Nickel Bag
By Amit Singh | Sunday, January 3rd, 2010 | Catch-All, PolicyWalking out of the Harris Teeter at Jenkins Row in SouthEast DC, I didn’t notice I was charged 5 cents for every plastic bag I walked out with until I saw the notice on the door. The Anacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act of 2009 signed by Mayor Fenty last July took effect on New Year’s Day. The fee is charged to clean the 20,000 tons of trash in the river each which costs an estimated $50 million annually.
Unlike most taxes, the bag tax does not immediately disgust me. First off, it is consumption based with easy alternatives (i.e. tote bags, reuse), second it was passed by the local politicians which the citizens have the most access to, and third the revenue is used for a specific purpose which is tangible in benefit. However, middle class families and the poor are likely hardest hit by the tax. My other concern is how well will the revenue get administered (this is Marion Barry’s city afterall) and what other laws this act will lead to. Chicago taxes water bottles (but interestingly not unhealthy sodas) and DC has wanted a commuter tax on VA and MD residents for years. Similar to how the DC Smoking Ban has had a domino effect on its neighbors, I wonder if Arlington, which just started an energy panel for the private sector, and the rest of NoVA will be influenced by DC’s new regulations. As politicians try to one up one another in who is the greenest of them all, I fear the citizens will be left feeling blue and in the red.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
I'm left handed but right brained.
Comments
9 Responses to "Nickel Bag"
I share many of your thoughts on this new tax as the environment there is horrible and this tax is local etc. Except I disagree with the part about the poor being hardest hit. They don’t have to be “hit”. There is an easy choice here.
Ever notice that the “poor” usually don’t do all the things we would like to see done for the environment or for personal health? I have used my own tote bags for a couple of years, but I see few others using them particularly in lower income parts of the city. Much like cigarettes, despite years of indoctrination, just look outside any high school and the young are the smokers, usually the lower class students..also the “poor” adults still smoke. A lot like the lottery, they “poor” are the ones who keep doing that too. Seems they just don’t get it. Doesn’t seem to have anything to do with education as they are all government school products and have been exposed to plenty of “education” on these health and environmental issues. Karl Marx must have been wrong, Must be something else that motivates men. . .
Dry Viking, while you are correct in pointing out the shortcomings of many poor people, I still believe the self-serving politicians and the tacit rich will allow all sorts of incentives and rebates, etc. you can already see that DC has given thousands of tote bags to the poor to counter the nickel fee but will they use them? what else will be done to accommodate?
I agree, then quit worrying about how the “poor” are harder hit. Treat them like real people (tough love) and they will respond much better than they do to state paternalism. It is really easy: treat everyone equally, period.
DC has the attitude of “let them eat cake”. This tax is just another revenue stream wrapped around a faux moral cause du’jour that they convinced you that they give a damn about. Do you really think the money won’t go to somebody’s slush fund or just get thrown in the general fund by some creative accounting?
Yes, its a moral cause rather than an technical objective. You’re being sold on saving the planet, the turtles etc. in a way that blends in with the Global Warming religion and political correctness. It isn’t important that you actually clean things up, you just have to “care” about it and allow political power and money to flow through the pockets of the new “Green Elite”. Politicians don’t care how they get the revenue streams…….. just that they get them. If they have to legislate “Green” morality first, so be it.
Hmmm, so….are paper bags now back? Weren’t plastic bags supposed to replace them to “save the environment?” Oooops.
Britt, I share your concerns of misuse of the revenue stream (no pun intended) but I disagree with your assertion that this is a moral cause and not a technical objective. whether you believe in global warming or not, we would all be remiss in not believing in pollution. its a fact that the Anacostia River gets 20,000 tons of trash per year of which 50% is attributed to plastic bags. perhaps there are more efficient ways to clean the river and it would be great if local businesses funded it without govt intervention but I haven’t seen that happen yet.
Cargosquid: Nope. You just made that up. Plastic bags replaced paper because they are cheaper. And, to my mind, more efficient. I have to carry my groceries from the street to my house..no driveway or garage. With plastic bags, I can get them all in one trip. Not so much with paper. I wouldn’t have a problem with the nickel fee.
I’m just glad we have not ended up with the nickel or dime deposit on beverage containers. All my beverage containers currently end up in the recycle bin and it would be an extreme pain to have to carry them back to the retailer to redeem the deposit and get them recycled.
It is my understanding that municipal recycling programs currently help pay for their recycling programs with the positive stream they receive from aluminum cans. If that is removed, municipal recycling will be more expensive.
I did not “make that up.” It was a question. Secondly, I remember the propaganda that “now we don’t have to cut down trees for grocery bags.” when the plastic bags first came out.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.