Austin Single-Use Carryout Bag Ordinance, The Good and The Bad

Fellow classmate and author, Wes Davis, of The View Less Taken recently posted “Bag Ban: The Impacts,” a commentary about a public policy of my personal interest. Wes takes an object approach of citing both the advantages and potential disadvantages of the Austin city ordinance that took effect March 1, 2013, which regulates the types of single-use carryout bags that can be provided by Austin retailers and encourages consumers to utilize reusable bags as an alternative to plastic bags.

As one advantage, Wes notes that damage to the planet could be significantly reduced if the ban on plastic bags catches on nationally. With this, West reveals a major environmental issue regarding the use of plastic bags, being that they are not biodegradable, which causes them to accumulate in landfills and in oceans. The plastic used in most plastic grocery bags (polyethylene terephthalate or PE) can take anywhere from 500 to 1000 years to break down! In 2008 Daniel Burd, a Waterloo, Canada high school student, demonstrated that certain types of bacteria in soil can effectively decompose plastic bags in three months. However, until researchers replicate his experiment and waste treatment plants implement new processes to do so, reducing the use of plastic bags and recycling them are two options to alleviate the problem.

For instance, recent laws in California have made biodegradable plastic bags mandatory. One biodegradable plastic made from corn (polylactic acid or PLA), decomposes into water and carbon dioxide in 47 to 90 days! Unfortunately, while plastic bags are fully recyclable, many people do not recycle them, but reuse them as trash bags for household items. For those who are interested in recycling plastic bags, drop-off locations for recycling can easily be found by visiting PlasticBagRecycling.org. As Wes mentions, the ban on plastic bags is trending. Many cities nationwide, including San Francisco, Los Angeles  and Mexico City, have either banned plastic grocery bags entirely, or encourage the use of reusable bags by charging fees for plastic grocery bags.

Wes notes an advantage for Austin businesses being the removal of the cost of production or purchase of plastic bags to provide customers free of charge. I agree that while the cost may not have been a heavy burden on the budgets of Austin businesses, there certainly is an advantage in eliminating plastic bags as an expenditure altogether. Now plastic bags are a source of revenue, as most stores charge anywhere from 20 cents to 2 dollars for a plastic bag. Moreover, businesses are able to sale reusable bags at an even higher rate. At some point those stashes of plastic bags in the cabinets and pantries of Austin consumers will diminish (if it hasn't already happened). With consumers purchasing more Hefty and HEB brand trash bags for items they would have reused a plastic grocery bag for, revenue for the overall sale of bags by Austin businesses will significantly increase.

I agree with Wes’ argument that the recent ban on plastic bags is a huge inconvenience for consumers in Austin. Remembering to bring them into stores presents a challenge (at least for me). Like Wes, I often forget to bring them inside and am faced with either purchasing more bags at the register or leaving my grocery cart unattended to go to my car and get them with my son. (As if grocery shopping with a four year old was not hectic enough!)

I would add that reusable bags are not durable. Their weak stitching takes the brunt of over-stuffing and the weight of more grocery items than would normally be placed in a plastic grocery bag. Consumers are doomed to constantly replace reusable bags, which adds up in cost over time. Another key argument made by H. Sterling Burnett on ncpa.org is that reusable bags present a considerably dangerous health concern, as they are repeatedly used, often with grocery items such as meat, poultry, and fish. If not cleaned regularly, harmful bacteria and mold can form which can contaminate bag users, their food, and others who make contact with the bags, including the grocery store conveyor belt.

Wes sheds light on another key disadvantage with reusable bags. The large number of people coming in and out of stores with bags and even without bags, carrying out items they purchase by hand, makes it difficult for businesses to determine who has actually paid for the items in their bags or in their hands. While this presents a problem for businesses it also presents an issue for customers being targeted by security as potential shoplifters. Better keep those receipts in close proximity folks!

Overall, Wes’ post is very well-organized and well-written. He provides a comprehensive commentary by taking an unbiased approach to review both the advantages and disadvantages of the ordinance. While I can relate to many of the pros as well as the cons, I agree with Wes and feel that the ordinance's positive impacts on Austin businesses and the environment  far outweigh the negative impacts on consumers and businesses.

Texas High School Students Get Test Relief

I am pleased to post about House Bill 5, which was signed into law by Governor Rick Perry on June 10, 2013 during the 83rd Texas Legislative session. Related to public school accountability, including assessment and curriculum requirements, the bill mandates a reduction in standardized testing, such that Texas students entering high school for the 2013-2014 school year will take ten less standardized state exams in order to graduate, in comparison to fifteen under the old law.  

