Expand the Bottle Bill!

Think back to when you were in elementary, and asked a teacher if you could be rewarded for what you were expected to do. You figured that because you were the only one doing what the teacher expected you to do, you would be rewarded. Your teacher’s response probably sounded like, “Why should you be rewarded for what you are supposed to do?” Well, it is about time that people are rewarded for what they are expected to do, and they have been ever since the bottle bill was passed. If the bottle bill is expanded, people would be able to recycle more bottles for money, meaning more recycling, and less pollution.
So, “What is the bottle bill?” The bottle bill is a bill that was proposed to encourage recycling through a simple machine that collects bottles and cans. The bottle bill goes through a simple process, to recycle throwaway beverages. The first part of the bill is to include a deposit on throwaways. The second part of the bill is to return the deposit to those who return the throwaway beverages.
In the year 1974, State Representative Lynn Jondahl decided to prepare a legislation to ban throwaways. Why did Jondahl decided to prepare such legislation? In the 1950’s most beverage containers were made of glass. The glass bottles were recycled in a fashion similar to that of the bottle bill. Many companies and businesses grew weary of the situation. In the 1960’s stores decided to make throwaway bottles and cans. This way, people would not have to worry about deposits, or returns. As the years passed, litter became an issue. Broken glass bottles and cans were found on streets and beaches. For this reason Representative Jondahl decided to put his bottle bill into effect.
Though the bottle bill seemed to be a wonderful idea to the majority of the people in Michigan, the bill had its’ opponents. Who were these opponents? They were no one other than the stores and business who believed that they would be negatively affected by the bill. The stores and business felt that the recycled bottles and cans would take away valuable space. Some said that the process would be too expensive, and unsanitary. Others believed that many good paying jobs would be lost.
The opponents of Jondahl had prevented the bottle bill from being passed for a while, but later failed to do so. Because 73% of the Michigan population agreed with passing the bottle bill, a petition was sent throughout the states to pass the bill. The petition had double the signatures than needed on it. It took as little as two months to raise 400,000 signatures by the Michigan United Conservation Club. On November 2, 1976, the bottle bill was passed. Those who were for the bottle bill had 8 million more votes than those who opposed the bill.
Since the bill was passed, the United States has seen nothing other than improvements by the bill. The percent of litter in Michigan was reduced by 84% since the bottle bill was passed. Ninety-seven percent of containers were recycled since the bill was passed. After Michigan passed the bottle bill, many other states passed a bottle bill. Oregon and Vermont were the two states that banned throwaways after Michigan. It has been proven that states that have a bottle bill have less litter than those that do not have such a bill. Michigan itself has the highest bottle bill, and therefore, the highest rate of recycling.
For those who believe that the bill is too expensive, “Is there a certain limit to how much we should spend on saving our nation?” Do people prefer living in a nation of sick people? Before the bottle bill was passed, Seagulls and rats ate from the landfills and spread diseases.
We as Americans should do all we can to save our nation from becoming a landfill. Through my interview with Jaclyn Delbrugge, I realized that she was one of the people who agree, but feel that the taxes would be too high. The only part that matters is that the process works. How high can the taxes be? I mean, it is ok if you put aside buying a new purse each month for helping your society. Another thing I realized through my interview was that Delbrugge was one of the many people who prefer curbside recycling. Though many people feel that we should stick to curbside recycling, the process only works in urban communities. What about residential and suburban areas? The bottle bill works for all communities.
Today, Michigan’s bottle bill applies only to pop and beer bottles. Imagine how many more bottles would be recycled if Michigan were to expand the bottle bill to include non-carbonated bottles such as water bottles, sports drinks, bottled coffees, teas, and fruit drinks. If this was to happen, an additional 800 million containers would be recycled.
The bottle bill is a type of recycling that works in all communities. The recycling rate has increased since the bottle bill passed. If the bottle bill is expanded to include non-carbonated bottles, the recycling rate will increase to a greater extent. For this reason, the bottle bill should be expanded.


Work Cited
Switalski, Michael. Switalski Reintroduces Bottle Bill Expansion. 29 Jan. 2009. 19 Feb.
2009. .

Damstra, Carolyn. The Mitten. Mar. 2009. 19 Feb 2009.
.

Hoy, Valerie. Litter Studies in Seven Bill States. 2007. 19 Feb. 2009.


Hoy, Valerie. Get the Facts. 2006. 19 Feb. 2009.
.

Rhetoric: Is speaking and writing with the intention to persuade, communicate, and teach. In order to speak well, a person must be capable of using research and evidence to communicate with others through persuasion. As one speaks and writes, they should also be capable of dividing what is said and how it is being said. In written rhetoric, the writer should show their ethos throughout the writing. Political leaders, student advocates and educators are a few examples of people who speak and write in order to persuade. For instance, a democrat will attempt to persuade others to follow their political views through strong emotional speeches and written documents. Another example is Martin Luther king. Martin Luther King persuaded many to disagree with racism through an emotional speech.