California’s Prop. 67 passed on November 8th. The law, SB 270 went into effect immediately, surprising many shoppers.

I fully agree with the aim of the law. I fully disagree with how the law was written.

Now, if a shopper in a grocery store/supermarket or drug store does not bring their own bag or other container to retrieve the items they’ve purchased, they are forced to purchase either paper, heavier, reusable plastic bags or cloth bags or take the items loose as they leave. The prices for bags range from a dime, upward.

The problems are numerous. Lots and lots of folks are pissed: Irresponsible people will still throw the heavier plastic bags in the trash. Others get angry when they forget to bring their own bags to the store or forgetfully leave the bags they did bring in their car. The money collected in sales of the bags remains with the stores and is supposed to be used for environmental purposes, but there is no real accountability that that is where the money will go.

If they had done things correctly (correctly, as I see it), they would have used the aluminum can recycling law (which has proven itself quite successful) as a template.

A shopper goes to the grocery store and pays the same amount (ten cents) for the old (outlawed) style of bag and receives credit of that amount when the bag is returned. Either to the grocery store or to a recycling center. This places a value on the bag. Ask yourself, ” What would happen?”, if that were the case.

People don’t tend to throw money away. Shoppers would be less likely to throw the bags in the trash and the bags that do end up in the trash would be at least as desirable to those folks who collect aluminum cans from dumpsters, etc. Bags blowing around the outdoors would turn into money blowing around. I’m sure money has fallen from pockets and purses, but you would be hard pressed to find it left on the ground if it was visible to passersby.

Also, bag makers would not need to retool and ultimately pass the costs onto consumers. California is not noted for being either consumer or business friendly. Legislators are clueless when it comes to a buck.

This would be a simple and far more effective answer to the problem. The reason the law is written the way it is may be as simple as why so many other laws are so detailed, complex and stupid. How else would lawmakers justify their work hours when so few hours would be needed to do things right?