PROP
65

CARRYOUT BAGS. CHARGES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 65

STOP THE SWEETHEART BAG TAX DEAL. HELP THE ENVIRONMENT

Proposition 65 is needed to STOP grocery stores from keeping all the money collected from carryout bag taxes as profit instead of helping the environment.

Grocery stores stand to gain up to $300 million in added profits each and every year unless you vote yes on Prop. 65.

That money should be dedicated to the environment, not more profits for corporate grocery chains.

Proposition 65 will STOP THE SWEETHEART DEAL WITH GROCERY STORES and dedicate bag fees to worthy environmental causes.

A SWEETHEART DEAL IN SACRAMENTO

Who in their right mind would let grocery stores keep $300 million in bag fees paid by hardworking California shoppers just trying to make ends meet?

The State Legislature!

In a sweetheart deal put together by special interest lobbyists, the Legislature voted to let grocery stores keep bag fees as extra profit.

The grocery stores will get $300 million richer while shoppers get $300 million poorer.

SHAME ON THE LOBBYISTS AND LEGISLATORS

The big grocery store chains and retailers gave big campaign contributions to legislators over the past seven years.

And legislators rewarded them with $300 million in new profits—all on the backs of shoppers.

Stop the sweetheart special interest deal . . . VOTE YES ON PROP. 65.

A BETTER WAY TO HELP THE ENVIRONMENT

You can do what the legislators should have done—dedicate these bag fees to real projects that protect the environment.

Proposition 65 dedicates the bag fees to environmental projects like drought relief, beach clean-up and litter removal.

It puts the California Wildlife Conservation Board in control of these funds, not grocery store executives, so Californians will benefit.

PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. STOP THE SWEETHEART DEAL AND HIDDEN BAG TAX.

VOTE YES ON PROP. 65.

THOMAS HUDSON, Executive Director

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 65

The San Jose Mercury News calls Proposition 65 a "tricky strategy" and adds "Prop. 65 deserves consideration as one of the most disingenuous ballot measures in state history."

The out-of-state plastic manufacturers behind Prop. 65 don't care about protecting California's environment. They want to confuse you. Don't be fooled.

Bags aren't free; they cost your local grocer up to 15 cents each. The out-of-state plastic bag industry figures are bogus. The state's nonpartisan analysis projects that total revenue from Prop. 65 is in the range of "zero" to, at best, $80 million.

Remember: there will be "zero" funding for the environment from Prop. 65 unless voters approve Prop. 67 to phase out plastic bags.

But the plastic manufacturers behind Prop. 65 are spending millions to persuade voters to oppose Prop. 67. Confused? That's the plastic industry's plan!

If you care about protecting wildlife and standing up to the out-of-state plastic bag industry, Vote Yes on Prop. 67, not this measure.

If you care about reducing plastic pollution, litter and waste, Vote Yes on Prop. 67, not this measure.

If you care about reducing taxpayer costs for cleaning up plastic litter, Vote Yes on Prop. 67, not this measure.

MARK MURRAY, Executive Director

Californians Against Waste

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 65

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PROP. 65 IS TO CONFUSE VOTERS

Prop. 65 promises a lot but—in reality—will deliver little for the environment. It was placed on the ballot by four out-of-state plastic bag companies who keep interfering with California's efforts to reduce plastic pollution.

65 is without real significance, designed to distract from the issue at hand: phasing out plastic shopping bags. All 65 would do is direct funding from the sale of paper bags (an option under the plastic bag ban) to a new state fund. The money for this fund is a drop in the bucket and will shrink over time as people adjust to bringing reusable bags.

TO ACTUALLY PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT, VOTE YES ON 67

The priority for California's environment this election is to reduce harmful plastic pollution by voting Yes on Prop. 67. This will continue efforts to keep wasteful plastic shopping bags out of our parks, trees, neighborhoods and treasured open spaces.

Prop. 65 is not worth your vote. Make your voice heard on the more important issues and uphold California's vital plastic bag ban further down the ballot.

MARK MURRAY, Executive Director

Californians Against Waste

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 65

The opponents of Prop. 65 want to dismiss it as "of no real significance".

YOU DECIDE: IS A $300 MILLION MONEY GRAB BY GROCERY STORES NOT SIGNIFICANT?

Without Prop. 65, not one penny of the $300 million customers will be required to pay if California's ban on plastic bags goes into effect will help the environment.

All $300 million will go to grocery store profits. THAT'S $300 MILLION EVERY YEAR!

VOTE YES ON 65—STOP THE SWEETHEART GIVEAWAY TO GROCERS.

In a sweetheart deal put together by special interest lobbyists, the Legislature voted to BAN plastic bags and REQUIRE grocery stores keep bag fees as profit.

Their "plastic bag ban" REQUIRES grocery stores to charge every consumer given a bag at check-out no less than 10 cents per bag.

They could have banned plastic bags without a fee or dedicated fees to environmental projects.

They didn't.

Instead, they made grocery stores $300 million richer and shoppers $300 million poorer every year.

A BETTER WAY TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT.

You can do what the Legislature should have done—dedicate bag fees to projects that protect the environment.

Prop. 65 dedicates bag fees to environmental projects like drought relief, beach clean-up and litter removal.

It puts the California Wildlife Conservation Board in control of these funds, not grocery store executives.

PROP. 65 WILL DEDICATE BAG FEES TO THE ENVIRONMENT.

It's simple and significant.

Join us—vote YES.

THOMAS HUDSON, Executive Director

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.

Back to top Back to the Top