Huntington Beach City Council voted 6 to 1 to start the process of repealing the city’s plastic bag ban. Councilmembers Mike Posey, Erik Peterson, Billy O’Connell, Barbara Delgleize, Dave Sullivan, and Jim Katapodis voted to repeal the ordinance and Mayor Jill Hardy voted to keep the ban.

The agenda item that was voted on instructs the city manager to begin the repeal process including preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which is estimated to cost $5,000. The EIR is expected to take between two and three months to complete, and when completed, the issue will go back to council for final approval.

The proposal to repeal the plastic bag ban was put on the council agenda by Councilman Mike Posey who expressed that he and others have issues with what they believe is overreach by the previous city council. (Carpio, Plastic bag ban repeal process starts in Huntington, 2015) Continue reading Huntington Beach City Council Votes to Repeal Plastic Bag Ban →

San Jose’s Bag Ban Useless in Solving Litter Problems –Should Be Rescinded

Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, LandFill Impacts, Litter Issues, Local Ordinances, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, , , , , , ,
Palm trees lining streets in San Jose, California
Palm trees lining streets in San Jose, California (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As previously noted in the blog article titled “San Jose Painfully Learns Litter Problems Were Not Solved by Plastic Bag Ban!”, the City of San Jose is painfully discovering that it’s much touted plastic bag ban that cost residents millions of dollars did virtually nothing to solve the city’s serious litter problems. According to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), one of the stated reasons for implementing the bag ban was to reduce litter on city streets, in creeks, and in storm drains. (City of San Jose, 2010) Two years after the plastic bag ban was implemented, that there has been no reduction of overall litter. Furthermore, the case is made, using San Jose’s own litter surveys and claims of bag ban success, to show that the plastic bag ban was never needed but was a very expensive mistake.

Although the exact number of single-use paper and plastic carryout bags used in the city is unknown, the city estimates that 68 million paper bags and 500 million single-use plastic carryout bags are used every year. In fact the Draft EIR identifies that 1.4 plastic bags are used per day by every living person in the City of San Jose which equates to 511 plastic carryout bags per person per year. (City of San Jose, 2010) This means that a family of four would use 4 x 511 or 2044 plastic bags per year.

In a November 20, 2012 memorandum to the San Jose City Council from Kerrie Romanov (Director of Environmental Services for San Jose) the following statement was made:

“Reducing the use of single-use carryout bags … supports the City’s Stormwater Permit requirement to reduce trash from the storm drain system from entering local creeks and enhance water quality: reduces litter in City sheets and neighborhoods: and lowers the cost of litter control.” (Romanov, 2012, p. 2) Continue reading San Jose’s Bag Ban Useless in Solving Litter Problems –Should Be Rescinded →

The California Bag Ban Scam

Bag Ban Myths and Misinformation, Bottled Water Ban, Carryout Bag Fees, Citizens Fighting Back, Disposable Shopping Bags, Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, LandFill Impacts, Litter Issues, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bags, Public Safety Impacts, Referendum, Reusable Bag Health Hazards, Reusable Shopping Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, , , , , ,

Capture10Statewide and local bag bans were a SCAM from the very beginning. These measures can best be characterized by deceitful scheming, repeated lies and distortions, backroom deals, a supportive one-sided media, and enough politicians succumbing to political correctness to force this law and the resulting shopping behavior changes on the people of California.

Not only were Californians deprived of more reasonable and acceptable solutions to address plastic bag litter by the shenanigans of bag banners but will also pay an additional $1 Billion per year just to take their groceries home.  And after spending all that money, litter will hardly be  affected at all!  More than 99.6% of litter will still be there waiting to be picked up.

These measures were passed by progressive politicians, and even though the measures affect every one of their constituents, both financially and through the expenditure of personal time, none were allowed to vote for it. In fact, to date, no member of the public  has ever been given the chance to vote for or against these measures!

The paper “The California Plastic Bag Ban Scam” examines and exposes the methods used by the bag banners to push bag bans at the local and state level, and how they were able to push through a law that is not only unpopular, but also sets new dangerous precedents in governmental power and law.

To read or download the article, click on the following link: The California Plastic Bag Ban Scam.

The authors welcome any feedback or corrections to this article.

Related articles

Why You Should Oppose Bag Bans

Bag Ban Myths and Misinformation, Bottled Water Ban, Carryout Bag Fees, Disposable Shopping Bags, Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, Litter Issues, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bags, Public Safety Impacts, Reusable Bag Health Hazards, Reusable Shopping Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
English: Ten Mile River (California), looking ...
English: Ten Mile River (California), looking northward from California State Route 1 as it crosses near the mouth of the river. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Some people welcome a ban on plastic carryout bags, others are opposed, and others are not sure. This article is intended for those of you who are in between and unsure whether you should oppose or support a bag ban.

With as much that goes on in the world today that vies for our attention, getting excited about plastic grocery bags (i.e. plastic carryout bags) is certainly not high on the totem pole. We live in a topsy–turvy world where things that were once banned are allowed (e.g. marijuana) and things that were once allowed are now banned (e.g. plastic carryout bags).

So how can we approach this subject in a fair and impartial manner? How can we determine if we should support or oppose a bag ban? We know that when the legislature or a local jurisdiction passes a law they are trying to solve a perceived problem. So the answer to the question is to understand the nature of the problem and how the proposed solution or law intends to solve that problem and most important what alternative solutions were considered. The more clearly we understand this the better we can see how our personal freedom and liberties are affected and whether that intrusion is warranted and justified.

