Megan’s Law-AB 488
HOW IT WAS BEFORE MEGAN’S LAW
Sarah *(fake name)
Little Sarah, 5-years-old, decided to finally break her silence and when she did, her parents didn’t believe her accusations. Sarah told her parents that her best friends uncle was touching her in places that made her uncomfortable. Sarah then spoke to her teacher, searching for solace; once again her parents excused her accusations and apologized to her teacher for Sarah’s comments.
This story is about Little Sarah who had horrific experiences with a predator, a child molester. At age 5, her and her family moved to Fairfield, that is where her best friend’s uncle who babysat and violated her. He called his game, “playing house”, he would put the other children “to sleep”, make Sarah his “wife”. Sarah said, “ he would gain our trust” and then molest her.
At 8-years-old, Sarah realized the games they played together didn’t feel right. And when she decided to reach out and speak to someone about his games, everyone ignored her and punished her for lying.
Shortly after Sarah started junior high school, one day her dad came into her room and apologized to her for ignoring her accusations. He told her he had been called to testify against Gail* (No last name for confidentiality), the nanny/child molester who had victimized more than 60 young girls. “They couldn’t do anything and he only received 5 years in prison”, said Sarah. “The court couldn’t prove much because they didn’t have any DNA and it was after the fact.”
THE LAW:
In February 2003, Assemblywoman Nicole Parra, D-Fresno, helped pass Assembly Bill 488, a law, which requires sex offenders to register where they reside, the crimes they committed, any identifying scars/tattoos and aliases they’ve used.
Assembly Bill 488 requires the Department of Justice to continually compile specific categorized information regarding any person that has been convicted as a sex offender, with specific crime to be registered with the Department of Justice.
The name for Megan's Law comes from a 7-year-old Megan Kanka, a New Jersey girl who was raped and killed by a known child molester who had moved across the street from the family without their knowledge. This web site was the result of the California Assembly BIll 488.
Any person worldwide has access to the Megan’s Law website, which is published by the Department of Justice. Other resources include, “900”, which lets people call to find out where sex offenders live by requesting information over the phone for a $4 fee per sex offender information you request.
The California Department of Justice said through the Megan’s Law website there is more than 63,000 registered sex offenders’ information available, which include over 33,500 specific addresses.
The Department of Justice was not available for comment, but their website said information regarding approximately 22,000 other sex offenders is not included on the website, but it is known by law enforcement personnel. The website also said, family, friends and or acquaintances of the victims according are the most common offenders.
HOW LAW WORKS NOW:
Sgt. Charlie Spruill, a Solano County police officer for over 15 years, said 12 of his years on the force, partnered with the FBI, were dedicated to working with sex offenders in Vacaville. “I don’t think Megan’s Law has helped. For our team there wasn’t a positive or negative effect,” said Spruill.
Prior to Megan’s Law people knew who the sex offenders were, but the public didn’t have access to more information, including where they live. Spruill said, “We team up with the FBI, state parole, police departments and Solano County.”
According to Spruill, there are many restrictions a sex offenders must follow depending on the state, county and city where they live. By 6 p.m. a sex offender can’t leave his home, the only exception is if there is an emergency. There are at least 150 different conditions a sex offender has depending on the category of the offense(s).
Offenders can’t live within 2,000 feet near a school, daycare or park. Once a sex offender has been convicted, the next step sending them to counseling classes, a department of the Vacaville police works with Liberty Health Care to provide appropriate classes. In Liberty Health Care, they offer services, which include psychiatrist, psychologist, police, attorneys, nurses, doctors and counseling services. They work together with the police department and monitor sex offenders’ lives. It is known to be an expensive program to maintain, but the state of California keeps up with it.
Almost 99 percent of the time when a sex offender goes to court it is most likely they will be deemed a sex offender for life. Spruill said, “as long as Megan’s Law exists and stays in effect, I’ve never seen sex offenders that is not declared sex offender for life.”
Patty Ortega, a Yolo county resident, is one of those who have been indirectly affected by Megan’s Law. Ortega has to see her youngest brother on the list and has to live with that for the rest of her life. Ortega explains that her brother was 19-years-old he was dating a girl that was 17. When she became pregnant, her parents reported Ortega’s brother after the law had been an effect only for six months.
