Bag it

Seattle voters toss disposable bag fee 8

Plastic bag in the windImage: Tom Twigg/GristIn the end, elections always come down to numbers. In the case of Seattle’s Aug. 18 primary—a vote that would decide whether the city would adopt a 20-cent fee for paper and plastic bags at local stores—the most important number turned out to be not the 20 cents nor the number of votes against, but the amount of money spent on the anti-fee campaign by plastic industry lobbyists.

That number is $1.4 million ... or about 7 million disposable bags at two dimes a piece. Enough, apparently, to defeat the measure by a hefty margin with more than half of the (all mail-in) ballots counted.

In comparison, the pro-bag camp raised just $80,000, and they knew they faced a tough fight, said Heather Trim of People for Puget Sound and the Green Bag Campaign.

Still, Trim is happy with the amount of media attention the issue garnered in the run-up to the vote and says it has inspired more people to bring their own bags. “We’ve had a huge surge of awareness,” she said. “This is only going to help.”

For more on the BYOBag debate, see our rundown of disposable-bag restrictions around the world and our list of alternatives from fanny packs to lunch tins.

Sarah van Schagen is Grist’s Seattle editor.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. sindark's avatar

    sindark Posted 12:49 pm
    19 Aug 2009

    In the grand scheme of things, plastic bags seem like a pretty trivial problem. There is no shortage of landfill space, so the important thing is just keeping them out of the oceans.
  2. jlwmid Posted 1:15 pm
    19 Aug 2009

    I live in Seattle and I voted against this. It had nothing to do with who spent the most money. I ignore almost all political ads [I will admit to being amused by some of the more hysterical ones on both sides of any given issue]. Most people here use their own bags. A tax like this impacts the poor more than anyone else. It put a burden on some types of stores and none on others. I reeks of a nanny state where people can't be trusted to do the right thing.In a city where more people have dogs than kids I shudder to think how nasty the streets would be if the people who are scooping after their dogs no longer have free poop bags.
    1. Tyler Durden Posted 4:11 pm
      19 Aug 2009

      Your point about the dog problem is valid, but the rest is bunk.  If people are using plastic bags, they are not doing the right thing, so they need to be made to do it.  Complaining about a "nanny state" or anything similar just means that you want to do whatever you want regardless of the negative consequences to the environment or other people.As to the dog problem, the only solution is to get rid of them.  I realize this won't happen anywhere near my lifetime, but hopefully at some point people will evolve enough to realize how environmentally destructive dogs are and that they are totally unnatural animals that were bred by humans and have no place in nature.
      1. dtrom4 Posted 7:20 am
        20 Aug 2009

        Yeah, kids too.  Do you know the carbon impact of having children?  We won't be able to solve the climate crisis until people stop having kids.
      2. Tyler Durden Posted 11:40 pm
        21 Aug 2009

        I get your sarcasm, but you're accidentally partially correct.  We won't solve any serious problems, including global climate change, until we greatly reduce our population.  The only way to get that done is limiting families to one child.
    2. Matt Petryni Posted 8:40 pm
      20 Aug 2009

      As a fellow Seattleite, I sympathize. We actually have biodegradable poop bags along major trails though, so I didn't really see that as a major issue. Nor do I think the environmental impacts of pet dogs should be anywhere near our highest reform priorities.I agree there were indeed other problems with Council's bag fee, but when I see the plastics elite throw soooo much money at a referendum like this I kinda feel like you have to vote against it just to show them Seattle's not their bitch like everyone else.I hope the Council has the balls to ignore this vastly overhyped and overmonied election and vote in another bag fee next year... though maybe a little lower (20 cents was a little steep), and focused less on grocery and more on retail. If the voters really get pissed at the City Council overruling them, we can kick them out them out. Something tells me that won't happen though.
  3. jbetzzall Posted 1:53 pm
    20 Aug 2009

    Heather Trim of the Green Bag campaign was quoted several days before the election predicting this result; it's exceedingly difficult to overcome such one-sided money imbalances. What's even more interesting is the pseudo-populist tactics used by the big-oil lobbyists. Their mailers and website both listed a large number of "ordinary people" identified by name and occupation as a way of humanizing themselves. Many were listed as "housewife" or "retired". Perhaps the next campaign should learn from this tactic and turn it against the big-money bullies. Surely we are better at generating real grass-roots support; let's think of a more effective way of demonstrating it.
  4. Matt Petryni Posted 8:41 pm
    20 Aug 2009

    P.S. RIP Greg Nickels's political career....

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement