Ahhhnuld and CA lawmakers have had their hands in the recycling cookie jar

[marmar]

from the Los Angeles Times:



California recycling measure may mean higher deposits and better returns
A bill awaiting the governor's signature would impose or increase deposits on billions of containers. Rising redemptions and raiding to balance the budget have left the state fund facing bankruptcy.

By Shane Goldmacher
September 28, 2009


Reporting from Sacramento - Californians could soon be paying new deposits on half-gallon juice jugs, small juice boxes and soy drink containers -- and handing over twice as much as they already pay on some soda and water bottles -- because lawmakers have been raiding the state's recycling fund to help balance the budget.

Officeholders have yet to repay $451 million they've taken from the recycling fund since 2002 to cover the state's bills, siphoning away $100 million this year alone. Recycling and deposit redemptions, meanwhile, have risen amid the recession and the fund is now facing bankruptcy.

The Legislature recently passed a vast expansion of California's recycling program. The proposal would replenish the fund by imposing new 5-cent deposits or doubling existing ones on billions of containers. Buyers could get the deposits back, as usual, by turning in the empty containers.

If Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signs the measure into law, consumers will pay an estimated $295 million more per year on beverage containers, according to the state Department of Conservation. The governor has not taken a public position on the measure, which would create no new environmental programs.

Opponents call the Legislature's proposal a hidden tax, the product of years of botched fiscal management. ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bottle-deposits28-2009sep28,0,5778855.story

[DJ13]

1. Its already .60c per 12pk

How about increasing income taxes on the wealthy instead of on consumption which hurts the poor the most?

[CountAllVotes]

2. be glad when the gropenfuhrer is out of office!!!!

ENOUGH!!!!!



:kick:

[Trillo]

3. I don't believe we get the full deposit back

though they change terms from time to time.

"Buyers could get the deposits back, as usual, by turning in the empty containers."

The levy is per bottle or container, the refunds, at least when I have gotten them, are by weight. Once, years ago, I double checked the refund value against the deposit paid, and it was around half of what I paid.

So, one thing that seems to happen is a transfer from everyone who buys those products that come in those containers, to the recycling company of some percentage. Is this kind of transfer a good idea when it's taken from poorer folks, to give to business folks?

Additionally, some folks simply place the deposit-charged containers in a recycling bin without demanding any fee back. This is a bigger subsidy to the recyclers.

I think it's great that we have recycling, but has its reality just become another transfer-from-the-least or regressive-taxation scheme?