My Advice to “Plastic Bag Ban Deniers”

by on October 3, 2014 · 63 comments

in California, Environment, History

plastic bag windHere is some advice to those who I call “plastic bag ban deniers” – people who are upset – and deny the benefits – about California’s newly enacted ban on plastic bags, just signed by Governor Brown just this past Tuesday, Sept 30th – which goes into effect July 1, 2015. According to HuffPo:

Under SB270, plastic bags will be phased out of checkout counters at large grocery stores and supermarkets such as Wal-Mart and Target starting next summer, and convenience stores and pharmacies in 2016. The law does not apply to bags used for fruits, vegetables or meats, or to shopping bags used at other retailers. It allows grocers to charge a fee of at least 10 cents for using paper bags.

The push for Brown to sign the legislation came from the more than 100 cities and counties, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, that already have such bans.  Bans have been enacted in Chicago, Austin and Seattle, and Hawaii – all it counties have done like wise. It’s true, most environmentalists and people who have participated in beach, park and riverbed clean-ups were happy with the new ban.

But obviously, not everyone is celebrating and certainly not my “plastic bag ban deniers”. HuffPo found shoppers were divided at a downtown San Diego Ralphs:

Shoppers leaving a Ralphs supermarket Tuesday in downtown San Diego were divided as they weighed the legislation’s environmental benefits against its costs. San Diego does not ban plastic bags.

 “With the amount of waste that we produce, we can try to help out by slightly inconveniencing ourselves,” said Megan Schenfeld, 29, whose arms were full of groceries in plastic bags after leaving reusable bags at home.

 Robert Troxell, a 69-year-old former newspaper editor, said the fees are more than an inconvenience for retirees living on fixed incomes like him. He shops daily because he has only a small refrigerator in his hotel for low-income seniors.

 “It becomes a flat tax on senior citizens,” said Troxell, who lives off social security and other government assistance. “I have not disagreed with Jerry Brown on anything — until this.”

And the division is bound to get wider, as a national coalition of plastic bag manufacturers is already threatening to go after a voter referendum to repeal the law. Under the umbrella and very dubious name of the American Progressive Bag Alliance, the trade group has been sponsoring commercials in California “blasting the ban as a cash-giveaway to grocers that would lead to a loss of thousands of manufacturing jobs.”

Advice to “Plastic Bag Ban Deniers”

Hoping that Californians will reject any referendum, then, here is my advice:

1.  If you feel irked about the ban, as you use plastic bags to pick up dog poop and other unsightly things, my advice: Start hoarding plastic bags right now, today. You have until July 1st of next  year – that’s 9 months to collect the plastic guys. You can stash your collected plastic – and use them with the ban actually begins – and perhaps save a few landfills in the process.

2. If you are upset with the fee that will then be charged for paper bags – most think it will be 10 cents (not much really – there’s not even a “cent” key on this keyboard), my advice: Start collecting paper bags right now, today, ask for paper at the check-out counter, so you can pile up the paper for next summer when each one will cost  you.

3. And for everybody else – my advice: Start investing in cloth or permanent shopping bags now, today.

plastic bag turtle


{ 63 comments… read them below or add one }

Graham Wellington October 3, 2014 at 11:19 am

Let’s clearcut more forests for all upcoming demand for paper bags. And are progressives in OB cool with using cloth bags since like 90%+ of them are made/imported from China or Vietnam? Most/all of which are made by people (children?) making pennies a day? Meanwhile hundreds of jobs in this country will be lost.

Lastly, 10 cents per bag adds up. I might just reuse my costco boxes at Ralphs once this madness starts.


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 5, 2014 at 8:35 am

There are plenty of places that banned plastic bags years ago. All you have to do is look at them to see what will happen. Toronto had this debate back in 2008, and enacted a ban. Groceries in Canada have already tried different policies. The most effective being charging $0.05 for plastic bags. That alone resulted in more than a 50% reduction in bags destined for landfill. The majority of paper bags are made from recycled corrugated cardboard, and saw mill scraps. The amount of pulp used to make paper grocery bags is trivial to the paper industry as a whole.


