Comments on: D.C. bag tax: Paper, plastic or puffery?

By: Joan

Joan — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 22:26:47 +0000

The plastic bag tax is an ugly regressive tax that falls disproportionately on the poor and the elderly. The tax is profitable for Safeway and CVS whose clerks have been instructed to ask in a whiny tone, “Need a bag?” They never ask, “Do you want to purchase a bag?” Personally, I have not paid one penny for a plastic bag since the tax went into effect, and not because of my concern for the environment. Of the four cents that go to the district, none goes to cleanup of the Anacostia River.

By: Jack

Jack — Sun, 28 Aug 2011 17:22:41 +0000

To the extent Mr. Lee identifies a problem, he falls short of offering any solutions. I agree with the DC Council that disposable plastic bag proliferation is a problem: 1) While there are between 500 billion and 1 trillion plastic bags consumed on earth each year according to USEPA and National Geographic, less than 1% are recycled (Christian Science Monitor); 2) It costs $4000 to process and recycle 1 ton of plastic bags, which can be sold on the commodities market for only $32, according to the San Francisco Dept. of the Environment; 3) National Marine Debris Monitoring Program measures show that plastic bags account for over 10% of debris washed onto US coasts, and they have been found as far away as the Arctic Circle and the Falkland Islands, where they can entangle and kill birds, sea mammals and turtles, and other wildlife; 4) CNN in November of 2007 explained that plastic shopping bags are made from polyethylene, a thermoplastic made from oil. CNN added in January 2008 that China will save 37 million barrels of oil each year due to their ban on free plastic bags. If 20% of the US population switches to reusable bags, then we would save 1,330,560,000,000 bags over our lifetime. Whereas federal courts often cite states’ roles as laboratories for experiments in democracy through the powers reserved to the people under the 10th Amendment of the US constitution, it’s ironic that Mr. Lee denigrates this legitimate local government exercise of public health and safety responsibilities by labeling disposable plastic bag ordinances as ‘social engineering’. Viewed another way, social engineering occurs when Madison Ave. marketers and other capitalist pirates seduce us into wanting something we don’t need, and further fool us into believing that we lack capacity to bring our own bag to carry our loot home. Leading our cultural rejection of addiction to disposable plastics and foreign oil imports is instead an example of social enlightenment. Adam Ebbin will make a great Senator in Virginia, and Tommy Wells and Mary Cheh deserve credit for their leadership on this important issue. Because Mr. Lee fails to articulate a solution to a problem he admits to, at least by implication, I wish to remind Blade readers: a) Reduce, b) reuse, c) recycle – in this order.

By: R

Sat, 27 Aug 2011 14:50:51 +0000

I live on a busy retail corridor in NW. Since the bag tax went into effect our street is no longer littered with plastic bags after a busy weekend. While my observation is not a scientific survey we simply no longer have a problem. Our street is much cleaner than it was before the tax. I would like to add Mark Lee is the same person who told us if the District enacted its no smoking regulations the cities nightlife would crumble and its patrons move to VA.

By: Stevg

Stevg — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 08:20:27 +0000

While this is all very interesting, I thought the Blade had a policy that highlights the gay characteristic of any issue. So, I think Mark Lee has a friend that he met at his Lizard Lounge parties who works for the American Chemical Council’s plastic division which has been actively fighting against plastic bag bans across the country such as the Toledo, Ohio area. It should be known that ACC is on record for being one of the few to testify against DC’s 5 cent bag during the hearings when this law was first proposed. We did not hear from Mark Lee, then so why now? Its because there is a active campaign to gut the law going on. But my real question is to Kevin Naff. When is your organization going to fact check?

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 21:10:30 +0000

Anecdotal. And amen.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 20:12:57 +0000

I find that hard to beLIEve, Councilman Wells, that a 60% reduction of the trash in the Anacostia River has been seen. I also find it offensive that I am penalized because some low lifes want to litter and soil our streets, waterways and public parks due to the permissive and relaxed expectations our government has put on them. Let’s hold those accountable who cause the problem, not those of us who provide a solution. I do, and have carried my groceries and purchases in a canvas bag for close to ten years now. This is the most corrupt and inept city government I have had the displeasure of living in, and this administration is worse than the last.

By: Plasticplace.net

Plasticplace.net — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 16:29:25 +0000

Most of the wastes found in our oceans and rivers are plastic materials, so the tax scheme has done something to lessen these wastes. But, the thing about plastic bags is not about its production, but the way they are disposed by people. We can blame ourselves for that.

By: Councilman Tommy Wells

Councilman Tommy Wells — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 22:20:47 +0000

The DC Bag tax accomplished exactly what it was meant to do – reduce the amount of plastic bag trash in the Anacostia River. It has been reduced by more than 60%. One million dollars in grants were just awarded to community based environmental groups for additional river clean up from the nickel raised from the nominal charge for disposable bags.

Because of its effectiveness, as the author notes, Montomery Co. just passed the same bill but covers virtually all bags not just food related. I believe DC should update its law to do the same to reduce the confusion cited.