Margarita Ochoa, a Woodland resident, wasn’t aware the law existed. A mother of three, all under age said if she had known about the site, she would have checked it before she purchased her home. “It worries me that my neighbor could be a sex offender, my family or friend. Now that I know about the law I want to check the website out,” said Ochoa.
Because of the Megan’s Law regulations, Realtors are required by law to disclose if any sex offenders reside in the area in which the home is being purchased.
Assemblywoman Parra said that the goal of Megan’s Law was achieved. “The law has given more information to law abiding citizens in deciding where to locate or re-locate.”
The reason was Parra decided to propose this law was that Megan’s Law database provides the public with an offender’s name and aliases, information on physical identifying traits and registered locations.
ADVOCATES AGAISN’T MEGAN’S LAW:
Advocates against Megan’s Law are in the minority. Since sex offenders are seen as predators who pose a threat to the public, it is rare to find people that defend the sex offenders.
Mark McDowell is a previously convicted sex offender who speaks out against Megan’s Law, suggesting it violates the rights of those who have to register as sex offenders. “Megan’s Law is ‘knee-jerk’ politics and should be abolished,” McDowell said. “It does no good and is completely unconstitutional.”
As an advocate, McDowell runs a website called pedophileophobia.com. It mentions his case and examines several pedophilia issues. “Anyone who has served his sentence should be allowed to have those convictions ‘set-aside’ and have his or her life ‘normalized,’” McDowell said.
McDowell has relocated to Asia because he had trouble finding gainful employment in the U.S. after losing his California teaching credentials. He has suffered psychologically from protocol he had to comply with as a registered sex offender. “Before I left the country, I had to go into a police station and register, which I found to be traumatizing,” McDowell said. “I even had to wait in a cell.”
McDowell was convicted on misdemeanor charges but was not required to publish his information on the database. He says that if sexual offenses are misdemeanors in California the offender can petition that all information be removed from the site. Since he left the country he is not listed on the public database.
Assemblywoman Parra does not think that Megan’s Law website is to invasive of the sex offenders lives. Sgt. Spruill read McDowell’s website and said, “I read the information on this site. If the writer believes so much in what he/she is writing and wants to stand up for his or her rights, then why is he or she hiding behind the system. IF he or she is so proud then let he or she stand up and be counted.”
On the contrary, Assemblywoman Parra does not think the Megan’s Law website is too invasive of the sex offenders lives.
McDowell’s life has shown that the implications and impacts of Megan’s Law. In California there are problems with unemployment and eventually forced relocation, in his case to Asia. “I committed no crime. A pat on a knee, the shaking or a hand and engaging in some frivolous sex talk that didn’t even involve the so called victims, hardly constituted a crime. I believe I was falsely convicted and deserved no punishment,” McDowell said.
Luciano Vargas, owner of the Acacia Garden Apartments complex in Yolo County is aware of Megan’s Law and as a family member he thinks Megan’s Law is a great way of keeping families safe. I’m the owner and I feel responsible of everyone who lives there Vargas said, “I will not rent my apartments to criminal, drug addict, or sex offender.”
In the end, Little Sarah, now a grown adult, will definitely take 100 percent advantage of Megan’s Law and the site. If it hade only been around when she was a little girl, she wondered if she would have been traumatized. Sarah has been happily married for over 3 year. Unfortunately, the wounds are still prevalent, she is afraid of having children as a result of what happened to her. “I would die if someone touched my kids, and I would fight like my parents didn’t.”
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
MEDI-CAL BENEFITS ELIMINATION-
The time has come for adults with Medi-Cal to say goodbye to a handful of benefits.
These benefits involve services that used to be available to adults, most specifically dental coverage.
Many Californians with Medi-Cal are already being denied service because doctors can’t afford to treat patients when the patients’ insurance only covers a fraction of the costs.
Elimination of these specific benefits will save $134 million in 2008 and 2009. The federal government considers these benefits which include: acupuncture, audiology, optometry, podiatry, speech therapy and psychology “optional”. The legislature’s fiscal adviser recommended that lawmakers approve this.
Last year the health care budget was only cut only $10 million in Medi-Cal benefits, miniscule compared to the cuts this year.
Medi-Cal is the second-biggest expenditure in California following education. It is funded by the state and federal government and is projected to cost $38 billion next year. $15 billion will come from the state’s general fund.
