February 23, 2007

Opinion

Revamping bottle bill just makes sense

In 1971, the Oregon bottle bill, which put a nickel deposit on soda and beer cans and bottles, was so effective in ridding Oregon’s landscape of litter that 10 states immediately followed its lead.

Now Oregon lags behind Michigan (which has increased the deposit to a dime) in keeping its bottle bill current and effective.

Oregon’s bottle bill law applies only to carbonated beverages in metal cans and glass bottles. That covered soda and beer, which were the most popular drinks in 1971. But more than 35 years later, we increasingly drink water, sports drinks and fancy juices and teas in containers that all are exempt from the bottle bill.

Many of these beverages are in plastic, and our rate of recycling rigid plastic bottles has fallen below 25 percent this year. So where are those bottles going? Just look around. Plastic bottles and broken glass increasingly litter our landscape.

To remedy some of these deficiencies, the daughter of the man who founded the bottle bill is using her seat in the Legislature to pursue its reform.

State Sen. Vicki Berger, a Salem Republican, is facing off against some very powerful bipartisan and industry opposition in her bid to revamp and revive the bottle bill. It’s a worthy effort.

According to state Department of Environmental Quality estimates, about 37.5 billion beer and soda containers were returned for deposit between 1972 and 2006.

The Association of Oregon Recyclers reports that 70 percent of containers covered under the bottle bill are returned for deposit.

Berger isn’t the first to propose expanding the scope of the bottle bill, so she knows what she’s up against. The grocery and beverage industries have defeated earlier efforts.

The reluctance to do anything to change the bottle bill is bipartisan. Both Democrats and Republicans have accepted campaign funds from the industries that do not want to see more containers brought under the bottle bill’s provisions.

The public needs to let weigh in on what we want to see regarding the bottle bill.

In the initial testimony Tuesday, Berger’s understanding of the issue was evident as she summed up the historic opposition to the bill: “Big national players came in (when the original bill was proposed); there were big disputes. It was a battle,” Berger said. Ditto, more than 35 years later.

The beverage industry is opposed to increasing the price of beverage deposit to a dime, but people still pick up dimes off the sidewalk. We believe that they would return more of those plastic water bottles as well.

http://www.gazettetimes.com:80/articles/2007/02/23/news/opinion/4edi01_ed0222.txt