Duke Kahanamoku October 5, 2014 at 2:33 pm

“Let’s clearcut more forests for all upcoming demand for paper bags.”

Forests all ready clearcut….where you been? Thanx for playin’ !


J.Stone October 6, 2014 at 10:31 am

Maybe you should learn more about the real Duke Kahanamoku, before you use his name, and attribute quotes using it. You are not Duke Kahanamoku.


Duke Kahanamoku October 6, 2014 at 1:57 pm

You need to read more carefully I believe, “J.Stone”.


SaneVoice October 7, 2014 at 1:04 pm

Thanks for helping us all out with that one, wonder boy J. Stone. We thought it was the real Duke Kahanamoku commenting from the grave


Dave Rice October 3, 2014 at 1:51 pm

I already use cloth bags for just about everything except meat and dairy (unless you wash your bags every shopping trip, don’t use them for meat or dairy). Ten cents for a single paper bag per week to put those items in shouldn’t break the bank.

I do, however, occasionally leave the cloth bags at home on purpose to get a handful of plastic bags, as I do reuse them around the house. Perhaps I should start hoarding…


sean M October 3, 2014 at 2:03 pm

People will look silly sipping 40s out of cloth bags. Not sure how can I recycle the dozens of cloth and ‘permanent’ bags I have accumulated. Hate to throw them in a landfill.

The bag ban will drive up costs a little bit for businesses and thus the cost of living in ca will creep up a little bit more, like all do-gooder rules do. It will cost the poor a little bit more, it’s sort of good news that ebt covers bag fees, but checkout lines will slow down a bit as people stuff groceries in multiple vegetable bags that hopefully won’t break and spill contents across store entrances.

Why just disposable bags? Why not ban drinking straws, plastic forks and disposable cups too. We can use our draught water to wash the non disposable utensils.


Duke Kahanamoku October 5, 2014 at 2:36 pm

“Why not ban drinking straws, plastic forks and disposable cups too. We can use our draught water to wash the non disposable utensils.”

Somebody actually wrote this?


Gerry Crown October 3, 2014 at 2:09 pm

With the Ebola virus and enterovirus spreading around and being prone to illness, there is no way that I will use reusable bags for groceries especially with meat and vegetables. No, thanks. I will buy the 1000 t-shirt plastic bags for $16 at Samsclub website. Since Africa also has a ban and they are using reusable bags, my predication is that a virulent virus will mutate from the reusable bags of Africa and will spread all over the world. HIV started in Africa. Ebola virus emerged from Africa. Enterovirus was a problem in South Africa. I think that Californians in the next ten years or more will be very unhealthy people with gastro problems and all kinds of illness from the dirty reusable bags. That is my prediction.

Remember Gemco, Fedco all those stores that closed down or got bought out. They closed down because of losses from shoplifting. The only way that the stores will quickly know that the customers paid for the store items was their OWN shopping bags. That free STORE shopping bag served as a BIG OBVIOUS RECEIPT to store clerks that the customer went through the cashier and bought the items.

Without the STORE shopping bag, anyone can walk out of the store and claim that they paid for the store items. I predict stores closing down or stores will sell their businesses to another corporation because of losses from shoplifting.


SaneVoice October 7, 2014 at 1:06 pm

So when your predictions are dead wrong, what do we get ? Hopefully less internet postings from you.


