When California\u2019s groundbreaking law on single-use plastic passed in 2022 to address the growing scourge of plastic pollution, it had broad political support. There was the state Chamber of Commerce, the Monterey Bay Aquarium, a powerful ocean advocate and Californians Against Waste.<\/p>\n
But now as the law\u2019s deadlines and requirements finally take shape, a hefty industry-oriented consortium is quietly organizing to burn it \u2014 and it\u2019s companion law, the state\u2019s Truth in Recycling law \u2014 to the ground.<\/p>\n
Internal industry documents obtained by The Times show how a group called the Print Creative Alliance and its allies plan to kneecap the laws. The alliance is an industry advocate and resource hub for printers, print brokers, packaging and label businesses, vendors, and creative marketing professionals across 13 western states. <\/p>\n
The organization sees the laws as financially perilous for the packagers and producers they work with, and therefore, for their own work.<\/p>\n
\u201cFrom my perspective, a threat to the producers is a threat to the industry,\u201d wrote Lou Caron, president of the alliance, to his member companies in an email. \u201cThese businesses, the producers, are customers of our members.\u201d <\/p>\n
Caron is also a board member and secretary-treasurer of a new organization, Californians for Affordable Packaging<\/a>. That organization not only drove a widespread lobbying and marketing campaign this summer to get lawmakers to pause and repeal the single-use plastic law, Senate Bill 54, but were also party to a lawsuit to overturn California\u2019s Truth in Recycling law, Senate Bill 343. <\/p>\n \u201cThe goal is to capitalize on the nationwide outcry surrounding affordability and California\u2019s cost of living topping the U.S.,\u201d Caron wrote in a July 13 email to his staff, which he said was drafted by Anthropic\u2019s Claude AI.<\/p>\n Caron confirmed the authenticity of the emails and the internal strategy document. He said they were prepared by him for internal use only. <\/p>\n In an email to The Times, he said members of his organization don\u2019t oppose the idea behind the single-use plastic law \u2014 that producers, not the public, should be responsible for what happens to their products \u2014 however, \u201cwe oppose a law that is largely unworkable and, in certain cases, cannot be understood.\u201d<\/p>\n William Valentine, a spokesman for Californians for Affordable Packaging, said his group had nothing to do with Caron\u2019s emails or documents, although his organization supports \u201cpractical, affordable, safe, and sustainable packaging policy in California.\u201d<\/p>\n Asked about the industry push to destroy the laws, Sen. Ben Allen (D- Santa Monica), the author of both plastic laws, said, \u201cI suppose the irony here is that we\u2019re all talking about affordability. The difference is that I\u2019m concerned about affordability for Californians and working families, rather than affordability for corporations who are polluting and who don\u2019t want to make changes.\u201d<\/p>\n He said the laws \u201cwill save money for residents because it finally shifts financial accountability onto the polluters who are pushing out all this plastic into the marketplace and creating all sorts of costs for taxpayers and ratepayers.\u201d <\/p>\n He noted this latest industry pushback isn\u2019t universal; it does not include the California Chamber of Commerce or the American Chemistry Council, a national trade group that represents plastic producers and chemical manufacturers.<\/p>\n However, in July, the Teamsters wrote a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature requesting a \u201creimagining\u201d and pausing of the single-use plastic law. A spokeswoman, Alexandra Banash, said labor is not involved with the affordable packaging organization and the Teamsters had not seen Caron\u2019s memo. <\/p>\n Senate Bill 54, California\u2019s landmark single-use plastic law, went into effect on May 1. By 2032, it requires a 25% reduction in single-use plastic packaging and foodware sold in the state. All packaging material also must be compostable or recyclable. It puts the cost and onus of waste disposal on the producers and packagers, not the public or local government who have, until now, had the burden of cleaning up plastic pollution.<\/p>\n Senate Bill 343 is the state\u2019s Truth in Recycling law, which requires that all materials that carry a recycling label actually be recyclable as defined by the state. A judge placed an injunction<\/a> on that law in July, after Californians for Affordable Packaging, and Caron\u2019s alliance \u2014 as well as 19 other industry groups \u2014 sued<\/a> over the law\u2019s constitutionality.<\/p>\n Caron wrote in an email to his members that the goal of that lawsuit \u201cis to delay and\/or amend SB54 which is a significant threat to business(es) delivering packaged products to California end users.\u201d <\/p>\n But he warned their efforts could lead to \u201ca ballot initiative asking voters to approve draconian regulations.\u201d <\/p>\n In 2022, many groups representing plastic and packaging producers \u2014 such as the American Chemistry Council and California\u2019s Chamber of Commerce \u2014 supported the implementation<\/a> of the single-use plastic law as a way to get environmental groups to drop a ballot initiative <\/a>that would have reduced single-use plastics in the state.<\/p>\n At the time, some environmentalists warned the industry would use the law as a way to delay plastic reduction before eventually killing it.<\/p>\n