After years of trying to pass a comprehensive update, in 2005 supporters tried a streamlined strategy: just add water bottles to the existing, highly successful statute. Senate President Pro Tem Don Williams proposed this simple bill, and in mid April, with seven full weeks remaining in the session, the bill to include water bottles was passed by the State Senate by an overwhelming majority. A lack of leadership in the House caused the bill to die on the calendar. House leaders were reluctant to call the bill because so many rank and file members have come to rely on campaign contributions from the bottle bill’s major opponents: beer and soda distributors, and the grocery store lobby. These opponents use the same tactics everywhere and once again dragged out the same tired arguments. One fact they simply can’t escape, however, is the incredible success of Connecticut’s bottle deposit/redemption recycling and litter reduction program.
Many towns in Connecticut have had “blue bin” recycling at the curbside since 1991, and the state has had a bottle bill for 26 years. So there are real numbers to compare the success of both systems. Redemption recycling enjoys a near 70% return rate while curbside recycling, where available, only gets under 30% in the very best of programs. Add to that the fact that redemption recycling costs no taxpayer dollars while curbside is funded completely with tax dollars. It makes no sense for any elected official to favor a government run, tax-funded system that is only half as successful as a privately funded program that costs taxpayers nothing. Obviously, the campaign contributions are the skewing factor.