With standardized testing reduced, students and teachers will have more time and thus more opportunity to focus on developing skills for college and the workforce, rather than spending the majority of the school year preparing for state exams. Beginning in the 2014-2015 school year, students will also have more flexibility in choosing curriculum in areas of their personal interest.

Under the law, Texas public schools will do away with offering only one general education plan that requires all students to take the same core courses in order to graduate. Instead a basic curriculum, which includes four English credits and three credits each in science, social studies, and math, has been established for minimum graduation requirements. While minimum course work must be completed for graduation, a broader curriculum will be offered for students who chose a diploma endorsement program of their choice. Students will have the option to choose an advanced graduation plan or diploma endorsement, which requires additional course work focused in one of five areas of study, including science and technology, business and industry, public services, humanities, and multidisciplinary studies.

Now, if this doesn't sound like college preparation, I don’t know what does! Students who choose a diploma endorsement or even consider one will be cognizant of the structure of a college graduation plan and better prepared for the transition into college life. Moreover, this system gives students an opportunity to examine studies of their interest, which they may continue in college. This may reduce the population of students who enter college with undecided majors or change majors frequently, as the program gives students an opportunity to discover early on that they may or may not have a passion for a program of study. 

The bill also establishes attendance standards which require students in grades K through 12 to be in attendance for 90 percent of the days a class is offered (or between 75 and 89.9 percent if the student completes a plan approved by the school principal) in order to receive credit or a final grade in a course. The board of trustees of each school district is to appoint at least one attendance committee to hear petitions for students who have not earned class credit or a final grade as a result of  their attendance.

The bill also sets forth new measures to enhance school accountability by rating school academic and financial performance as well as community and student engagement to provide a more accurate representation of a school’s performance. Schools will receive a letter grade for their performance in each area to provide a comprehensive and practical representation of a school’s overall performance. 

While Texas has come a long way in terms of testing required for high school graduation, the passage of House Bill 5 has a great connection to House Bill 72, passed during a 1984 special session, which enacted many educational reforms including a requirement for students to pass a basic skills test in order to graduate from high school.

The increase in standardized testing in Texas over the past few years can be attributed to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) which became No Child Left Behind (NCLB) when it was reauthorized in 2001, becoming one of the most significant federal reforms since the passage of ESEA. The primary focus of NCLB is to hold schools accountable for the performance of all students by measuring student proficiency on state academic achievement standards through the use of annual assessments, relying on scientific research to determine what methods are most effective, promoting an increase in parental involvement, and measuring overall school performance with annual assessments and progress reports.

Texas was prepared with a plan when the Obama administration recently announced that states may get relief from the provisions of the NCLB in exchange for efforts to close achievement gaps, promote rigorous school accountability, and ensure that all students are on track to graduate well-prepared for college and the workforce.

While Texas has long emphasized the need for school accountability, high-quality academic assessments, and highly-qualified teachers, the new law allows Texas high schools to continue improving student achievement and school accountability. By relying on a combination of state exams, curriculum focused on college and career readiness, emphasis on the importance attendance, and a more comprehensive school performance assessment, Texas high schools should see an increase in their overall performance ratings as well as their graduation rates. 

Texas Justice System Reviewed

Brandi, a fellow classmate and blogger of Brandi's TX state blog, recently posted “Original commentary #1,” a commentary about the role of the justice system in Texas State and local government on July 26, 2013.

Brandi highlights key points about the Texas justice system’s budget, efforts to ensure that criminals are justly punished, and the important role of the Texas attorney general. She also emphasizes the difficulty of a judge’s obligation to adjudicate objectively and without prejudice. While Brandi does not go into great detail about the complex court system, law enforcement, criminal prosecution, trials, appeals, and corrections, she does emphasize the importance of the accountability of the members of the justice system to remain abreast with current laws and regulations and maintain an acute awareness of the effects of their actions, rulings, and the messages they impart. 

Brandi does point out a key problem with the Texas justice system, being that the perceptibly "enormous" budget is not sufficient enough to carry out the large number of vital tasks performed by the its members. While the complexity of the lower judicial courts and complicated system of determining jurisdiction, electing, and appointing judges presents confusion, the budget problem presents an even greater concern. The speedy growth of the population, growing rate of impoverished, poor, and under-educated individuals, as well as the influx of drugs that enter the state exacerbates the issue. This shortage of funds poses questions about how effectively the justice system can perform the multitude of duties it is tasked with.

While I did not acquire any new information, I did enjoy reading the commentary and certainly agree with Brandi’s statement that, “The involvement of Texans in the issues that face our world is an important factor in keeping the system in balance and running the way we want it to.” I feel that all Texans would greatly benefit by being active participants in Texas State and local government by helping to mobilizing those who share their interest in the community, voting, and actively taking positions on public policy.