A Retrospective after 50 Years
by John Lesow
Bob Keller’s timely article, “No Deposit, No Return” from the March 2005 issue of Whatcom Watch was a glimpse into the past and provides a window into the future.
His closing paragraph, comparing Oregon highways to Washington highways, says it all.
“To learn how well (the mandatory 5 cent) deposits do work, drive on Oregon highways and count trash pick up bags per mile compared to Washington’s rate. We’re the ‘Never Clean’ state.”
Exactly.
This statement underscores the futility of “voluntary recycling” and the success of the beverage industry to effectively stifle any state legislation that would affect their bottom line, dating back to 1970.
Beverage Industry
Collectively, “beverage industry” includes bottle makers, grocers, can manufacturers, aluminum companies, breweries and soda companies.
Make no mistake, these companies play hardball, despite the pleasant, positive messages depicted in their advertising.
The best way to enact tough, effective legislation is from citizen testimony before legislative bodies, and building a reasoned case through a written record and responsible comment.
This was the primary difference between the legislative approval of Oregon deposit legislation and the defeat of the Washington measure by the voters in the same year.
Oregon’s state legislation has proved preferable to Washington’s voter referendum on this complex subject, one that can be easily distorted and manipulated by aggressive corporations through slick ad campaigns and misinformation.
In Oregon, a small group of citizens lobbied the Oregon House of Representatives for House Bill 1046, whose provisions were nearly identical to Washington State Initiative 276.
Oregon’s Bill Passed, Ours Didn’t
The Oregon Bill passed and was signed into law by Republican Governor Tom McCall immediately, despite an expected challenge of the law’s constitutionality by the beverage industry.
By contrast, Washington Initiative 276 never passed.
Two subsequent attempts in succeeding years also failed, killing this legislation forever in The Evergreen State.
This is why, as Keller notes, Washington remains sandwiched between Oregon and British Columbia, both of which use the free market mechanism of assigning cash value (deposits) to inspire proper human behavior.
In 1970, I was an active member of a small independent lobbying group, the People’s Lobby Against Nonreturnables (PLAN) and a volunteer (unpaid) lobbyist for the Oregon Environmental Council.
I also clerked at a law firm that had two respected lawyers, John Mosser and Don Morgan, who assisted in drafting a “Bottle Bill” that would pass Constitutional muster when the inevitable beverage industry lawsuits were filed.
The stage was set for a truly David vs. Goliath battle, and we won.
For a detailed account of our story, go to: http://whatcomwatch.org/wpww2/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Lesow-LITTERNONRETURNABLEBEVERAGE-1971.pdf
There are several takeaways from this experience, including:
1. Avoid reliance on industry or government surveys when lobbying for complex legislation. Do your own surveys and research if you wish to present material that contradicts the “experts” on the opposing side.
– An example is the volume vs. piece count method of measuring litter.
– Logic would dictate that a beer can or bottle would have more impact on roadside litter than a cigarette filter, but both were counted equally in the survey offered by the beverage industry.
2. Industry may deny that technology exists to address a problem identified in legislation. Don’t buy it.
– An example is the detachable aluminum “pull tab” on beer and soda cans, which was a newer addition to “convenience packaging” in the late 1960s. A step up from the old can opener or “church key” ….
– However, detachable pull tabs were also the source of injury for any person or animal that stepped on one of these sharp objects that had not been disposed of properly.
– Given human nature, many were not.- A simple addition to the Oregon legislation, Section 5, sub (3) prohibited any metal beverage can “so designed and constructed that part of the container is detached in opening the container.”
– Beverage industry executives from American Can Company testified during public hearings that this technology was not possible at the time the legislation was being considered.
– In fact, it quickly became quite possible when the bill became law. And nondetachable tabs have been in use on beer, soda and juice cans since that time.
– You can thank progressive legislators and environmental lobbyists every time you pull a tab on your soda and push down to consume the contents, rather than peeling the tab back and tossing it away.
3. As Bob Keller noted in his article, be prepared for some backlash. Stick to your guns. I still recall being on a talk radio broadcast and being introduced as, “the Communist that wants to hit you up for a nickel on your non-returnable cans” …! Just remember, there is no such thing in these matters as “bad publicity” for a just cause. Go for it.
– You just might win.
_________________________________-
John Lesow, BSc, J.D., is a retired Western Territory Manager for Cascade Canada Material Handling Products. He served two terms on the Whatcom County Planning Commission while residing in Point Roberts. A dual citizen, he now lives in North Vancouver and is a past Director of the Edgemont Community Association.