These benefits include incontinence creams and washes, acupuncture, dental, audiology, optometry, optical, chiropractic, podiatry, psychology and speech therapy.
The Health Access Analysis of the 2008 and 2009 Health Services Budget reveals that adult dental benefits will account for the largest portion of the cuts by accounting for almost $115 billion dollars
Since Medi-Cal serves the poorest Californians, three million low-income adults, some with disabilities, will lose dental coverage.
Maria Oregel a resident of Yolo County will be one of the many residents who will be effected with this budget cut. “That is wrong what their doing, the government should give the opportunity those who are less fortunate and don’t have insurance instead of taking away,” said Oregel.
While the state will about $115 million from the cuts of dental benefits they will also loose an equal amount in matching federal dollars.
The lack of dental treatment will likely result in higher medical and hospital costs since people will have to have dental procedures preformed at the at the emergency rooms in hospitals.
The budget cuts that will effect chiropractic care, acupuncture, audiology, optometry, , podiatry, speech therapy and psychology will save a combined $19 million
Adults on Medi-Cal who are having their benefits eliminated will have a difficult time finding doctors that will take them on as patients. Manuel Ochoa 85 has had Medi-Cal for over 40 years and doesn’t understand how the budget works. “ I don’t care I just need to be treated, I’m old I could die and I would not understand how the system works,” said Ochoa.
Senators have voted to reduce Medi-Cal payments to doctors by 10 percent , cutting about $577 million total from the Medi-Cal program.
Senator Dennis Hollingsworth, the former Vice Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee for over three years, supported the cuts.
“Senator Hollingsworth voted for these cuts because he realizes that the state budget is in a terrible predicament and we needed to find ways to bring the state back to fiscal solvency,” a spokesman for Hollingsworth said.
Governor Schwarzenegger called for the state budget to cut 10 percent across the board because the state is facing a $16 billion deficit.
“Senator Hollingsworth realized we needed to bring the deficit back down consistent to the revenue the state is bringing in,” the spokesman said. “Health issues aren’t something he focuses on.”
Some healthcare advocates say these cuts will make it challenging for caregivers to afford to stay with the program.
“There is no benefit to going without health coverage. Patients will delay care and get sicker,” Health Care Policy Coordinator Hanh Kim Quach said.
Quach works for Health Access California, a statewide non-profit organization founded in 1987, dedicated to achieving quality, affordable health care for all Californians.
Health Access has advocated for healthcare reform to provide immediate healthcare services to California’s most valuable populations.
“We do research, advocacy and lobbying to prevent the cuts. We keep advocates around the state informed about actions so that they may act to prevent the cuts,” Quach said.
Approximately seven million people depend on Medi-Cal for health care purposes and about six million of them will be directly affected by these cuts.
Families will see in increase in co-payment, a family of three, for example, who makes over $26,400 a year would see an increase in co-payments from $5.00 to $7.50. People with Medi-Cal will receive less services for more money.
Bertha Torres, a Woodland resident disagrees to having to pay co-payments. She doesn’t receive any Medi-Cal but her family does. Her niece is single and has two girls. One of the girls just turned 18 years old, she has medical problems that her Medi-Cal coverage can not cover because some benefits like speech therapy for example will be removed. .
“They will not get the care they need and get sicker as a result. That will cost the entire system money as sicker patients are more expensive to treat,” Quach said.
The assembly bill ABX1 was defeated in the Senate Health Committee in January because a “highly respected advisor to the Legislature” worried that the average premium cost would be too much.
The bill’s projected cost would be $250 per member each month but projections can underestimate costs in the long term.
Rejection of the bill came from the fear that the average premium may end up closer to $300 per member each month because of inflation and difficulty projecting rate in the future.
In the potential situation that the premiums became that expensive the purchasing pool would then have a budget deficit more than $4 billion by 2015.
One average Medi-Cal member accounts for $187 per month and the author’s of ABX1 came up with the $250 projection because they added a 30 percent margin.
This bill was one of the efforts of healthcare reform that failed because of the costly expenditures that the current system had with the new cuts.
Sandra Shewry, director of the state Department of Health Care Services told the L.A. Times in March that earlier this year lawmakers rejected Schwarzenegger’s proposal for universal healthcare.