Dana Levy October 4, 2014 at 7:58 am

Whine, whine, whine, snivel. I am surprised that there are any negative comments at all. It seems the “selfish” amongst us don’t see an upside to this new rule. It is way past time and it is coming. Get over it! And, the “old “fart who says he lives on a fixed income and it is going to hurt seniors, everybody, sans those who win the lottery live on a fixed income of one type or another. If he isn’t comfortable on his fixed income he can go to work at McDonalds and relish in the fact that “we all” get to vote shortly on whether he remains in the poverty category or moves on up to the “slightly upper” poverty category. I AM GLAD CALIFORNIA IS TAKING THE LEAD ON THIS SUBJECT AND HOPE IT DOES SO ON MANY OTHER IDEAS WHOSE TIME HAS COME. Boo to Seaworld, hooray for bike lanes, let’s save all the water we can, and electric cars are coming. Progress is always going to gore somebody’s ox but it is: adapt or die. No exceptions, nature’s imperative is always in force…


Dean October 4, 2014 at 10:35 am

Visual impact of the plastic bags.
After the 2003 fire in San Diego with all the hillsides black in Mission Trails park. Within a week you could see thousands of white bags tangled with the burned brush. Maybe we should tax the plastic bag manufacturers to clean up the mess they help make.


jettyboy Jettyboy October 4, 2014 at 2:26 pm

Boo fucking hoo, so helping the environment & the earth might cost you a few extra extra pennies. Deal with it assholes.


Greg "Greg" H October 6, 2014 at 9:52 am

Here’s some things to consider with the plastic bag ban that I don’t think anyone is seeing.

If people are seriously whining about paying an extra 10 cents per bag, pay attention, most retailers give you a 10 cent credit for every reusable bag used right now before any of the bag bans have been enacted and have been doing this for years. So in essence, you are already being charged 10 cents per bag right now and could be getting .30-50 off each grocery or Target trip. That sure adds up!

Why anyone would want to carry 10 small grocery bags at once when 2 or 3 reusable bags can hold the same amount of items amazes me? Much simpler to load 2 or 3 bags inside of your trunk than a bunch of plastic bags. Most reusable bags are pretty easy and lightweight to throw in your next load of laundry if you are that worried, or like another user said, don’t put meat /dairy in these bags.

Unless you have a Saint Bernard or a giant wolf dog, the smaller fruit & veggie produce bags make great dog mess clean up bags. And if you don’t eat fruit or veggies then you probably have $25 or so to buy a years supply of doggie bags off of (equaling about $2 a month)

I am constantly telling merchants around OB after purchases “no bag please (do you seriously think I need a bag to carry the bag of chips or handled six pack I just bought, I do have two hands).” It is this type of conditioning and automatic responses by merchants that helped get us to where we are at and need to be changed.

Last off, I am constantly picking up floating plastic bags during surf/swim sessions and cleaning them up from our streets and alleys. I never have a problem when my dog decides to go #2 twice on me in one walk after I’ve discarded the first bag because there is always a littered plastic bag floating around.


John October 6, 2014 at 10:20 am

Ah the logic. You dont worry about having bags to pick up your dog poop NOW because of all the bags “blowing in the wind”. (where do you live, a bible belt trailer park? I dont see this in OB.)
So after the ban you can just scoop them up by hand and put them in your pocket?
And youre constantly swimming and surfing around bags… well I am sure the dog poop they will be replaced with after every good rain are much more preferable?
You still identified some good points. Why not channel the activism toward the issues with reasonable solutions such as educating retailers when a bag is appropriate and getting people to properly dispose of trash?

AND ON THAT I will tell you why you see refuse blowing in the wind:

NO TRASH CANS ANYWHERE. Seriously. Every fast food outlet every strip mall abd most convenience stores have quietly removed all waste receptacles from their properties. Obviously to “solve” the homeless problem. Nothing to dig for.
Perhaps no one else noticed this but I did as soon as I too lost all those domestic conveniences.
I cant fill my car/home with trash but there is no place to dispose of it anywhere it is actually generated.
Dont ban bags. Fix the broken source to landfill chain.


