By Glen Wunderlich Outdoor Columnist Member Professional Outdoor Media Association
Over the years several campaigns against litter have spawned various degrees of success to battle this public enemy. There were the “Every Litter Bit Hurts” and the “Don’t Be a Litter Bug” mantras during my childhood. The “Adopt a Highway” litter control program gets volunteers to pick up trash along our roadways. Unquestionably, one of the most successful devices to date has been the Bottle Law passed over 30 years ago, which was done so by an overwhelming margin of Michigan voters. However, it can be argued that the costs associated with recycling bottles and cans have resulted in higher costs at the cash register to consumers. Fair enough, but the landscape is cleaner nonetheless.
In an attempt to expand the current law to non-carbonated beverage containers (SB 0054), the fight appears to have stalled insofar as it has gone nowhere in almost six months after its introduction January 27, 2009. Never fear; lawmakers have a new scheme to battle the plague of illegal dumping, fast-food packaging, non-returnables, and even cigarette butts: HB 5081.
This bill introduced June 11th aims to control behavior by rewarding snitches. In essence, HB 5081 would pay a reward to any person that provides information that materially contributes to the imposition of a civil fine. The money would come from civil fines collected and would pay the informant(s) 50 percent of the amount.
Government rewards people that don’t work and many people ride the gravy train for all its worth. Illegal aliens don’t have health care insurance, so taxpayers reward them by providing services in hospitals for whatever ails them. Beer cans are tossed aside by human pigs and others are rewarded 10 cents each time they bend over to clean up after them. Behavior that gets rewarded gets repeated.
I really don’t know anyone who appreciates litter, although many are oblivious to it. However, by imposing stiff penalties to offenders and compensating those most offended and willing to act, the idea may have merit and it will be interesting to see where this legislation goes.
Written into the proposal are only two purposes that money shall be expended from the fund that evolves: 1) payment of rewards, and 2) publicizing the availability of rewards. This is where some tweaking is in order. Half the money collected must be put into advertising? What a waste! We can do better than that!
Think, for example, how much taxpayers squander on the campaign to wear seatbelts. Millions are spent on billboards, television and radio spots to tell us what we already know. Enough already! What driver doesn’t know about the consequences of seatbelt law infractions? Not one. Yet, our government keeps fueling the drive with our money.
Let’s amend HB 5081 to provide for more practical use of funds generated. Politicians never seem to be at a loss as to how to spend money but advertising to preach to the choir will pay little in dividends, once such a program takes hold. After all, we don’t have to tell people to pick up cans and bottles, do we? Let the debate center on doing something better with litterbugs’ cash, because we certainly don’t need another billboard littering the landscape!
