1AC – The Bottle Bill Page |1

BOTTLE BILL 1AC- TRA$H IT OR CA$H IT, BABY

Brett Godush wrote in the Vermont Law Review in 2001,
“Living in Michigan, near the Indiana border, a person experiences the benefits of living in a
state with a bottle bill and some of the problems associated with a state lacking such a bill (Indiana).
Along the roads in Indiana, a greater amount of litter exists than in Michigan. More startling, however,
are the completely different perceptions between the citizens of Michigan and Indiana regarding
beverage containers. In Indiana, beverage containers are just that-containers. Once emptied, these
containers are thrown away, either in the garbage or anywhere else that is convenient at the time.
However, in Michigan empty containers represent money. Though the deposit in place in Michigan (ten
cents per container) may seem relatively insignificant, it may not be to many residents of the state. In
reality, the ten- cent deposit represents enough financial gain to make container redemption worth the
effort.

By creating this monetary incentive, the Michigan bottle bill helps ensure that the benefit of returning
beverage containers will outweigh the costs.

Because we agree with the Vermont Law Review that a federal bottle bill would benefit the nation, my
partner and I are RESOLVED: That the United States Federal Government should significantly reform
its environmental policy.

We'll begin with some facts about the status quo, under OBSERVATION ONE: INHERENCY.

1.) What are bottle bills?

Container Recycling Institute [The Container Recycling Institute is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization
dedicated to reducing beverage container waste through producer and consumer responsibility. We
focus on policy research and education], “What is a bottle bill?” published at the Bottle Bill Resource
Guide, 2007 (accessed August 2009) http://www.bottlebill.org/about/whatis.htm

The term “bottle bill” is actually another way of saying “container deposit law.” A container deposit
law requires a minimum refundable deposit on beer, soft drink and other beverage containers in order
to ensure a high rate of recycling or reuse.
How a bottle bill works
Deposits on beverage containers are not a new idea. The deposit-refund system was created by the
beverage industry as a means of guaranteeing the return of their glass bottles to be washed, refilled and
resold.
When a retailer buys beverages from a distributor, a deposit is paid to the distributor for each can or
bottle purchased. The consumer pays the deposit to the retailer when buying the beverage. When the
consumer returns the empty beverage container to the retail store, to a redemption center, or to a
reverse vending machine, the deposit is refunded. The retailer recoups the deposit from the distributor,
plus an additional handling fee in most U.S. states. The handling fee, which generally ranges from 1-3
cents, helps cover the cost of handling the containers.

2.) Federal bottle bills continue to be defeated despite their merit

Brett Godush [J.D.- Vermont Law School, 2001, cum laude; B.S. in Environmental Studies- Central

“Some people drink Pepsi/Some people drink Coke/The wacky mourning DJ says/ democracy's a joke!” – CAKE
1AC – The Bottle Bill Page |2

Michigan University, 1997; B.S. in Business Administration- Central Michigan University, 1997,
magna cum laude, wrote on environmental issues for the Vermont Law Review], “NOTE: THE
HIDDEN VALUE OF A DIME: HOW A FEDERAL BOTTLE BILL CAN BENEFIT THE COUNTRY”,
published in the Vermont Law Review, Summer, 2001 [25 Vt. L. Rev. 855] [accessed via LexisNexis]

“Although the ten states possessing bottle bills have experienced the positive attributes of such
programs, numerous similar federal bills continue [*856] to be defeated. Yet, on the twenty-ninth
anniversary of Earth Day, the need for a national beverage container deposit bill was presented once
again to the United States Senate. n5 Citing, in part, the success of Vermont's bottle redemption system,
Senator James Jeffords (R-VT) introduced the National Beverage Container Reuse & Recycling Act on
April 22, 1999 (S. 859).”

The idea of federalism was that states could be testing grounds, or pilot projects, for certain proposals.
Several states have tested, California’s bottle bill is quite successful and so we shall now implement it
federally.

This brings us to the PLAN TEXT:

“Congress shall pass and the President shall sign a Federal Bottle Bill, to be modeled after the
California bottle bill. Funding and enforcement are through normal means. We'll clarify as
needed.”

This brings us to the reasons to affirm the resolution and the plan, which are found in the
JUSTIFICATIONS.

Justification 1 is Increased recycling

A.) Bottle bill states recycle more

The Chicago Recycling Coalition [A statewide environmental advocacy organization, A Bottle Bill for
Illinois, 2008, http://www.chicagorecycling.org/index.php?
option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=26&Itemid=63
“Because people are motivated by cash returns to recycle their bottles and cans, they participate in
bottle bill programs at much higher rates than with drop-off or even curb-side recycling. The national
rate for beverage container recycling is around 30 percent and falling. But in bottle bill states, the rate
averages between 70 and 80 percent.”

