Editorial
Connecticut
Pocketing the People’s Nickels
In 1978 most people bought bottled water only before a big storm, in case the electricity went out. That was the year the General Assembly decided to tack a nickel deposit onto containers of carbonated beverages like soda and beer. The law’s purpose was to reduce litter, and it accomplished that.
But times change. The amount of bottled water sold has doubled in the last three years. It has gone from 206 million in 2002 to 426 million in 2005, according to the Connecticut Recycling Institute. The institute predicts more than 1 billion bottles of water will be sold here in 2010.
That incredible statistic is the best argument for expanding the bottle bill to include deposits on bottles of water and other noncarbonated beverages such as tea and fruit drinks.
This year’s bill has a good chance of passing, despite opposition from grocers and similar groups who say it will increase the costs they incur when collecting the bottles. To help offset those costs, the proposal would increase handling fees for such groups to 3 cents a bottle from the current 1.5 cents.
But the bill has one persistent and maddening flaw. It continues the patently outrageous practice of allowing the bottling industry to keep the unclaimed bottle deposits, which amount to an estimated $25 million a year. The industry claims the money is needed to offset costs. But there has never been an independent audit of those costs, nor has there been an audit to figure out exactly how much of the people’s unclaimed deposits roll in every year, only to be turned over to the bottlers.
The original version of this year’s bill tried to use unclaimed deposits collected on noncarbonated beverages for recycling programs, a wise move since Connecticut’s recycling rate has been stuck at 30 percent for years and desperately needs to improve. But the water industry objected, arguing that not getting unclaimed deposits would put them at a competitive disadvantage against those companies that get to keep the nickels.
Yet turning over all the deposits to big companies is a disservice to the state’s citizens. Nonetheless, some legislators say that a bottle bill will never pass unless the unfair status quo continues.
The legislature should be embarrassed. It has never managed to face down lobbyists and bottling interests to take back the money. Previous leaders of the General Assembly would not even allow a recorded vote on the issue.
And the industry is shortsighted. It would be better off voluntarily giving up a percentage of the unclaimed deposits now rather than risk even a bigger cut in the future.
Despite this flaw, however, the bill deserves passage. And when it does pass, it must include a requirement that the amount of money collected in unclaimed deposits be counted and the information made public every year. People have a right to know how much of their money legislators are turning over to big companies instead of using it to clean up the environment — the very point of the proposal.
