On his official website, San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi starts his list of accomplishments with this item: "Plastic Bag Ban: First-in-the-Nation ban on plastic bags in chain grocery stores and drug stores, which sparked similar legislation around the world from Oakland to Canada to Paris to Beijing." In his final month as supervisor before he becomes sheriff, Mirkarimi wants to expand the ban so that it applies to all stores and requires retailers to charge customers for bags at the checkout counter.
"First in the nation" is rarely a good thing for a law. First, it means the measure is liberal. (Conservatives don't brag that their proposed laws are an experiment.) Second, its target is virgin territory probably because there's been no need for a law. Third, the measure may cost someone else his job and surely will be paid out of your pocket.
Exhibit A: San Francisco's groundbreaking Happy Meal law. McDonald's got around the ordinance that banned free toys with meals that don't meet City Hall's nutritional standards by announcing it will charge customers an extra 10 cents if they want a toy with the food.
Exhibit B: The Mirkarimi plan. Supervisors will vote on Plastic Bag 2.0 this month. It would come with a mandatory charge of at least 10 cents per bag starting July 1, possibly rising to 25 cents in 2014. Retailers would get to keep your dimes.
Mirkarimi told me that San Francisco no longer is in the lead when it comes to bag laws. Other governments — Ireland, Beijing, Marin County — that followed Ess Eff's lead are "now blowing by us. Their laws are much more vigorous."
Single-use bags don't just end up in landfills and wetlands; they litter streets and become a "nuisance" and "blight." Science is on his side, Mirkarimi told me; it takes 500 years for plastic bags to disintegrate. (How does anyone know it takes 500 years for a bag to disintegrate?)
Mayor Ed Lee told KCBS' Barbara Taylor that he supports the measure because it probably would "modify behavior." Spokeswoman Christine Falvey walked that position back with an email that said Lee supports "the goal of the legislation and incentivizing consumers to bring their own bags." He will weigh in later.
Mirkarimi argued, "You've got to deal with the hidden costs of pollution that were never factored in (to) the retail point of purchase."
This is how City Hall sees the bag bill playing out: Thanks to enlightened San Francisco politicians, shoppers begin to take reusable bags wherever they go.
Bad consumers pay for their own bags. Good consumers no longer have to subsidize bad consumers.
Even the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce is on board. "You're outlawing the plastic bags but also encouraging reusable," said Vice President Jim Lazarus.
"The chamber reflects the community we live in," Lazarus added. I ask how big department stores, which send off their merchandise in brightly colored bags, feel about the bill. "A number of retailers must prefer not to have this regulation," he answered, "but are resigned to the changing demands of communities of how bags are used."
That's the story of San Francisco. The left squawks when, say, the mayor suggests that Occupy SF activists decamp from their illegal digs in Justin Herman Plaza. The mayor backed off for weeks. But when City Hall tells law-abiding businesses and customers to change their behavior, it gets results.
But not always the desired result. A Safeway spokeswoman explained that Mirkarimi's 2007 plastic bag ban prompted customers not to bring their own reusable bags, but to ask for free paper bags.
Given a choice, San Franciscans chose free bags. Bingo, a new law.
Of course Safeway supports the new Mirkarimi measure. It makes Safeway charge for bags it has been giving away.
The lonely job of opposing the measure falls to Stephen Joseph, who represents plastic bag manufacturers. Because most reusable bags are made overseas whereas most plastic bags are made in America, he claims, the new measure essentially would kill American jobs and replace them with Chinese jobs.
Joseph doesn't believe consumers will use reusable bags as often as expected. They get dirty, so you don't want to put food in them.
Also, San Francisco is a tourist mecca. Where's the hospitality in charging visitors to buy a bag to take their purchases home?
My objection: City documents report that single-use plastic bags represent 0.13 percent of California's total waste stream. If the supervisors want to address a "nuisance," as Mirkarimi calls plastic bags, they should work with the mayor to go after bigger nuisances that dramatically alter the quality of life in San Francisco. Read: aggressive panhandlers, hostile street people who use the city as a public toilet and substance abusers who drive up crime rates. But that would require city pols to moderate their politics.
So they go after people who have the cheek to buy things in San Francisco stores and expect a free new bag. They're the only group in San Francisco that won't protest.
Email Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM

|
 |
Comments
|
8 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Yep, another phony solution, in the form of a feel good, do nothing law. Now, if someone would please explain how we are going to clean up the gyre, and place the limits on human population on this planet that must be there if we ever are to have a real solution...
Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Sun Dec 4, 2011 10:18 AM
|
|
|
|
Pizza boxes, soup cans, milk bottles, and week-old meatloaf generally do not end up blowing down the road. Plastic bags often do. The point of this legislation is not to make a big dent in the total volume of garbage produced, as you implied, but primarily to remove a particularly ubiquitous item of non-biodegradable litter. Old pizza boxes do not kill sea turtles but floating bags do because they resemble the turtle's food. This legislation is not a cure-all, but it is a start.
.
San Luis Obispo, CA was the first city in the world to ban smoking in all indoor public places, including bars and restaurants. I think that the history of this issue is a strong counter example to your comments about "First in the Nation" laws. Would you really want to go back to the days of breathing carcinogens with your restaurant meal?