John October 6, 2014 at 9:53 am

It’s pretty sad that some pro ban supporters need to resort to ad hominems and other logical fallacies to promote this.
“Selfish”? “Assholes”?
How about many people have thought this through and recognize what a worthless, unworkable gesture this is and are tired of the bureaucratic stupidity these kind of things generate just for the self indulgence of well meaning ideologues?
1. Its unworkable because of all the exceptions. So I go to tbe grocery store abd there will still be these bags for fruits vegetables and meat but everything else gets juggled out the door bagless? I doubt it. And what about all the self check and self bag retailers? At walmart late at night the only registerd ARE self check.
So I put a meat item in a bag and fill the rest with cereal. A fruit item in another and fill tbe rest with cans.
What exactly have we accomplished here?
2. Every alternative has a cost. Often equal or worse.
The serious health risks inherent to cloth bags are explained away by saying we can wash them.
Yeah. With water in a serious drought heated by petroleum generated electricity and dried by the same.
And paper bag production has enormous costs in both energy and water use.
Either alternative is more resource intense for the planet. Why do you think retailers went plastic over paper years ago? Because it cost MORE?
No they were cheaper and that was because the resources used were LESS.
3. As for the waste issue most people I know save them for other uses like wrapping food or picking up dog poop.
These needs do not diminish we will just be buying thickeer more resourcr intensr and dump filling bags from the store to do them.
There really is no tangible benefit here other than allowing some really misguided abd illogical people to pat themselves on the back at the end of the day, lying to themselves that they helped save the planet. If that inconveniences the rest of us that’s silly. If their solutions really harmed the planet it becomes the moral obligation of those who saw this to SHOUT all along the way:
What resources are we saving?


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 6, 2014 at 4:19 pm

“The serious health risks inherent to cloth bags”? That is pretty funny. Guess it’s a wonder I’m even alive after using cloth bags for decades. [rolling eyes]


John October 7, 2014 at 12:15 am

Rolling eyes? Is that the new term for ignorance? Why do you think the ban doesnt include meat or fruits and vegetables?
Nobody cares if you have gotten sick or not. Food borne illness from cross contamination of foods is a big deal- and consumers are at risk from the negligence of other shoppers. If you had raw chicken in a bag placed in a checkout line and juice from it contacts a vegetable which is then eaten raw that is a real issue. How do we know who washes tbeir bags? Cloth bag users “solve” the problem by washing bags often each time they are used.
This uses water that must be heated then sent down the drain now full of detergent and bleach (which must be treated then put in the ocean) then put in a dryer which uses energy again.
All to save the use of a few flimsy bags of which a barrel of oil probably makes many thousands of.
Why would you so flippantly dismiss such an obvious flaw in your save the planet agenda? Is it because that isnt really the agenda?
Thats the funny thing here. I dont oppose this for any other reason than concern for the environment.
The bags have become a symbolic target for people to express valid concerns about our wasteful consumer driven society and thoughtless littering.
Its not going to accomplish a thing.


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 7, 2014 at 6:46 am

Rolling eyes means rolling your eyes – self explanatory. Your cross contamination concerns are way overblown as your ‘environmental’ concerns about washing bags. Ive been using bags for decades and it isnt often a bag needs to be washed. If it is there is no need for bleach or a dryer. There is an amazing new technology they call the clothes line. If raw meat touches food its way more likely to happen during food preparation. If it happens in a bag it can happen in a plastic bag just the same. Many people reuse plastic tshirt bags – which are much harder to clean than cloth or mesh bags. This isnt my agenda, you may have noticed I said jist charge for plastic bags and their use will go way down. But others have posted what a financial hardship it is to pay for a bag. And you wonder why Im rolling my eyes?


Greg "Greg" H October 7, 2014 at 10:31 am

Yes Marc, you do not need to wash bags every time! Most reusable bags (.99 ones) are made from Polypropylene which has been around for years and can withstand temps up to 180 F making it no problem to go through the dishwasher/clothes washer or dryer (if you can’t afford a clothes line and the Sun’s 99% bacteria killing effective UV Rays).