The proposal would have included a raise in rates paid to Medi-Cal doctors and the payments would have been funded by billions of dollars in new fees.
Pharmacist Ira Freeman is not directly affected by the budget cuts because pharmaceuticals aren’t part of the benefits that have been victimized.
He is outraged and is fasting for 15 days in protest, according to an article in Drug Week.
Ted Mazer is an ear, nose and throat physician in San Diego who recently received a check for $168 from the California’s medical insurance program.
The problem is that the check was for a tonsillectomy, a procedure that costs far more than what the check covers and Mazer had to cover the balance with his own money.
He has since joined the trend of many physicians by no longer accepting patients with Medi-Cal.
Throughout California people with Medi-Cal will continue to have problems finding doctors within reasonable locations that will treat them.
These benefits involve services that used to be available to adults, most specifically dental coverage.
Many Californians with Medi-Cal are already being denied service because doctors can’t afford to treat patients when the patients’ insurance only covers a fraction of the costs.
Elimination of these specific benefits will save $134 million in 2008 and 2009. The federal government considers these benefits which include: acupuncture, audiology, optometry, podiatry, speech therapy and psychology “optional”. The legislature’s fiscal adviser recommended that lawmakers approve this.
Last year the health care budget was only cut only $10 million in Medi-Cal benefits, miniscule compared to the cuts this year.
Medi-Cal is the second-biggest expenditure in California following education. It is funded by the state and federal government and is projected to cost $38 billion next year. $15 billion will come from the state’s general fund.
These benefits include incontinence creams and washes, acupuncture, dental, audiology, optometry, optical, chiropractic, podiatry, psychology and speech therapy.
The Health Access Analysis of the 2008 and 2009 Health Services Budget reveals that adult dental benefits will account for the largest portion of the cuts by accounting for almost $115 billion dollars
Since Medi-Cal serves the poorest Californians, three million low-income adults, some with disabilities, will lose dental coverage.
Maria Oregel a resident of Yolo County will be one of the many residents who will be effected with this budget cut. “That is wrong what their doing, the government should give the opportunity those who are less fortunate and don’t have insurance instead of taking away,” said Oregel.
While the state will about $115 million from the cuts of dental benefits they will also loose an equal amount in matching federal dollars.
The lack of dental treatment will likely result in higher medical and hospital costs since people will have to have dental procedures preformed at the at the emergency rooms in hospitals.
The budget cuts that will effect chiropractic care, acupuncture, audiology, optometry, , podiatry, speech therapy and psychology will save a combined $19 million
Adults on Medi-Cal who are having their benefits eliminated will have a difficult time finding doctors that will take them on as patients. Manuel Ochoa 85 has had Medi-Cal for over 40 years and doesn’t understand how the budget works. “ I don’t care I just need to be treated, I’m old I could die and I would not understand how the system works,” said Ochoa.
Senators have voted to reduce Medi-Cal payments to doctors by 10 percent , cutting about $577 million total from the Medi-Cal program.
Senator Dennis Hollingsworth, the former Vice Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee for over three years, supported the cuts.
“Senator Hollingsworth voted for these cuts because he realizes that the state budget is in a terrible predicament and we needed to find ways to bring the state back to fiscal solvency,” a spokesman for Hollingsworth said.
Governor Schwarzenegger called for the state budget to cut 10 percent across the board because the state is facing a $16 billion deficit.
“Senator Hollingsworth realized we needed to bring the deficit back down consistent to the revenue the state is bringing in,” the spokesman said. “Health issues aren’t something he focuses on.”
Some healthcare advocates say these cuts will make it challenging for caregivers to afford to stay with the program.
“There is no benefit to going without health coverage. Patients will delay care and get sicker,” Health Care Policy Coordinator Hanh Kim Quach said.
Quach works for Health Access California, a statewide non-profit organization founded in 1987, dedicated to achieving quality, affordable health care for all Californians.
Health Access has advocated for healthcare reform to provide immediate healthcare services to California’s most valuable populations.
“We do research, advocacy and lobbying to prevent the cuts. We keep advocates around the state informed about actions so that they may act to prevent the cuts,” Quach said.
Approximately seven million people depend on Medi-Cal for health care purposes and about six million of them will be directly affected by these cuts.