The purpose of this paper is not to provide a detailed explanation of the problem and the solution (e.g. plastic bag ban) but a philosophical argument about why or why not bag bans should be opposed.

Click on the following link to read the entire article:  Why You Should Oppose Bag Bans

Related articles

San Jose Painfully Learns Litter Problems Were Not Solved By Plastic Bag Ban!

Carryout Bag Fees, Economic Costs, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Disposal, Plastic Carryout Bags, Reusable Shopping Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, , , ,
Palm trees lining streets in San Jose, California
Palm trees lining streets in San Jose, California (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The City of San Jose is painfully discovering that the much touted bag ban that cost residents millions of dollars in out of pocket costs and personal time did nothing to solve litter problems. An environmental group, San Francisco Baykeeper, has notified the city that intends to file a lawsuit because of the city’s failure to prevent trash and sewage from flowing into the Guadalupe River and Coyote Creek through its storm drain system and into San Francisco Bay. The lawsuit is being filed because of violations of the Federal Clean Water Act. (Rogers, 2014)

“San Jose is a hot spot for trash pollution and bacterial pollution into the bay,” said attorney Sejal Choksi, program director for Baykeeper. “Its leaders have not taken care of the problem or prioritized the issue. We’ve seen the trash, we’ve measured the bacterial pollution. What they are doing is not sufficient.” (Rogers, 2014)

In response, Kerrie Romanow, director of environmental services for the City of San Jose, stated that nine catch basins have already been installed in the storm drain system to trap trash and plans are to install 20 more in the next three years. She also stated that the city has increased street sweeping and banned plastic bags. (Rogers, 2014)

San Francisco Baykeeper is a non-profit corporation whose purpose is “… to preserve, protect, and defend the environment, wildlife, and natural resources of San Francisco Bay, its tributaries, and other waters in the Bay Area.” (San Francisco Baykeeper, 2014) Continue reading San Jose Painfully Learns Litter Problems Were Not Solved By Plastic Bag Ban! →

Citizens Group Pushes City Council to Repeal Disposable Shopping Bag Fee

Disposable Shopping Bags, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Referendum, Reusable Shopping Bags
Downtown "Old Town" Fort Collins
Downtown “Old Town” Fort Collins (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On 21 October 2014, the Fort Collins, Colorado City Council repealed the disposable bag ordinance which would have imposed a 5-cent fee for each disposable paper or plastic bag distributed by retailers in the city beginning on April 1, 2015. (Gordon, 2014)

The ordinance was originally passed by the council on a 5-2 vote on August, 19, 2014.  The ordinance would have required all retailers to impose a fee of 5-cents for each disposable paper or plastic shopping bag issued at the point of sale to customers.  Exempt from the fee are plastic or paper bags used to package bulk food items and bags used to contain frozen food or meat and prevent contamination of reusable bags.  Also exempt from the fee are newspaper bags, dry-cleaning bags, and bags sold in bulk packages to consumers such as trash bags. The purpose of the fee was to discourage use of disposable bags and encourage the use of reusable bags. (City of Fort Collins, 2014)

The ordinance met with swift opposition and the group Citizens For Recycling Choices filed a protest with the City Clerk’s Office on August 26, 2014. (Udell, Fighters of plastic bag fee out gathering signatures, 2014) The group needed to collect 2,604 signatures and managed to collect more than 4,000 signatures. (Udell, Bag fee opponents collect more than 4K signatures, 2014) The group used social media and word of mouth to publicize the signature gathering effort. (Udell, Fighters of plastic bag fee out gathering signatures, 2014)

Continue reading Citizens Group Pushes City Council to Repeal Disposable Shopping Bag Fee →

California Legislature Fails Citizens with Draconian Bag Ban

Carryout Bag Fees, Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bags, Public Safety Impacts, Reusable Bag Health Hazards, Reusable Shopping Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, Uncategorized, , , , , , ,
A few volumes of the journals of each house (A...
Not all laws passed by the California legislature are in the public interest. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The California Legislature has once again failed the people of California, this time by passing a draconian plastic bag ban i.e. SB-270). This legislation would ban the distribution of thin-film plastic carryout bags by grocery and convenience stores and impose a minimum fee of 10-cents per store provided paper or reusable bag. The intent of the fee is to change shopper behavior by using a punitive financial incentive to coerce shoppers into bringing and using their own reusable bags. The legislature could have passed a much simpler solution that would have received a much greater and widespread public support and would not have involved changing shopper behavior or imposing bag fees while at the same time solving the plastic bag litter problem. Continue reading California Legislature Fails Citizens with Draconian Bag Ban →

California Legislature Passes Statewide Bag Ban Bill

Carryout Bag Fees, Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, LandFill Impacts, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bags, Recycling Impacts, Reusable Shopping Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, , , , , , ,
California State Capital in Sacramento
California State Capital in Sacramento (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On Friday, 29 August, 2014 the California State Legislature passed a statewide plastic bag ban in passing SB-270. SB-270 now goes to Governor Jerry Brown for his signature. Governor Brown has until 30 September 2014 to act on the measure. Governor Brown has not indicated support for or opposition to the measure.

If the measure becomes law, shoppers will have to bring their own carryout bags, purchase and use reusable bags, or purchase a paper or thick plastic “reusable” bag for 10-cents each. The law becomes effective on 1 July 2015 for most grocery stores and 1 July 2016 for convenience stores.

NOTE: The key provisions of SB-270 are outlined below. These key provisions are taken from the language of SB-270 as much as possible but have been changed and modified for clarity and readability. Readers are referred to the actual legislation at: SB-270 (Padilla). Continue reading California Legislature Passes Statewide Bag Ban Bill →