Bad Bag Ban

On Friday, March 2, 2012, the Austin City Council passed a bag ban. This will ban disposable paper and plastic bags at all retail checkout counters beginning next year in March 2013.  Only reusable bags, those made of durable material, thicker paper, and plastic bags with handles will be offered by retailers and those who do not follow the new ordinance must face being charged with a class C misdemeanor.

The Austin City Council plans to launch a $2 million education campaign to enlighten customers of the provisions the new ordinance entails as well as to distribute reusable grocery bags for free in low-poverty areas of the city to lessen the burden on the poor.

While I do understand that bags often end up as litter on the side of the road and parks thus becoming harmful to the environment, I do not support the bag ban for several reasons.

The most prominent issue I have with this new ordinance is the $2 million that are going to be spent to teach Austinites how to follow the law. Retailers will put signs up to remind us to bring and use our reusable bags. Who’s going to pay for those signs? Will the costs of the new ordinance lead retailers to increase the costs of products and food to make up for their expenses to carry out the provisions of the bag ban?

The second issue I have with this new ordinance is sanitation. Employees will be touching hundreds, even thousands, of reusable bags per day and we know they won’t be washing their hands in between transactions. This can lead to the rapid spread of germs or cross-contamination of food.

My third issue is that some customers will inevitably forget to bring their reusable bags to the store. It is highly unlikely that the retailer will turn forgetful customers away. This means that customers will be walking out of stores with their purchased items unbagged. This will certainly lead to confusion and I think that a more significant consequence is that there may be an increase in shoplifting. Retailers will be forced to have their employees stationed at every exit to thoroughly check receipts. This will certainly result in aggravated customers and simply running to the grocery store will become a much more complicated and time-consuming errand.

My fourth and final issue with this bag ban is that plastic bags are used by many people and organizations. People often recycle plastic bags in their homes to be used as trash can liners and to clean up after pets. Many organizations that serve to clean our communities use them to reduce environmentally harmful litter.

As previously stated, I do not support the bag ban because it seems to lead to more problems than it solves. A better alternative would have been to enforce Austinites to recycle. This way money will be spent to teach them an extremely valuable practice instead of teaching them to follow the law. 

New Policy: Written Consent for Vehicle Searches

             Writtenconsent to search is progress was published on Monday, July 23, 2012. The editorial informs Austinites that beginning next month, “Austin police will have to obtain written permission before searching a vehicle.” At the moment, officers “ask verbal permission before conducting a search.” The editorial then introduces a racial issue by stating that “Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo announced the new policy after a report by the Office of Police Monitor that black and Hispanic drivers were searched more often than whites.” According to American-Statesman Patrick George, “one in eight traffic stops involving a black driver resulted in a search” and 1 of 10 traffic stops involving Hispanic drivers were searched. “White drivers were searched in 1 of 28 traffic stops according to the police monitor’s report.”

             I have pulled the previous statements straight from the editorial in order to put a summary together. However, the statements I chose also add credibility to the editorial because they illustrate that the author is not only throwing statements at us but has provided us with sources for his/her information. The statement with numerical data really grasps the reader’s attention and shows that the author took the time to do research, which again adds credibility to the editorial.

            In response to the racial issue, Austin Police Chief Art “was quick to wave away any suggestions that the results could be indicative of racial profiling. Stepped up police work in high-crime areas means more activity in neighborhoods with high concentrations of minorities.” Unfortunately, the author introduced the racial issue but failed to provide any further details or opinions which left me very unsatisfied. I feel as though the editorial is incomplete because he/she didn’t address this issue.  

            One of the only opinions that the author offers is that “The new policy is not radical because officers can ask for a signature authorizing a search as easily as they now ask verbal permission.” The author has failed to see the importance of the new policy which is not to make searching a vehicle more difficult but to protect the ambiguous nature of verbal consent from negatively affecting law enforcement or the citizen. For example, my uncle is in law enforcement and has had several complaints filed against him claiming that he searched vehicles without permission. Fortunately, he has been able to defend these claims with video and audio surveillance. Written consent will hopefully convey the importance of the issue at hand by grasping the attention of the citizen and will reinforce citizens’ rights because the form will remind them that they have the right to refuse the search unless there is probable cause. I am aware that written consent won’t get citizens off the hook for vehicle searches, which I wouldn’t support anyway, but I am glad that the game will no longer be played as he-said-she-said as it has been for my uncle. 

Austin Property Tax Increase

            An editorial named Pull back on rapid tax increases is aimed to alarm taxpayers in Austin with the hopes of motivating them to push for answers about why their property taxes are increasing. The editorial states that “solutions for managing costs start with telling the public the truth about their taxes.” This powerful statement illustrates the frustration that the author has with city officials. The author then supplements his/her aggravated statement by throwing large numbers into the equation, a great way to attract his/her audience’s attention. Numbers always make me skeptical because there are so many ways that they can be misconstrued. Fortunately, the author provided the sources for his/her numerical information with the following, highly appreciated, statements: “according to a study conducted by Eben Fodor, a national land-use expert” and “The data regarding tax increases did not come from City Hall, county government or the school district, but rather from an American-Statesman analysis reported by Marty Toohey.”

            Like I previously mentioned the article is intended to alarm Austinites about their unexplained property tax increases. The author wastes no time in captivating his/her audience’s attention by providing numerical data. The author then offers a better understanding to these numbers by giving his/her audience a collective reason as to why their property taxes have been raised. The following sentences are only a few of the statements that the author provided to explain the numbers he/she has thrown into the mix: “It’s also clear that all five taxing jurisdictions share responsibility for the rising tax burden. In the past decade, Austin Community College raised its property taxes 184 percent; Travis county increased by 46 percent; the City of Austin charged 44 percent more…” These statements are very important to the credibility of the editorial because it shows that the author isn’t simply making claims about property tax inflation but has done the proper research and can intellectually provide insight as to why property taxes are being increased.

            As a young adult who has never owned any taxable property, it is somewhat difficult for me to understand the true monetary significance of this editorial. Then again, I never realized how expensive gas was until I started driving and paying for the gas myself. However, I agree with the author’s overall opinion that “our elected officials take a hard look at the facts, not that they’re on the table, and begin telling the public the unvarnished truth about growth, taxes and costs.” The author offers a multitude of opinions and solutions to property tax increases. I do not agree with several of his/her solutions especially that school districts should use their reserved money to help reduce property taxes. I do admit that my opposition on this potential solution is strongly influenced by my support for education since I am currently a student. Ultimately, I agree that Austinites are entitled to know why their property taxes are being increased and where exactly their money is going. 

Texas is Spending $500 Less per Student on Average

PolitifactTexas published an article on Thursday, April 26^th, 2012 regarding the alarming school budget cut statement made by state representative Donna Howard at a Texas Capitol rally. “Speaking to the crowd gathered to advocate for more public school support,” Howard decided to call “out those officials who have said the state has increased its aid to school districts” (PolitiFact). Howard then continued by declaring that the state is now “spending on average $500 less per student” (PolitiFact). Deeper investigation into the already disturbing $500 figure reveals that since money isn’t equally divided amongst public school districts, some schools’ budget cuts are even greater than $500 per student.        

This article is of great importance because public school funding is an area that the Legislative Budget Board should try their absolute hardest not to reduce. It is clear that the economy is not in good standing but education is important considering that Texas education is already behind when compared to other states in the U.S. Also, bearing in mind that the students that are currently in school will someday lead the nation makes the budget cut even more frightening.