Families will see in increase in co-payment, a family of three, for example, who makes over $26,400 a year would see an increase in co-payments from $5.00 to $7.50. People with Medi-Cal will receive less services for more money.
Bertha Torres, a Woodland resident disagrees to having to pay co-payments. She doesn’t receive any Medi-Cal but her family does. Her niece is single and has two girls. One of the girls just turned 18 years old, she has medical problems that her Medi-Cal coverage can not cover because some benefits like speech therapy for example will be removed. .
“They will not get the care they need and get sicker as a result. That will cost the entire system money as sicker patients are more expensive to treat,” Quach said.
The assembly bill ABX1 was defeated in the Senate Health Committee in January because a “highly respected advisor to the Legislature” worried that the average premium cost would be too much.
The bill’s projected cost would be $250 per member each month but projections can underestimate costs in the long term.
Rejection of the bill came from the fear that the average premium may end up closer to $300 per member each month because of inflation and difficulty projecting rate in the future.
In the potential situation that the premiums became that expensive the purchasing pool would then have a budget deficit more than $4 billion by 2015.
One average Medi-Cal member accounts for $187 per month and the author’s of ABX1 came up with the $250 projection because they added a 30 percent margin.
This bill was one of the efforts of healthcare reform that failed because of the costly expenditures that the current system had with the new cuts.
Sandra Shewry, director of the state Department of Health Care Services told the L.A. Times in March that earlier this year lawmakers rejected Schwarzenegger’s proposal for universal healthcare.
The proposal would have included a raise in rates paid to Medi-Cal doctors and the payments would have been funded by billions of dollars in new fees.
Pharmacist Ira Freeman is not directly affected by the budget cuts because pharmaceuticals aren’t part of the benefits that have been victimized.
He is outraged and is fasting for 15 days in protest, according to an article in Drug Week.
Ted Mazer is an ear, nose and throat physician in San Diego who recently received a check for $168 from the California’s medical insurance program.
The problem is that the check was for a tonsillectomy, a procedure that costs far more than what the check covers and Mazer had to cover the balance with his own money.
He has since joined the trend of many physicians by no longer accepting patients with Medi-Cal.
Throughout California people with Medi-Cal will continue to have problems finding doctors within reasonable locations that will treat them.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Bill Project
Recycling Plastic Bags
Early one morning, Assemblyman Levine of Los Angeles was going for a run and came across dozens of plastic bags stuck in trees and littered on the ground fouling the environment. It was then when Assemblyman Levine got the idea for and introduced Assembly Bill 2058.
AB 2058 would prohibit a store from providing plastic grocery bags to customers after July 1, 2012, unless the stores can prove that there will be a 70 percent decrease in the amount of plastic bags being used.
Stores must also prove that there will be a 35 percent decrease in the number of plastic grocery bags during a 12-month period by Dec. 31, 2010. If a decrease in use is not seen, the bill would mandate stores to sell plastic bags to customers for 15 cents per bag as an alternative.
AB 2058 builds upon the provisions of AB 2449 that passed 2006 and became law in July 2007. AB 2449 introduced by Assemblyman Levine says that stores that have over 10,000 square feet of retail space need to provide recycling bins where customers can return their plastic bags to be recycled.
The Californians Against Waste Organization describes the terms of AB 2449, that requires stores to provide the recycling of plastic bags and also demands to make reusable bags available to consumers for purchase.
Brianna Southern who worked for Trader Joe’s in San Francisco, said, “When I worked at Trader Joe’s in 2007 it was a general consensus among employees that using plastic bags was a hassle because they were harder to pack and bad for the environment,”
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors started the trend to recycle plastic bags. In a San Francisco Chronicle article, by Charlie Goodyear, Ross Mirkarimi said, “ I am astounded and surprised by the worldwide attention… hopefully, other cities and other states will follow suit.”
San Francisco started the beginning of what AB 2058 has become. If this bill passes it will be a groundbreaking measure to help our environment statewide.
What is the Purpose of this Bill?
Assemblyman Levine talked about the purpose of the bill and said, “ this bill builds upon the success of Assembly Bill 2449, signed into law in 2006, which requires 7,000 retail outlets throughout California to establish a recycling program for plastic bags. Since its implementations AB 2449 has already resulted in a substantial increase in plastic recycling. Based on that success, it’s time to take the next step.”
