Where else but California would the liberal legislature take something as used, useful, and reused as a plastic grocery bag, demonize it, and use that as a opportunity to raise taxes?
AB 1998, designed to appease the environmental lobby in Sacramento and also give the Democrats another way to tax Californians, would in addition to being an inconvenience to most, would be a major problem to lower income folks;
There is a bill working its way through the California legislature known as AB 1998 which if passed will ban the use of plastic bags to carry your groceries home from the supermarket. Instead, shoppers must buy reusable bags or buy paper bags for 5 cents from the grocer.
I’m sure the paper bags will require double bagging so we’re now talking 10 cents extra per bag of groceries.
To me this isn’t just another “save the planet do gooder” idea, it’s another attempt by an industry to charge us more for something that should be innate to the service they provide…like the airlines now charging for checked luggage knowing that because you are taking a trip you have to take SOMETHING with you.
What’s next, charging us to use the shopping carts when we shop?
This legislation also doesn’t take into account the poor and those on fixed incomes who cannot afford additional expenses for necessities. Those using public transportation have a difficult time carrying paper bags on buses or trains.
They are also difficult to carry in rain or windy weather. Also plastic bags find multiple uses in our households once we get home.
Well, here on the left coast we’re fairly used to bad legislation becoming law and can sometimes accept stuff like this as inevitable. Maybe not, in this case.
Yesterday AB 1998 came up for a vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee. One might have expected that this bill would pass on a partisan vote, with Democrats (who love to ban things, and play nanny – and who also love to whack people with fees) voting yes, and freedom-loving Republicans voting no – and since there are more Dems than Reps on the committee, AB 1998 should be on its way to the full Senate for a vote, right? Not so! I am very pleased to share that it was clear that Democrats are quite split on this bill, because instead of voting out the bill they instead to the unusual step of voting to refer it to the Senate Rules Committee (an exclusive five member committee that is under the firm control of Senate President Darrell Steinberg). Why did this happen? And will the bill come back this session? We did a little “looking under the hood…” to gain some understanding.
Read it all for the Left v. Left story. It’s short, so don’t bother with the popcorn.