A federal bottle bill would increase recycling

Brett Godush [J.D.- Vermont Law School, 2001, cum laude; B.S. in Environmental Studies- Central
Michigan University, 1997; B.S. in Business Administration- Central Michigan University, 1997,
magna cum laude, wrote on environmental issues for the Vermont Law Review], “NOTE: THE
HIDDEN VALUE OF A DIME: HOW A FEDERAL BOTTLE BILL CAN BENEFIT THE COUNTRY”,
published in the Vermont Law Review, Summer, 2001 [25 Vt. L. Rev. 855] [accessed via LexisNexis]

“In the present case, the requirement of a federal solution is clear for several reasons. First, a
federal program would introduce the rest of the country to the success experienced by the ten states
currently with bottle bills. Potentially, the entire country could experience a recovery rate of nearly

“Some people drink Pepsi/Some people drink Coke/The wacky mourning DJ says/ democracy's a joke!” – CAKE
1AC – The Bottle Bill Page |3

twice that of well-run voluntary recycling programs, at 85 to 90%. n109 Furthermore, [*867] a federal
bill could enhance the current system by implementing one standardized approach, instead of the
piecemeal effort of state-by-state bills.”

And, the bottle bill would encourage recycling of other materials as well
Brett Godush [J.D.- Vermont Law School, 2001, cum laude; B.S. in Environmental Studies- Central
Michigan University, 1997; B.S. in Business Administration- Central Michigan University, 1997,
magna cum laude, wrote on environmental issues for the Vermont Law Review], “NOTE: THE
HIDDEN VALUE OF A DIME: HOW A FEDERAL BOTTLE BILL CAN BENEFIT THE COUNTRY”,
published in the Vermont Law Review, Summer, 2001 [25 Vt. L. Rev. 855] [accessed via LexisNexis]

“Once consumers get in the habit of returning beverage containers, they will be more likely to
recycle other materials, hopefully without the need for additional incentive. This is a very important
externality, since the United States is far from achieving optimal recycling rates, n198 especially based
on results of other industrialized countries. N199”

B.) Recycling benefits the environment

Recycling lowers air and water pollution
Brett Godush [J.D.- Vermont Law School, 2001, cum laude; B.S. in Environmental Studies- Central
Michigan University, 1997; B.S. in Business Administration- Central Michigan University, 1997,
magna cum laude, wrote on environmental issues for the Vermont Law Review], “NOTE: THE
HIDDEN VALUE OF A DIME: HOW A FEDERAL BOTTLE BILL CAN BENEFIT THE COUNTRY”,
published in the Vermont Law Review, Summer, 2001 [25 Vt. L. Rev. 855] [accessed via LexisNexis]

“ By significantly increasing the percent of materials reclaimed, bottle bills help reduce many
types of air and water pollution, including greenhouse emissions. n52 The reduction in greenhouse
gases could amount to 1.74 metric tons of carbon nationwide. n53”

And, recycling 58 billion aluminum cans would be like taking 1 million cars off the road.
David Abel [Staff writer for the Boston Globe], “Coming up dry on bottles: Law change would let
consumers redeem water, juice bottles”, published in The Boston Globe, March 24, 2008 [Boston
Globe, March 24, 2008 Monday THIRD EDITION; METRO; Pg. A1] [accessed via LexisNexis]

“Eben Burnham-Snyder, a spokesman for the US House Select Committee on Energy

Independence and Global Warming, said opponents of bottle laws are more concerned about their
bottom line. He added that a federal law would remove any arguments about illegally transporting
bottles across state lines. Recycled, the 58 billion aluminum cans the nation discards each year would
cut carbon emissions by the equivalent of taking 1 million cars off the road, he added. “

Justification 2 is Economic Benefit.

A.) Jobs created

A nationwide bottle bill would create 100,000 jobs
Rodale Research Institute [a nonprofit research organization that studies solutions to improve the
global environment, especially involving agriculture and sustainable development] “The bottle bill and
farmers,”, Published online by the Rodale Research Institute, 2003,

“Some people drink Pepsi/Some people drink Coke/The wacky mourning DJ says/ democracy's a joke!” – CAKE
1AC – The Bottle Bill Page |4

http://newfarm.rodaleinstitute.org/depts/gleanings/1102/bottle_bill/index.shtml
“A national bottle bill would create jobs, reduce litter, save energy and protect the environment. Iowa
reports that as a result of its bottle bill, 1,200 jobs have been created. If every state had a deposit-return
system, a total of about 100,000 jobs could be created.”