In response, Guido Bucheli, a Sacramento resident said, “I think is a great idea that they charge you for plastic bags, it will enforce change”. Bucheli is the owner of three canvas bags and takes them with him when he goes grocery shopping. Bucheli said not only does it help the environment, but in the long run it saves money.
Bucheli thinks it would take time for people to adjust to the change. “You change your behavior for the environment. The strategy is to change consumers behavior,” said Bucheli.
Why is the Bill Important?
Plastic bags have helped many over the years, they make carrying groceries easier, but they bring many more complicated issues including environmental consequences.
An article in the San Francisco Chronicle said an estimated 180 million plastic bags are distributed to shoppers each year, just in San Francisco. “Made of filmy plastic, they are hard to recycle and easily blow into trees and waterways, where they are also blamed for killing marine life.” Another big issue is that they take up much needed landfill space and take away from disposing of other refuse.
One of the many reasons Assemblyman Levine introduced this bill is for environmental change. According to a recent study through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, they estimate, marine debris has negatively impacted at least 267 species around the world.
In April 2002, a dead juvenile Minke whale was found beached on the shores of France; researchers concluded the cause of death was attributed with approximately 2 pounds of plastic packing and supermarket bags found in its stomach.
Assemblyman Levine said, “California can act to mitigate the impact the state has on the environment.”
There are others who disagree with AB 2058 and it’s supporters. Grocery Sales Manager, Darrell Costello said, “I would have to say the bill would do no good for the environment.”
She thinks the way the bill is written it is too vague and it has many loop holes as well as weaknesses.
As the bill is proposed currently, it would cut back on the amount of plastic bag usage and it is “trading one problem for another,” said Costello.
The intent of the bill is to help the environment and to reduce the amount of plastic bag waste and pollution, while hopefully setting an example for other states.
Stores That Have to Comply with AB 2058:
They are “the same stores defined in AB 2449” Assemblyman Levine said. “Under AB 2449 the stores that have to provide recycling were defined in the following ways”
They have to meet the definition of a “supermarket”, and have over 10,000 square feet of retail space that generates sales or use tax pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniforms Local Sales and Use Tax Law.
The idea behind this bill is to target the places where most consumers receive their plastic bags, such as Vons, Ralph’s, Safeway, Walgreen’s, Rite-Aide and big box retailers such as Target and Wal-Mart. Assemblyman Levine said the overall idea is to include stores where people do their everyday shopping.
Opposition of AB 2058:
Kevin Frazier a 21-year-old, Woodland resident disagrees with AB 2058. “I believe it would cost more money to recycle plastic bags.” He believes that AB 2058 is only another excuse for political supporters to make money off of the general public.
Assemblyman Levine does not know just how many organizations that are against the bill. “It is too early to tell and my office has not received any letters in opposition,” said Assemblyman Levine.
Costello said, it is not necessarily true that we would pay 15 cents per bag. “Stores may charge 15 cents per bag, but it does not say they have to or will be made to.”
There are two successful models in the United States of stores charging for bags. The store Save-a-Lot does not provide free bags. Customers bring their own or they can buy bags at this store; Aldi’s supermarkets does the same. “This is an outstanding model because it puts the environmental responsibility where it belongs with each of us. Each person needs to take responsibility for their impact or resources,” said Costello.
Lourdes Ochoa a Woodland resident would be affected in a different way if the bill passed. For the last three years she has been taking care of her son’s dog Buzz. When she goes to the grocery store she uses those bags to clean up after the dog, which has worked great for her. “ He leaves a big surprise if you know what I mean, so I pick it up with the plastic bags that I get from the store.” “I can’t imagine paying for something I’ve been getting for free for all these years.”
Supporters of AB 2058:
In a Sacramento Bee article, reported by Rachel Leibrock said, “Sacramento City Councilwoman Bonnie Pannell recommended that Sacramento follow San Francisco’s lead. We’ve been talking a lot about the city going green and we need to take a look at issue,” Pannell said.
San Francisco has banned disposable plastic bags in grocery stores, and have replaced them with biodegradable, compostable bags.
Environmental groups support AB 2058 as well as some Waste Management employee who did not want to be named said they agree with the bill. Waste Management has already started many versions and various programs for plastic recycling.