.
Joseph's view that consumers will not place food in soiled bags is a weak, silly argument. My family has used reusable bags for years. If they get dirty, we just throw them in with the laundry. Does Joseph wear only disposable clothes?
Comment: #2
Posted by: Mark
Sun Dec 4, 2011 12:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Masako
So we should let these phonies who promote feel good, do nothing laws decide who lives, dies, is allowed to be born and who is not allowed to be born. In this way the gyre would be cleaned up. I think those who promote population control should be the first volunteers.. This fake stance of concern for the earth is dangerous. I think Hitler and Stalin were intent upon controlling the population. Have you joined their fan club for the sake of the gyre? Madness way beyond the silly antics described in this article.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Tom
Sun Dec 4, 2011 12:57 PM
|
|
|
|
Tom:
Wake up, my friend. I don't like the San Francisco law. It is a crock. I thought that was pretty clear. We have that much in common.
Regarding population control, nobody that I know of is saying someone should "decide who lives, who dies, is allowed to be born and who is not allowed to be born." Least of all me.
Think back to third grade about the classroom hamster cage. There is only so much room in there for them. Things get pretty ugly if they keep on breeding and have nowhere else to go.
The planet is actually a fixed amount of real estate, just like that cage, but on a grander scale. There is only so much room, and despite the grander scale, we are at the limit.
Think about how the fish in the ocean are going away, hazardous waste is seeping into our ground water, and the oceans are rising. (I leave it to you to guess what's causing that.)
Things can be done to squeeze more out of this wonderful piece of real estate, like solar, green energy, and all of that other good stuff the lefties love so much. But there is a limit, and we're there.
All of those feel good solutions amount to adding more lanes to the highway. You know, the ones that soon fill up, and then we're right back where we started trying to figure out how to manage the gridlock, but with many more cars there to manage than we started with.
If our wise leaders, and voters like you and I who support them, don't start thinking about how to keep the human population from continuing its steady explosion, soon it will be a march toward extinction.
I'm not saying I know how to stop it, and apparently nobody else knows, either, but if we don't we are on the way to taking our place among the dinosaurs.
Like they say in those 12-step programs, the first thing you have to do to solve a problem is admit that you have it. Then at least you have a chance at doing something about it. Until then, it just gets worse and worse.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Masako
Mon Dec 5, 2011 9:58 PM
|
|
|
|
Masako
We always have as much in common as in opposition. I liked your note. I would agree that the first thing we have to do is admit there is a problem, I think we don't see the same problem. I do not in any way want to leave future generations with a political climate that disables their ability to solve the problems they will face. We, if we will admit the truth, know absolutely nothing about their world. Eons ago a tribe watched a volcano erupting and one of them mentioned it was the end of the world. I believe that in 50 years we will not be petroleum based in our energy consumption. A free market solution will arise as surely as kerosene replaced whale oil. Huge and powerful beaurocracies will always stymie the efforts of truly creative people. Already these beaurocracies have managed to create generational welfare families. Beaurocracies depend upon a weak and ineffectual client base, they have no reason to allow their clients to truly make the best of themselves. I always get agitated when somebody mentions population control because I do not believe the speaker has at all imagined the true ramifications of such power invested in a beaurocracy. It creates the very dystopian future leftists claim to fear but constantly push us toward.
So you either think the earth is here for people or the people are here for earth. If you trust future generations they will see to the gyre, just as we saw to the Cuyahoga River. Leave them the political climate that will allow them to solve problems. Kiss your babies, do a great job in everything you are charged with, and then sleep well because the future is not really something that belongs to you and I. Mommy and Daddy had to let you go, and it may be time for our generation to let it go if the only solution we can come up with abridges the rights of free people Freedom, that is still the very best gift we can offer future generations. Any type of control certainly means less freedom, so you see what I am thinking.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Tom
Tue Dec 6, 2011 9:03 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Tom. Government control is the last resort. It's the only choice when nothing else does the job. That's why China actually does regulate its population now. They had to choose between that and mass chaos. At least that's the way I see it.
I remember the first time I flew back to the United States from Asia, thinking how spacious and green the California landscape is compared to the sardine can east, and getting a sick feeling that we are going to go right down the same path to wall to wall people, and yep, the lack of freedom and individuality that comes with such togetherness.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Masako
Tue Dec 6, 2011 9:55 PM
|
|
|
|
Masako
Good conversation. China has been since the 1970's. Millions of mostly female babies have been aborted. There is also an underground of unofficial children being hidden. How humanitarian. Congress has messed everything up, the Senate is worse, the POYTUS is clueless, and corporations have had to be bailed out. Do you need further proof that the knuckleheads at the top don't know what they are doing? Please do not give them any more power, they are inbept with what they have on their small plates. I lived out West, there is plenty of room and plenty of time. Don't push panic buttons we can't unpush later, and don't give more power to the fools at the top.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Tom
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:51 AM
|
|
|
|
Would love to continue the conversation. onbeyondzen@yahoo.com. I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it. But mostly I agree anyway. Cheers. Masako
Comment: #8
Posted by: Masako
Wed Dec 7, 2011 9:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|