Vote No on Question 2

Changing the state’s Bottle Bill by expanding the beverage container deposit law is not a good idea.

Since a reported ninety percent of households currently have access to curbside and community recycling programs, the state should be focusing on what works instead of expanding this totally outdated, insufficient and inconvenient system.

The expansion bill cost nearly $60 million a year, more than three times the price of curbside programs, while increasing recycling rates.

It appears people want to increase recycling rates but this is the wrong approach by apparently wasting taxpayers’ dollars on expanding an uneconomical, 30 year old system, according to people opposed to Question 2.

The change will also raise the nickel deposit and additional fees every five years without a vote from the general public.

Currently, more than 30 million of unclaimed nickels go into the state’s general fund and subject to political control and release.

Expanding the Bottle Bill, which includes beer, soda and other beverage containers, will not stop the discarding of these containers from being tossed away by uncaring people.

Raising the tax on tobacco to stop people from smoking didn’t work.

Vote No on Question 2.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.