How Much would the Bill Cost?
“The fiscal cost has not been determined at the time,” said Assemblyman Levine.
Will Californians Pay More for Some Products or Services?
It will only change if the measure passes and areas choose to charge a fee for plastic bags. If customers choose to continue using plastic bags they they’ll have to pay the fee. Stores will continue to push for customers to use other bags such as canvas or other types of environmentally friendly, reusable bags.
This bill is not hurting businesses, it is about changing consumer behavior.
“This legislation will shift responsibility and the expense of cleanup by creating a state program under which businesses will be responsible for the proliferation of litter from plastic bags,”
said Assemblyman Levine.
Early one morning, Assemblyman Levine of Los Angeles was going for a run and came across dozens of plastic bags stuck in trees and littered on the ground fouling the environment. It was then when Assemblyman Levine got the idea for and introduced Assembly Bill 2058.
AB 2058 would prohibit a store from providing plastic grocery bags to customers after July 1, 2012, unless the stores can prove that there will be a 70 percent decrease in the amount of plastic bags being used.
Stores must also prove that there will be a 35 percent decrease in the number of plastic grocery bags during a 12-month period by Dec. 31, 2010. If a decrease in use is not seen, the bill would mandate stores to sell plastic bags to customers for 15 cents per bag as an alternative.
AB 2058 builds upon the provisions of AB 2449 that passed 2006 and became law in July 2007. AB 2449 introduced by Assemblyman Levine says that stores that have over 10,000 square feet of retail space need to provide recycling bins where customers can return their plastic bags to be recycled.
The Californians Against Waste Organization describes the terms of AB 2449, that requires stores to provide the recycling of plastic bags and also demands to make reusable bags available to consumers for purchase.
Brianna Southern who worked for Trader Joe’s in San Francisco, said, “When I worked at Trader Joe’s in 2007 it was a general consensus among employees that using plastic bags was a hassle because they were harder to pack and bad for the environment,”
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors started the trend to recycle plastic bags. In a San Francisco Chronicle article, by Charlie Goodyear, Ross Mirkarimi said, “ I am astounded and surprised by the worldwide attention… hopefully, other cities and other states will follow suit.”
San Francisco started the beginning of what AB 2058 has become. If this bill passes it will be a groundbreaking measure to help our environment statewide.
What is the Purpose of this Bill?
Assemblyman Levine talked about the purpose of the bill and said, “ this bill builds upon the success of Assembly Bill 2449, signed into law in 2006, which requires 7,000 retail outlets throughout California to establish a recycling program for plastic bags. Since its implementations AB 2449 has already resulted in a substantial increase in plastic recycling. Based on that success, it’s time to take the next step.”
In response, Guido Bucheli, a Sacramento resident said, “I think is a great idea that they charge you for plastic bags, it will enforce change”. Bucheli is the owner of three canvas bags and takes them with him when he goes grocery shopping. Bucheli said not only does it help the environment, but in the long run it saves money.
Bucheli thinks it would take time for people to adjust to the change. “You change your behavior for the environment. The strategy is to change consumers behavior,” said Bucheli.
Why is the Bill Important?
Plastic bags have helped many over the years, they make carrying groceries easier, but they bring many more complicated issues including environmental consequences.
An article in the San Francisco Chronicle said an estimated 180 million plastic bags are distributed to shoppers each year, just in San Francisco. “Made of filmy plastic, they are hard to recycle and easily blow into trees and waterways, where they are also blamed for killing marine life.” Another big issue is that they take up much needed landfill space and take away from disposing of other refuse.
One of the many reasons Assemblyman Levine introduced this bill is for environmental change. According to a recent study through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, they estimate, marine debris has negatively impacted at least 267 species around the world.
In April 2002, a dead juvenile Minke whale was found beached on the shores of France; researchers concluded the cause of death was attributed with approximately 2 pounds of plastic packing and supermarket bags found in its stomach.
Assemblyman Levine said, “California can act to mitigate the impact the state has on the environment.”
There are others who disagree with AB 2058 and it’s supporters. Grocery Sales Manager, Darrell Costello said, “I would have to say the bill would do no good for the environment.”
She thinks the way the bill is written it is too vague and it has many loop holes as well as weaknesses.
