Lobbyist claims that New York anti-plastic bill would harm people of color called ‘misleading'

The Guardian

6 hours ago

The oil and petrochemical lobby is attempting to fend off a New York state proposal to slash plastic waste by arguing that it will disproportionately burden people of color, advocates and assembly sources say, despite widespread evidence that the plastic supply chain poses serious health risks to Black and brown communities.
In New York state, advocates are fighting to pass a wide-ranging bill to reduce plastic packaging by 30% in 12 years while dramatically boosting recycling rates and phasing certain toxic compounds out of packaging. The packaging reduction and recycling infrastructure bill would place a fee on large businesses that distribute plastic packaging, with revenue benefiting taxpayers – a scheme called extended producer responsibility.
The proposal, which must be taken up this week in order to pass, passed the senate last month for the second year in a row, with backing from nearly every Democrat. But it is facing staunch opposition from some business interests and the American Chemistry Council, a lobbying group representing big oil companies and chemical manufacturers such as DuPont. Efforts to push back on the bill have reportedly cost more than $2m.
In recent weeks, advocates and assembly staff told the Guardian, lobbyists have focused on the assembly's influential Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic, and Asian American legislative caucus, arguing that the proposed legislation will raise food prices, thereby harming communities of color who are more likely to rely on food assistance programs.
The efforts to kill the plastic legislation are 'plainly racist', said state assembly member Claire Valdez, who represents part of Queens in New York City and backs the original bill. 'These companies just want to be able to continue pushing their product on exploited and under-resourced communities without consequence,' she told the Guardian.
The tactic, first covered by the Albany Times-Union, has prompted ire from bill advocates. In a letter to the state assembly in support of the bill, New York religious leaders said this 'corporate narrative' is 'not only false; it is also deeply insulting'.
'It is an immoral and manipulative tactic for these corporate interests to use communities of color as pawns to preserve their bottom lines,' the letter says. 'By focusing their efforts on lobbying the Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic, and Asian American Legislative Caucus, they are attempting to create division and fear where none should exist.'
Another letter, sent jointly by the NAACP New York State Conference and Consumer Reports, said: 'We are aware that representatives of the petrochemical and packaging industries have been meeting with members of the Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic and Asian Legislative Caucus in an attempt to discredit this bill and promote a weaker alternative. They claim that this legislation will raise prices for everyday New Yorkers. These claims are misleading and lack data to support them.'
Garbage incinerators, on which the bill attempts to reduce reliance by boosting recycling, are often located in communities of color, where they emit toxic pollutants supporters of the legislation say. And plastic production, which also creates dangerous air emissions, also disproportionately harms the health of Black and brown Americans.
Reached for comment, Freeman Klopott, spokesperson for the American Chemistry Council in New York, said the proposed legislation 'is not the answer to New York's waste problem'.
'ACC has joined a broad coalition that have worked closely with many legislators on both sides of the aisle to highlight more effective, equitable ways to reduce packaging waste,' Klopott said.
The ACC did not respond to questions about lobbyists targeting lawmakers who are people of color in efforts to oppose the bill.
Business interest groups opposing the bill have denied that any intentions they have are racially motivated.
Industry interests point to a York University study which found the original bill would raise prices by over $700 per household annually. But bill advocates note that report was produced by a group that is funded by the plastic lobby. They say there is no credible evidence that the policy would increase consumer prices. One 2022 report from Columbia University found that such programs result in only very small price increases, while a 2020 report funded by Oregon's environment department found that extended producer responsibility bills did not raise prices in Canadian provinces.
In recent weeks, a handful of New York Democratic lawmakers, most of whom are members of the Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic and Asian legislative caucus, have thrown their support behind a competing, weaker bill, which is supported by business interests. It, too, would create an extended producer responsibility program, but forgo some of the more progressive elements of the original legislation such as the ratcheting down of plastic that businesses can use and the mandates placed on recycled content levels.
Petrochemical interests have previously argued that plastic reduction efforts would harm people of color and poor communities. A lobbying group representing plastic bag manufacturers in 2014 funded New York's Black Leadership Action Coalition, whose founder argued that those backing a fee on plastic bags had 'BEEN HAD' and 'BEEN HOODWINKED.' As Minnesota environmentalists worked last year to overturn a policy preventing municipalities from banning plastic bags, some trade groups argued the repeal would place a burden on low-income communities of color, advocates told the Guardian. And last year, the International Council of Chemical Associations commissioned a report that said production caps would require disproportionately harm low-income people by raising product prices.
But at a press conference in Albany this month, advocates for the original plastic reduction bill said that passing the policy would benefit Black and brown Americans by helping to tamp down on toxic petrochemical processing.
'How many more of us have to die because of these polluters,' asked Sharon Lavigne, founder of the Louisiana grassroots organization Rise St James. 'They're sacrificing us to make a profit.'
Sarahana Shrestha, an assemblymember representing a south-eastern New York district, who supports the original legislation, said the industry's 'fear tactic' is working on some lawmakers who may be less familiar with the legislation.
'Lawmakers are always scared that a policy could have unforeseen consequences for their constituents,' she said, adding that the opposition's strategy has focused on stopping the bill from being put up for a vote.
New York's assembly has until Tuesday to vote on the proposed bills, which if passed would head to the governor's desk for final approval.