John October 7, 2014 at 3:27 pm

Okay smart guy if cross contamination is a non issue THEN WHY DOES THE BAG BAN EXEMPT MEATS FRUITS AND VEGETABLES?
Love to hear your explanation for that.


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 7, 2014 at 3:51 pm

Water. Paper bags don’t work for wet goods. You can still use cloth though – which I do. You keep talking about this like it is something new. It is not. The only thing new about this is that it is the first State-wide ban. Seattle is another city that has already banned the single-use bag. If you don’t want to hear it from ‘smart-guy’ me, take it from Seattle Public Utilities:

Exemptions from the law:

* Plastic bags used in stores for bulk items or to protect vegetables, meat, fish and poultry, frozen foods, flowers, deli foods and similar where moisture would be a problem are exempt.


Greg "Greg" H October 8, 2014 at 11:24 am

Why don’t you wash out the back of your trunk every time you go to the grocery store?


John October 8, 2014 at 11:45 am

Your assertion that food borne illness is not a concern with reusable bags is inconsistent with documented history as well as scientific research.


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 9, 2014 at 12:11 pm

Did you read the article you posted? It says:

“The first thing mentioned in the article on this, Contaminated reusable grocery bag causes gastric illness outbreak, is pretty much BS ”

You made my point for me this time.


John October 9, 2014 at 12:44 pm

Im sorry, how does that persons comment negate that:

The LA times article documents a serious food borne illness health officials blamed on reusable bags…

And the person himself links to credible research showing substantial contamination and rises in e coli hospital admissions in a bag ban city.

You c/p’ing an out of context remark and then saying I made your point amounts to blatant dishonesty. You have to lie to yourself and everyone else to support your position.

Thats the funny thing about the internet. People like you think laying the B S deep and wide and appearing to “win” an argument accomplishes something. Yet when you close the browser the issues dont disappear. Over a dozen people went to the hospital in a widely reported event and your acceptance of this fact is hardly a prerequisite for me to get through my day.


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 10, 2014 at 10:20 am

You posted the link that called the story BS not me. The reason it is BS is because the sickness had nothing to do with the bag being reusable or not. It had to do with a bag of food being left in a bathroom.

John October 6, 2014 at 9:56 am

Excuse the typos. Posting from mobile its hard not to without a preview function.


Duke Kahanamoku October 6, 2014 at 10:13 am

The planet and humanity will be better off with fewer and eventually no plastic bags.
Call the Waaaaa-ambulance!

As for ad hominem attacks, they’re rightly placed. If a person feels he/she cannot live without plastic bags than the person’s intelligence (or lack of) is definitely in question!

Quit making excuses, get over it and turn it into a challenge to cut back your waste even further! There is only one planet Earth.


John October 7, 2014 at 12:26 am

Let me know when you learn how to discuss actual valid talking points.
See the below furnished link about the use of resources.
California is in its worst drought ever and look at the difference in fresh water consumption.
Lack of intelligence? From a guy who used the word waaaa-ambulance in a post.
Stay classy.


Duke Kahanamoku October 7, 2014 at 9:41 am

SB 270 signed into law. “Push for Brown to sign the legislation came from the more than 100 cities and counties, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, that already have such bans. ”

Game over. The plastic bag law is now in effect, so your timing to prompt debate is too late.

Perhaps you should work to repeal this law if it has you in such a fit. Good luck!


John October 7, 2014 at 3:40 pm

Explain how the ban will even remotely affect me when I use the self check line and place a meat fruit or vegetable in each plastic bag then double bag it and fill it with other items?
Who will stop me? Will the state spend millions creating a bag police force? Will they have attorneys defend their false arrest suit when they realize I was within tbe law?
And you obviously know nothing about the issue.
How are paper bags saving the planet when the fresh water use and GGE are many times more than plastic?
What about all the plastic bags I will have to purchase to use in place of all the grocery bags I used to reuse? I never threw mine away. I had a special stainless steel receptacle to store and dispense them. Yes so many people did that they marketed special receptacles.
The bags I will now purchase are thicker and use more resources to produce and fill more landfill space.
Did you calculate that into your save the planet equations?