As the bill is proposed currently, it would cut back on the amount of plastic bag usage and it is “trading one problem for another,” said Costello.
The intent of the bill is to help the environment and to reduce the amount of plastic bag waste and pollution, while hopefully setting an example for other states.
Stores That Have to Comply with AB 2058:
They are “the same stores defined in AB 2449” Assemblyman Levine said. “Under AB 2449 the stores that have to provide recycling were defined in the following ways”
They have to meet the definition of a “supermarket”, and have over 10,000 square feet of retail space that generates sales or use tax pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniforms Local Sales and Use Tax Law.
The idea behind this bill is to target the places where most consumers receive their plastic bags, such as Vons, Ralph’s, Safeway, Walgreen’s, Rite-Aide and big box retailers such as Target and Wal-Mart. Assemblyman Levine said the overall idea is to include stores where people do their everyday shopping.
Opposition of AB 2058:
Kevin Frazier a 21-year-old, Woodland resident disagrees with AB 2058. “I believe it would cost more money to recycle plastic bags.” He believes that AB 2058 is only another excuse for political supporters to make money off of the general public.
Assemblyman Levine does not know just how many organizations that are against the bill. “It is too early to tell and my office has not received any letters in opposition,” said Assemblyman Levine.
Costello said, it is not necessarily true that we would pay 15 cents per bag. “Stores may charge 15 cents per bag, but it does not say they have to or will be made to.”
There are two successful models in the United States of stores charging for bags. The store Save-a-Lot does not provide free bags. Customers bring their own or they can buy bags at this store; Aldi’s supermarkets does the same. “This is an outstanding model because it puts the environmental responsibility where it belongs with each of us. Each person needs to take responsibility for their impact or resources,” said Costello.
Lourdes Ochoa a Woodland resident would be affected in a different way if the bill passed. For the last three years she has been taking care of her son’s dog Buzz. When she goes to the grocery store she uses those bags to clean up after the dog, which has worked great for her. “ He leaves a big surprise if you know what I mean, so I pick it up with the plastic bags that I get from the store.” “I can’t imagine paying for something I’ve been getting for free for all these years.”
Supporters of AB 2058:
In a Sacramento Bee article, reported by Rachel Leibrock said, “Sacramento City Councilwoman Bonnie Pannell recommended that Sacramento follow San Francisco’s lead. We’ve been talking a lot about the city going green and we need to take a look at issue,” Pannell said.
San Francisco has banned disposable plastic bags in grocery stores, and have replaced them with biodegradable, compostable bags.
Environmental groups support AB 2058 as well as some Waste Management employee who did not want to be named said they agree with the bill. Waste Management has already started many versions and various programs for plastic recycling.
How Much would the Bill Cost?
“The fiscal cost has not been determined at the time,” said Assemblyman Levine.
Will Californians Pay More for Some Products or Services?
It will only change if the measure passes and areas choose to charge a fee for plastic bags. If customers choose to continue using plastic bags they they’ll have to pay the fee. Stores will continue to push for customers to use other bags such as canvas or other types of environmentally friendly, reusable bags.
This bill is not hurting businesses, it is about changing consumer behavior.
“This legislation will shift responsibility and the expense of cleanup by creating a state program under which businesses will be responsible for the proliferation of litter from plastic bags,”
said Assemblyman Levine.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Quick Facts about Polyethylene
Plastic bags are made of polyethylene Polyethylene is a petroleum product Production contributes to air pollution and energy consumption
Four to five trillion plastic bags are manufactured each year
Americans use over 380 billion polyethylene bags per year
Americans throw away approximately 100 billion polyethylene bags per year Of those 100 trillion plastic bags, 1% are recycled It takes 1000 years for polyethylene bags to break down
As polyethylene breaks down, toxic substances leach into the soil and enter the food chain
Approximately 1 billion seabirds and mammals die per year by ingesting plastic bags Plastic bags are often mistaken as food by marine mammals.
100,000 marine mammals die yearly by eating plastic bags.
These animals suffer a painful death, the plastic wraps around their intestines or they choke to death
Plastic bags choke landfills
From an article by Julie Brutish (http://environmental-activism.suite101.com/article.cfm/say_no_to_plastic_bags)
Photo right from (Sacking the Environment
The Plague of Plastic Bags)
Photo left from www.cdnn.info.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
