Transcript
Page 1: Why Vote Yes on Prop 67 and No on Prop 65 to Ban Single ......Sep 12, 2016  · placed two measures on the November ballot (Prop 67 and Prop 65) in order to confuse voters and prevent

VOTE YES on Prop 67 to implement the statewide bag ban passed by the legislature in 2014.• Californiaenactedastate-wideplasticbagban(SB

270–Padilla)intolawin2014.• Thelawwasblockedwhenoutofstatebag

manufacturersplacedProp67ontheballot.ItrequiresvoterstoapprovetheimplementationofSB270,thelegislativelyenactedban.

• TheseoutofstatebagmanufacturershavenowplacedtwomeasuresontheNovemberballot(Prop67andProp65)inordertoconfusevotersandpreventastate-wideplasticbagban.

VOTE NO on Prop 65 because it could invalidate the statewide bag ban.• Prop65soundsgoodbecauseitwoulddivert

fundsraisedfromthesaleofpaperbagstoanenvironmentalfund.

• LegalanalysisindicatesthatthereisagoodchancethatifProp65passes,thefeeschargedonbags,asaresultofthepassageofProp67,couldbeviewedasatax,andwouldrequirea2/3majorityofvoterstosupportitinordertobevalid,whichmeansProp65couldinvalidatethestatebagban,since2/3ofvoterssupportingisaveryhighbar.

• Weknow:It’ssuper-confusing!Butthat’sthepoint.We’reprettysurethebagindustryputthisontheballotbecausetheywanttoconfusevoters.

California's bag ban protects the environment — not the profits of out-of-state bag manufacturers.• InCalifornia,themulti-milliondollar“no”campaign

againstthebagbanis98%fundedbyout-of-state

firms,andthelargestfundersareplasticbagmanufacturersfromSouthCarolina,NewJersey,andTexas.1

Plastic bags waste taxpayer dollars. • Governmentspendsroughly$428millionannuallyto

controllitterbeforeitreachesstatewaters.Between8and25percentofthatcostisattributabletoplasticbagwaste.2

• Managingthe24billionbagsthatendupinlandfillscosts$25milliondollarseachyear.3

Plastic bag recycling is costly and ineffective.• Recyclingplasticbagsdoesnotmakeeconomic

sense.Onereportfoundrecyclingonetonofplasticbagscosts$4,000.Therecycledproductcanbesoldfor$32.4

• Shoppingbagsjamexpensivemachineryatrecyclingplantsandcontaminatetherecyclingstream,increasingcosts.IntheCityofSanJose,plasticbagjamscostthecityapproximately$1millionperyear.5

Why Vote Yes on Prop 67 and No on Prop 65 to Ban Single-Use Plastic Bags in California?Voters have a key opportunity this November to uphold California’s single-use plastic bag ban, but need to watch out for dirty ballot tricks by the bag industry.

A mother sea otter tries to rescue her pup from a plastic bag in California.

phot

oby

ter

rymcc

ormac

,2011.

Page 2: Why Vote Yes on Prop 67 and No on Prop 65 to Ban Single ......Sep 12, 2016  · placed two measures on the November ballot (Prop 67 and Prop 65) in order to confuse voters and prevent

1 http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1372902&view=late1&session=20152 NRDC,“WasteinOurWater:TheAnnualCosttoCaliforniaCommunitiesofReducingLitterthatPollutesOurWaterways,”August2013.http://docs.nrdc.org/oceans/oce_13082701.asp3 “Shopping?TakeReusableBags!”CalRecycle.N.p.,23Nov.2011.Web.13June2012.http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/publiced/holidays/ReusableBags.htm4 CleanAirCouncil.(2009May).Why Plastic Bag Fees Work.5 CityofSanJosestaffreport,SanJoseTransportationandEnvironmentCommitteeHearing,February2,2009.6 “SingleUseBagOrdinance,LosAngelesCounty,CA,”GreenCitiesCalifornia,January27,2013,http://greencitiescalifornia.org/best-practices/waste-reduction/LA-co_single-use-bag.html7 https://www.sanjoseca.gov/Archive/ViewFile/Item/20278 http://www.cawrecycles.org/list-of-local-bag-bans/9 S.C.GailandR.C.Thompson,MarinePollutionBulletin,Volume92,Issues1–2,15March2015,Pages170–17910 http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/ocean_plastics/11 http://www.sfei.org/documents/microplastic-contamination-san-francisco-bay12 http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-tons-of-plastic-trash-in-oceans-20150213-story.html13 BrendleGroup.“TripleBottomLineEvaluation:PlasticBagPolicyOptions.”CityofFortCollins,October2012,pg.9.14 http://www3.epa.gov/region9/marine-debris/faq.html15 “FightingtheTideofPlasticBagsinaWorldAwashwithWaste"http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/13/eco.plasticbagwaste/index.html

Bag bans work. • LargestorescoveredbyLosAngelesCounty’sbanonplasticbagsreducedoverallsingle-usebagusage

by95%,whichincludesa30%reductioninpaperbagusage.6• SanJosereducedplasticbaglitterby89%inthestormdrainsystem,60%inthecreeksandrivers,and

59%incitystreetsandneighborhoods.7• 151jurisdictionsinCaliforniahavenowbannedsingle-useplasticbagsandplacedafeeonpaperbags.8

Plastic bags harm marine and human life. • Atleast690speciesareimpactedbymarinedebris(mostlyplastic);10%ofthemhadingestedmicro-

plastics.9• Ingestionofplasticdebrisbyseabirds,fish,andseaturtleshasbeenwidelydocumented.Ingestioncan

causesuffocationorstarvation;wildlifecanalsogetentangledinplasticdebris.

California’s waterways are filling with plastic.• IntheLosAngelesareaalone,10metrictonsofplasticfragments—likegrocerybags,strawsandsoda

bottles—arecarriedintothePacificOceaneveryday.10• Nearly4millionpiecesofplasticfloodtheSanFranciscoBayeveryday.11

• About61%ofstreetlitterintheBayAreaisnotcapturedorcontrolledbystreetsweepingandlittercollectionandendsupflowingintoinlandandcoastalwaters.12

Single-use plastic bags are a major part of the problem.• Becausetheyarelightweight,plasticbagscanoftenbecomelitter.Evenwhenproperlydisposedof,theyfly

outofopengarbagecontainersandlandfills.13• AccordingtotheCaliforniaCoastalCommission,plasticbagscomprise13.5%ofshorelinelitter.TheCityof

LosAngelesfoundthatplasticbagsmadeup25%oflitterinstormdrains.14• Theaveragetimeofuseofadisposablebagis12minutes.15

FOR MORE INFORMATION:CFacebook.com/cleanwateractionCA • www.cleanwateraction.org/CA350 Frank Ogawa Plaza, Suite 200, Oakland, CA 94612Tel. (415) 369-9160 • Email: [email protected]

Paid for by Clean Water Action for distribution to its members.


Recommended