Duke Kahanumoku October 9, 2014 at 2:38 pm

Not my job to explain laws to people. I can tell you that as with any law, if you deliberately break it there is a chance you will be fined, just as those who get caught not wearing seatbelts. It is your choice. And as with any violation, you are always welcome to explain your case to the judge.

Hope that helps you along your way!


John October 10, 2014 at 12:58 pm

Thats funny.
Describe the process in which a consumer could be brought before a judge and fined for using a plastic bag.
Was a “bag officer” monitoring the door at the local food4less?
Was a state agency created with hundreds of employees driving hundreds of vehicles hundreds of miles a day across the state doing inspections at retailers- destroying the planet with fossil fuel fuel pollution ensuring compliance with this planet saving measure?


Duke Kahanamoku October 10, 2014 at 4:05 pm

Your panties are in a tight twist aren’t they?

Take a deep breath. Relax in knowing this is a small step in the right direction for the planet and its oceans.


John October 11, 2014 at 8:02 pm

Don’t change the subject, support your ridiculous claim.
How will consumers be brought before a judge and fined under this law?
Do you always post fantasy in discussions about real issues?


Duke Kahanamoku October 12, 2014 at 1:24 pm

The net result of the legislation will be a great reduction of plastic bag trash in the landfill.

OK John, With all your verbosity on this matter here’s another suggestion for action on your part:

After the law goes in effect, why don’t you hold a press conference with police present and break the law to challenge enforcement aspect. And after that yawner, you would likely have your day in court to explain your lawlessness to the yawning Judge even!

John October 13, 2014 at 8:47 pm

You have no proof there will be a significant reduction in waste to the landfills.
Just as you cannot explain how anyone could be brought before a judge and fined for violating the bag ban.
Youre off in your own little world.

John October 13, 2014 at 8:52 pm

The fact is on every claim you are WRONG.

Duke Kahanamoku October 14, 2014 at 9:19 am

Mr. “Save the Bags!” (John)-

“Even Christman (plastics industry rep) acknowledges that reusable bags are hard to beat. “Intuitively, we know that reusable bags, if people reuse them over and over again, could have some environmental benefits,” he says.”

–From the article you linked to which incidentally is from the plastics industry itself– Thank YOU for making the case that you are wrong, John. Here’s hoping to see you test the legal waters as I suggested in earlier posts to “Save the Bags!”

John October 14, 2014 at 5:22 pm

Since this is not legislation which compels people to only use reuseable bags you and your point are, as usual, wholly irrelevant.

Greg "Greg" H October 6, 2014 at 11:30 am

Resources being saved? Here you go, one of the better articles I receive at my plastics industry job!


Mark October 6, 2014 at 12:30 pm

This seems to be a huge win for big grocery businesses, which have lowered their costs and effectively passed them onto consumers.

Also, the sanctimonious condescension of posters like Dana Levy and Jettyboy will not win over the people who disagree with them. Calling people who disagree with you obscene names and saying nasty things about them is actually counterproductive, and it also just makes you look mean-spirited.

Another example of misplaced good intentions, it seems to me. I suspect that the voters will overturn this one on ballot.


Dana Levy October 7, 2014 at 7:30 am

Tough shit. You will just have to live with it!


BeachGirl October 6, 2014 at 12:55 pm

I am happy about this and hope it goes further!!! I find all the plastic bags being used at our OB farmers’ market gross. I made the switch years ago and am proud to say I never use plastic bags. I have reusable mesh produce bags and bring containers to the deli counter. It really is no big deal once you get in the habit. My bags even fold up into a tiny self contained ball that is easy to keep in car/purse/whatever. The biggest hurdle for me was finding something made in the USA. I gave in and bought bags from a SF based company who manufactures in China. The environmental damage of shipping those few bags is far outweighed by the thousands of plastic bags I have saved. I have received many free reusable bags from Ralph’s and whatnot that come to my mailbox for no reason, I’d be happy to share those with those that can’t afford bags. And I seriously doubt I am encountering any health risks using reusable bags.


