Editorial

Markell's veto of unused bottle bill was the correct approach

Back in the middle of June, we said in this space that the Legislature and the Markell administration should either enforce the 29-year-old bottle bill or get rid of it.

That was in response to House Bill 201 that was designed to do away with the 5-cent bottle deposit law that 70 percent of Delawareans ignore and serves only to line the pockets of bottle distributors in the state. (Unpaid refunds stay in the pockets of wholesalers.)

Gov. Markell, however, has gone a step further and we applaud him for it.

Besides objecting to the bill because it wouldn't bring down the cost of a bottle of soda or beer by 5 cents and didn't provide refunds for bottles cashed in after the ban went into effect, the governor said it was a flawed bill that was contrary to the state's emerging reputation as a leader in alternative energy and climate prosperity.

As written, the governor said in his veto message, the bill lacks consumer protections or any plan to improve the state's recycling rate.

One of the biggest flaws, which the governor artfully points out, is the provision that would in effect continue to allow distributors to collect 5 cents per bottle even though it was added because of the bottle bill in 1982. (Deposits on cans were eliminated in the 1990s.)

The governor wants representatives from wholesalers, retailers, environmentalists and legislators to sit down and come up with legislation that will promote waste diversion and recycling efforts that are fair to taxpayers.

In other words, a better bill that actually promotes use of the deposit aspect.

One of the priorities should be to return cans to the formula and add water bottles. Bottled water has had an explosive effect on the market along with the accompanying increase of discarded plastic containers that show up along roadways.

http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090721/OPINION09/907210330/1004/OPINION/Markell-s-veto-of-unused-bottle-bill-was-the-correct-approach