Given the success rate of most bills Coleen shouldn't feel too down about her bid to bring one before the A&PW Committee this fall. Nationwide the expected lifespan of ordinances designed to curb disposable bag use don't far outstrip the period between when you pick up the bag at check out and drop off the bag in the bag bin. Blame for the failure of proposed bills in Seattle and the state of California falls squarely, but not exclusively on the shoulders of the American Chemistry Council. Their crack team of lobbyists shut down both efforts faster than you can say 'paper or plastic' using arguments that could arise around any kitchen table. How can you ban plastic bags when paper bags require four times the energy to create? Shouldn't the ultimate decision of how to carry your groceries rest with the people? Why punish people for shopping? Although each of these reasons have serious merit, should they prevent us, the community, from taking action to protect the natural heritage we hope to bequeath our kids?

Ironically we have to visit the other coast, in fact the nation's capitol for a good working example of an ordinance for reducing disposable bags. Rather than shout louder into the bullhorn community activists in Washington DC attended to each of the above points, responding to the input of citizen's groups and the city council to craft the Anacostia River Cleanup Act .

Point #1: Draft a bill that aims to improve the community

Note the title points to the purpose of the bill, not its effect. This bill aims to generate the funds Washington DC needs to clean and maintain a healthy river. The Anacostia River Cleanup Act will fund education, provide reusable bags to the needy and disadvantaged, and prevent further degradation of the river.

Point #2: Identify the guilty culprit

Yes, reducing the number of disposable bags we use will certainly decrease our contributions to landfills. It also could make bringing home the fish filet rather tricky. We could go back to wrapping the ground chuck in newspaper, or simply recognize we may need plastic bags for some tasks. Rather than penalize the use of all plastic and paper bags, the Anacostia River Clean Up Act clearly targets disposable carryout bags (ie the bags to carry your take out, not garbage bags or that sack of granola from Blind Faith Cafe).

Point #3: Help fund the solution, not more government

Revenue from the surcharge goes to the Anacostia River Cleanup Fund; a dedicated source of revenue generated from a nickel surcharge on the provision of disposable carryout bags. The District of Columbia collects surcharge revenue, but only for deposition to the fund. Now make no bones about it – the City of Evanston could use additional revenue. We seem to like world class police and fire protection, visiting lots of libraries and having healthy trees and nice parks. But in this case the cost should match the solution, not simply cover a budget hole.

Point #4 Cover all the bases.

The Cleanup Act raises awareness of the impact our choices have at the checkout counter. But it also actively involves retailers in the solution by mandating the provision of recyclable and recycled disposable bags. So even if you left your reusable bags at home (and don't feel like buying more) you will know the bags you're carrying won't outlive your grandkids.

In a nutshell the Anacostia River Cleanup Act charges consumers the true price cost of their disposable bags, offsetting the choice by funding conservation activities, and reducing the impact of that choice by making the bags recyclable and recycled. It actively and positively engages the community in improving behaviors and reducing impacts.  The Evanston City Council would do well to heed such a precedent.