RB October 7, 2014 at 9:45 am

I sure hope the anti plastic bag zealots are responsibly collecting rain water to wash these reusable bacteria factories.


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 7, 2014 at 11:26 am

Zealots for saying plastic bags should not be given away free so there are fewer hanging from the trees, landing in the water, and getting buried in landfills? Calling a reusable bag a “bacteria factory” sounds more like zealotry to me. I haven’t had to wash any of my cloth bags this year, but if I did I have a 220 gallon rain barrel system. ????


John October 8, 2014 at 12:24 pm

Hows that rain barrel system workin out fer ya in this record drought?
If litter is the driving issue arent there better ways to address that?
Like ensuring there are trash cans where the bags are distributed? Enforcing existing litter laws?
I dont think another bureaucratic process with loopholes that make it unworkable and a fee system set up like a tax or penalty is the way to go here. Just more headaches with another chance to bilk the consumer. Like the lottery or better still CRV. You ever actually try to get your nickel back? Almost impossible to make it financially viable. It has become a very lucrative tax. And get this. They tax the CRV fee.
Tax on tax. Too much.


CaptObvious October 7, 2014 at 9:57 am

Pardon me folks— I the time for debate on this issue has passed. Generally speaking, debate on issues occurs PRIOR TO PASSAGE of legislation. Perhaps folks need to keep that in mind for future reference if this wish to participate in public forum.

Or you can continue on as did “the birthers” or “the truthers. ” EVERYONE loves a good laugh!


want2surf October 7, 2014 at 12:23 pm

Thank you, Captain Obvious! (had to be said)
Right there with you. “Birthers”, “truthers”, “deniers” – not a single inconvenient truth changes their opinions.


John October 8, 2014 at 12:03 pm

The “passage of legislation” in this case was anything but democratic.
The news didnt report a thing about a state level ban until after gov. Brown signed it into law.
No popular vote was held.
You might as well say its not valid to criticize the Iraq war because its already happene.
Im not surprised you would want the debate to end since youre so wrong.
And people are going to keep complaining because as the link above documents t is counterproductive toward saving resources and if litter is the driving issue why not directly fix that? Get retailers to restore their trash cans! Thats got to be the obvious cause of most if this. They all removed them to discourage tthe homeless so people who leave the store with an item for immediate cobsumption simply discard the bag on the ground. Besides tbere are laws against littering if you cant use that tool you just make another law?


hOBie October 8, 2014 at 12:49 pm

Understand you’re angry John, but you seem to need a refresher course in 3rd grade American civics.

There was no “popular vote” because we live in a representative democracy where we vote to elect officials to pass laws. Not all laws, not even here in CA where you can get just about anything put on the ballot, gets put to a popular vote. Nor should it. If you don’t like it, take it up with your assembly person. And next time, stay better informed about what issues and votes your elected officials have before them. Fox News not sounding the alarm about this prior to this vote is no excuse.

So indeed, this passage of this legislation (no need ” “) was exactly that and was also democratic.


John October 9, 2014 at 12:57 pm

I guess you have some bizarre need for recognition for completing the third grade?
And what… you are suggesting my selection of my state level representation in the last election cycle should have been wholly dependent on their position on a state wide bag ban?
Well you went there, so can you document such legislation was proposed at the time and the candidate expressed a position on it?
Do posts like that come from a textbook of snarky replies
? The trademark being mentioning this “fox” thing. What is a “fox”?
I havent had cable in 14 years. You must have the wrong guy.
Are you a peeper? You look in on people to see what TV channels they watch?


