More politics: Mayoral debate, Port on KUOW, bag-fee breakdown

MAYORAL DEBATE: In case you’re not going to the big showdown between Joe Mallahan and Mike McGinn at the Cinerama downtown today, sponsors say they’ll stream it here (look for that stream around noon – 12:15 pm update – it’s started, with an intro from moderator Steve Scher – 12:25 pm – added the embedded version above, click to watch – 1:57 pm, it’s over but you can click to see the archived video).

PORT COMMISSION CANDIDATES ON THE RADIO: Marcee Stone mentioned this at last night’s 34th District Democrats meeting (we’ve added more details to our report; see it here) – West Seattleite Max Vekich and incumbent Tom Albro are both scheduled to be on KUOW (94.9 FM or listen online) at noon.

WEST SEATTLE VOTERS HATED THE BAG FEE: May not surprise you. But if you’re interested in the breakdown, seattletimes.com (WSB partner) has made a map with the breakout on what parts of the city backed the bag fee in last month’s election and which parts didn’t. Doesn’t appear ANY part of West Seattle had a majority “yes.” 12:13 PM UPDATE: Via Twitter, @labradoodles points out that if you follow the link to a larger version of the map, you will see two small clumps where the fee was supported (here’s that link).

Beetlecat September 10, 2009 (12:02 pm)

I’m still shaking my head at the bag fee failure… :)

Beetlecat September 10, 2009 (12:19 pm)

is it me, or does the failure of the fee along the ‘coasts’ of Seattle indicate more of a ideological opposition to the fee rather than an economic imperative? I Especially like that Seward Park voted no.

cjboffoli September 10, 2009 (12:27 pm)

Seeing the data presented geographically is really interesting to me. I’d love to see if correlated with a bunch of other metrics.

chas redmond September 10, 2009 (1:16 pm)

I think what this says more about is the distribution of unmarried, single, young, economically neutral folks – the green locations on the map are heavily populated with the 20-30 crowd, most of whom don’t have much money but also don’t have many family chores either – mostly because they don’t have families yet – I think this is more of a “youth” versus “a bit of experience” show rather than anything with philosophical overtones. I am quite progressive, liberal and socialistic – I voted no because the way to get rid of plastic bags is not to tax them, but to BAN them like nearly every other municipality/jurisdiction/country has done. Taxing is what caused it to fail – I’m betting an outright ban would pass handily.

chas redmond September 10, 2009 (1:17 pm)

oh, calling it a “fee” is also completely disingenuous – that helped kill it also.

Christopher Boffoli September 10, 2009 (1:21 pm)

I’m sure people can apply their own biases. But I’d like the numbers to speak for themselves. And if we could see an overlay of age, gender, income, residents per household, etc. I think those assumptions would probably be challenged.

Beetlecat September 10, 2009 (1:25 pm)

@chas: so the perfect is the enemy of the good yet again? :)

I’d be very hesitant to pull the age card when trying to assess the yes voters in the inner core of the city. A commenter on the Seattle Times (not an affiliate of me) article made the apt comparison of people who live in the city make smaller, more frequent trips to the store and thus have a much easier time with reusable bags than those who would come in for a carload of 7-8 canvas bags.

The bag tax seemed like a perfect compromise to still offer bags to those that needed them, but not make it a “crime” to do so…

I think there was certainly some nimbyism and consumption of the lies/distortions of the anti-tax “folks” behind the failure.

seven September 10, 2009 (1:29 pm)

Anybody who voted against the bag fee, in my opinion, but claims to care about the environment is lying.

The bag fee may not have been the best way to go about the reduction of plastic bags but it was a good start. We’re just too selfish and nimby minded to even try.

Ireland imposed a tax on plastic bags and in under a year plastic bag use went down 90%.

You fell for the chemical corporations lies.

of course September 10, 2009 (2:26 pm)

I opposed the bag fee for 2 reasons. First, the fee was too high. If it had been a nickel I might have agreed, but 20 cents was way too high. Second, you may note that the areas that voted yes, besides having higher numbers of younger populations, also have more shops within walking distance. The farther you are from a store the likely you are to have your reusable bags with you. I recycle my plastic bags and use them for my dog’s waste.
Lower the fee and you might get my vote next time.

seven September 10, 2009 (2:43 pm)

Of course,

What?

did you mean to say “the farther you are from a store the less likely you are to have your reusable bags with you”?

otherwise i’m confused.

using them for your dogs waste is bad for the environment. dog poop in plastic bags gets thrown in landfills.

Mark September 10, 2009 (2:49 pm)

I do know the “Plastics” lobbyists and associated groups poured at least $1Million into opposing the tax, that alone was enough for me to be for the tax. Its like when W was for something, you just knew there was an evil involved.

seven September 10, 2009 (2:59 pm)

Agreed,

It feels as though we chose to support a corporation that pollutes the earth rather than support a small step that might have helped clean it up, if only a little.

of course September 10, 2009 (2:59 pm)

Yes, I meant to say “less likely”. Sorry about that. And many plastic bags are biodegradable now.

seven September 10, 2009 (3:26 pm)

The ones you get at the grocery store are not biodegradable. They are the ones that break down into smaller bits of plastic but do not disappear entirely.

on board September 10, 2009 (3:47 pm)

I only voted for it once I saw that the Chemistry lobby spent $1.5m to defeat this.

I too think that creating a tax is the wrong way to influence this behavior.

Carole September 10, 2009 (4:58 pm)

I think including paper in the bag vote may have been overreaching. Most paper bags are already made from recycyled material and many end up in our recycling bins again. I know although I have canvas bags, I do find paper grocery bags useful to hold my paper/glass recyclables – newspaper, junk mail, any paper or glass that can go in our recycling bins before I haul them from my apt to the bins in back of our building. And it wouldn’t affect large stores like department stores or hardware stores…uneven application to retail.

flynlo September 10, 2009 (8:03 pm)

If the city really thinks that plastic bags are bad for the environment, why does the Parks Department continue to line garbage cans in the city’s parks with plastic bags? Why did the city change the garbage collection downtown to REQUIRE that all
garbage and recycling be placed in special, purchased from a single supplier, plastic bags?

yumpears September 11, 2009 (8:57 am)

Was it the “for” or “against” side that was using bags along the side of the road to get their message out? It looked like it was the bag tax proponents that had the bags out which looked like a total watse of bags to me. I voted against the bag fee. I use canvas bags myself, but I didn’t think $.20 a bag fee is the right way to go.

Michael September 12, 2009 (11:59 am)

The citizens of Seattle got it right. Bag bans have an emotional appeal but they are a very bad idea (http://www.biodeg.org/Plasticbagbans.htm)

All shortlife plastic should be biodegradable (www.biodeg.org). If the recycled or virgin bag at the grocery store bears the d2w droplet logo it can be tested according to ASTM D6954 and will not just fragment. It will be bioassimilated in the same way as leaves and straw, but in about 2 years instead of 10, and without any harmful residues (it does NOT contain heavy metals).

As plastic is made from a by-product of oil which used to be wasted nobody is importing extra oil to make it.

Instead of buying an expensive cloth bag, why not use your plastic bag time and time again. It will fit into your pocket or handbag.

Sorry, comment time is over.