NO on Prop 65: Sowing Confusion About the Plastic Bag Ban.

Note: Propositions 65 and 67 both deal with the statewide plastic bag ban established by a law passed in 2014, and much of the information about them is related and often presented together. See more about Proposition 67 at Prop 67 – Protect California’s Plastic Bag Ban.

For background information on this measure, refer to the Legislative Analyst’s Office analysis included in the Official Voter Information Guide.

League Analysis:

PROPOSITION 65 is an initiative measure that was put on the ballot by the four major manufacturers of plastic bags – all from out of state. It is deceptive. It tries to appear environmentally friendly while in fact serving to distract voters from Proposition 67.

Proposition 65 would change where the revenue from the sale of biodegradable carry-out bags goes. It would no longer be retained by retailers, as provided by SB 270, but rather would go to a new state fund to be administered by the state Wildlife Conservation Board. The fund would be used to support (1) grants for programs and projects related to drought mitigation; (2) recycling; (3) clean drinking water supplies; (4) state, regional, and local parks; (5) beach cleanup; (6) litter removal; and (7) wildlife habitat restoration.

Although at first glance Proposition 65 may sound reasonable, in fact it adds bureaucratic complexity to manage a very small amount of money for efforts already supported by other state funds. Further, the position on the ballot of Proposition 65 is before Proposition 67, and both deal with plastic bags, which can be confusing to all but the most informed voter.

Campaign Funding: As of August 30, $2.872 million had been raised by the APBA (the four out-of-state manufacturers of plastic bags from South Carolina, Texas, and New Jersey) in support of Proposition 65 and opposition to Proposition 67. That sum is in addition to $3.258 million that the APBA raised while gathering signatures to place the referendum on the ballot. Funding in support of Proposition 67 was $1.199 million—66% from California, and most of the rest coming from grocers. (There was no organized campaign funding opposition to Proposition 65.) For more information on campaign funding see Cal-Access.

You can find information about the opposition to Prop 65 on the Yes on 67 website.

An additional resource is the Northern California Recycling Association.

Sample Letters to the Editor

Note: Please adapt this letter to your own community and check your local paper’s word limit for a published letter. If you are not a League president or their designee, you are not authorized to sign letters to the editor in the name of the League. You are encouraged, however, to express your views as a Californian and you are welcome to cite that you agree with the League’s position.

Dear Editor,

The League of Women Voters of California recommends a “No” vote on Proposition 65, “Carryout Bags. Charges.”

Proposition 65 is a deceptive measure. Four large players in the plastic bag industry—all from out of state—spent millions to put this disingenuous initiative on the ballot. It creates a distraction in an attempt to cause enough voter confusion that the more significant environmental measure, Proposition 67, fails.

Although at first glance Proposition 65 may sound reasonable, in fact it adds bureaucratic complexity to manage a very small amount of money for efforts already supported by other state funds. Its true purpose is to distract from Proposition 67, which would put a ban on carryout plastic bags across California—something the plastic bag industry certainly doesn’t want.

Vote with the League! Vote NO on 65 and Vote YES on 67.

Sincerely,
(Your name)

Sample Letters to the Editor (For Prop 67)

Here is another sample letter for the related measure, Proposition 67.

The League of Women Voters of California recommends a “Yes” vote on Proposition 67, the referendum on the plastic bag ban. Plastics, and plastic bags in particular, have entered our land, streams, lakes, and ocean. Never degrading, they pose a threat to wildlife and the ecosystem.

Across nearly half the state, many counties and most major California cities already ban single-use carryout bags, and it is working well.

A “Yes” vote will retain and implement the law passed to ban carryout plastic bags across all of California. That law was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor in 2014. Grocers support it. Advocates from the Monterey Bay Aquarium and Coastal Commission support it. Environmental groups and many others strongly support it.

Vote with the League! Vote “Yes” on Proposition 67.

Sincerely,
Your name

Vote with the League! Share our flyer with your friends and family.