B.) Costs slashed

Recycling reduces energy usage and disposal costs
Anthony R. Depaolo [Managing Editor, 1994-1995, BOSTON COLLEGE ENVIRONMENTAL
AFFAIRS LAW REVIEW], “COMMENT: PLASTICS RECYCLING LEGISLATION: NOT JUST THE
SAME OLD GARBAGE”, Published in the Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, Spring,
1995 [22 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 873] [LexisNexis] [Ethos]
Despite the technological and economic problems associated with the recycling process, plastics
recycling offers many benefits. For instance, the amount of energy needed to process recycled plastics
is much lower than that needed to process virgin materials. n43 In addition, because plastic makes up a
significant part of the waste stream in the United States, n44 recycling plastics helps society to avoid
growing incineration and landfill costs. For example, MassPIRG, a Massachusetts public interest
research group, determined that once all pertinent factors n45 were added together, recycling waste
lessened incineration [*880] costs at the rate of $ 202 per ton n46 and lessened landfill costs at a rate
of $ 63 per ton.

In New York, bottle bills saved 2 million barrels of oil and 19 million taxpayer dollars in
one year
Container Recycling Institute [501(c)3 nonprofit organization dedicated to reducing beverage
container waste through producer and consumer responsibility. We focus on policy research and
education.] “What is a bottle bill?” published at the Bottle Bill Resource Guide, 2007 (accessed
August 2009) [brackets added] http://www.bottlebill.org/about/whatis.htm
“A detailed report by Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimated that the volume of discarded beverage
containers was reduced by 72 percent annually, from 47.5 million cubic feet to 13.1 million cubic
feet. The study estimated that the 34.1 million cubic feet saved by the deposit law was approximately
equal to all of the municipal waste generated by a city the size of Rochester over a period of nearly
three years. The study also found that recycling rates increased dramatically after the bill's passage,
with aluminum cans increasing from 18 percent to 82 percent; glass one-way bottles from 5 percent to
79 percent; and PET bottles from 1 percent to 57 percent. Finally, the study estimated the deposit law
saves the state 11.5 trillion BTU's (British thermal units) or the equivalent of 2 million barrels of oil
annually. The New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC) estimates the overall
redemption rates for deposit containers to be 77.6 percent for 1995. Redemption rates for various
container types are as follows: aluminum 85% glass 75% PET soda 66%
Both waste, and waste management costs were expected to be substantially reduced according to
preliminary findings by the NYSBWA study. The study estimated an annual reduction of solid waste
tonnage of 650,000 tons, at a savings to taxpayers of $19 million a year. The bottle bill continues to
serve as a valuable waste management tool, according to the NYDEC, which reports that redeemed
deposit containers account for 5 percent of the total 6.35 million tons of waste diverted in FY 95-96.”

C.) Homeless gain

“Some people drink Pepsi/Some people drink Coke/The wacky mourning DJ says/ democracy's a joke!” – CAKE
1AC – The Bottle Bill Page |5

The bottle bill would give the homeless a source of income

David Abel [Staff writer for the Boston Globe], “Coming up dry on bottles: Law change would let
consumers redeem water, juice bottles”, published in The Boston Globe, March 24, 2008 [Boston
Globe, March 24, 2008 Monday THIRD EDITION; METRO; Pg. A1] [accessed via LexisNexis]
[brackets added]
“Standing over a grocery cart full of empty Budweiser bottles and Coke cans, James Williams
walked to a trash barrel outside a South End redemption center, pulled out a few empty plastic water
bottles, and shrugged.
"My question is: Why in the world can't you redeem these, when you could if it had bubbles
inside?" asked Williams, 63, a Dorchester resident who has spent years rifling through dumpsters,
tossing aside countless plastic water and juice bottles. "It makes no sense. We're passing up thousands
of dollars. It would help the homeless and empty lots of trash from landfills."”

Justification 3 is Responsibility
Bottle bills transfer the responsibility where it belongs- the producer and consumer
Container Recycling Institute [The Container Recycling Institute is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization
dedicated to reducing beverage container waste through producer and consumer responsibility. We
focus on policy research and education], “Bottle Bills Provide Financial Incentives for Recycling”
published by the Bottle Bill Resource Guide, 2007 (accessed August 2009),
http://bottlebill.org/about/benefits/financial.htm
“Furthermore, deposits place the cost of managing post-consumer beverage containers where it
really belongs--on those who manufacture, sell and buy them. Whether they are landfilled, littered or
recycled, there is a cost to managing 'used' beverage containers. Containers that are landfilled, littered,
or recycled through municipal recycling programs represent a cost to government and taxpayers. The
deposit system shifts those costs to producers and consumers of the containers. This is known as
extended producer responsibility (EPR). “

Judge, what we've seen is a tried and true piece of legislation that could provide benefit to our
environment and to our economy, while increasing responsibility. So for all these reasons, we urge
you to affirm the resolution, support the bill, and CRACK A BOTTLE. Thank you.

Skeletor, demanding moar bottle bill.

“Some people drink Pepsi/Some people drink Coke/The wacky mourning DJ says/ democracy's a joke!” – CAKE