Duke Kahanumoku October 9, 2014 at 2:41 pm

Are you trying to be funny, John?


John October 10, 2014 at 12:47 pm

No if that were the case I’d have tapped the elementary school thesaurus and used phrases like “call the wahhhh-ambulance!”.
Anyway, don’t you think the other reader should have the opportinity to defend his talking points before you start ankle biting?
I don’t understand this “the debate is over, don’t confuse us with facts about all the flaws in our plan” attitude. This remains an ongoing issue as long as a ban is in effect. As the drought continues and paper bag factories spring up using alarming amounts of water people are going to talk about it. When trash continues to litter the landscape and people recognize the issue wasnt just one small fraction of the litter content but that we had stupidly eliminated all the ways to collect and discard it, people will talk about it.
(Its rather telling NObody wanted to touch that point and how many ways it makes this law insane. One leaves a convenience store with a snack and drink packaged in multiple plastics foils papers etc. Upon consuming them they find there are no longer any waste receptacles on or adjacent to the property. The plastic bag gave the consciencious the ability to bag the refuse and carry it away. Now you’ve virtually required them to throw it all on the ground.)


Marc Snelling Marc Snelling October 10, 2014 at 1:27 pm

T-shirt plastic bags are trash by definition. Where is the logic in saying trash will be reduced by producing more trash to hold the trash? Besides we already have garbage bags. Throwing trash on the ground cant be blamed on anything other than the person themselves.

The water issue is a good one to address. What is the true cost of plastic when you take into account that it never decomposes, turns into small pieces of plastic sand and enters the food chain in sea birds and moves up to humans and others at the top of the food chain? What is the cost of hundreds of thousands of dead sea birds ? Plastic bags also clog recycling equipment, boat propellers and other machinery ccausing costly repairs. What is a clean beach worth? The islands in the Pacific that catch the current can have 5-10 feet of trash on them. At least paper trash breaks down eventually and is a renewable resource.


John October 10, 2014 at 2:48 pm

Trash bags are trash by definition. Would you claim they are not useful for directing trash to its appropriate destination. The landfills are full of nondecomposable items these bags probably amount to 1/1000th of a percent and IIRC can be made to decompose.
Get back to the issue. How stupid was it to eliminate waste receptacles to repel the homeless. I think this has gone on so quietly and absolutely but nobody but me has noticed. There is no place to discard of litter any more. Havent we as a society just guaranteed a huge litter problem? Caused businesses to allow the refuse generated by tbeir operations to be someone elses-actually all of ours- problem?


Duke Kahanamoku October 10, 2014 at 1:04 pm

Are you leading the charge to get a petitioning campaign underway to overturn this law?

Didn’t think so.


John October 10, 2014 at 2:58 pm

This is a requirenent for discussion or voicing opinions?
Or a red herring meant as an ad hominem to discredit a person posting valid talking points.
You cant refute what I am saying so you attempt to invalidate me.
Better stick to surfing your debate skills are not so good.


Duke Kahanamoku October 10, 2014 at 3:51 pm

You are a day late and a dollar short, John and you still don’t get that. Timing is everything, my man!

Since you seem to have a keen interest in State of California politics, perhaps there is pending legislation that may be of interest to you at the State level:

Maybe you can enlighten us on upcoming votes in the State Assembly and attempt sway OBRAG readers with your self described superior reasoning skills.

Aloha John.


Jon October 10, 2014 at 2:47 pm

Are you guys all still at it on this thread? This debate has been over. Be quiet already! We’re busy.


John October 10, 2014 at 2:54 pm

When Frank tells us hes tired of all the hits on his site that will be something.
Last time I checked that is used to calculate ad revenue.
I cant speak for him but I would imagine as long as it isnt getting ugly or personal he doesnt mind that an article is generating interest and discussion.
After all the loser blogs are the ones where you see 0 comments.


Leave a Comment

Older Article:

Newer Article: