By Noah Rothman
Monday, May 02, 2022
It was an idea so irredeemably stupid that
political media’s incredulous coverage of it betrayed an
unspoken assumption that it would never be enforced. And yet, for no
discernible reason, every indication suggests New Jersey’s ban on single-use
receptacles will come into force this week. Its most measurable effects will be
to make life marginally more expensive and less convenient.
In the Garden State, disposable shopping bags—not just
plastic bags but paper, too—are no longer available gratis at your local
market. This week, they’ll be retired, along with other single-use disposable
packaging, and violators will be expected to pay a fine. Only now, however,
have local media outlets begun to inquire about the new
ban’s unanticipated consequences.
Previously, coverage around the speculative environmental
benefits of eliminating single-use carryout bags has been entirely circular:
bag bans, research concludes, are an effective way to ban bags! The environmental benefits
associated with forcing consumers to purchase reusable bags, which are
more energy- and resource-intensive to produce than their
disposable alternatives, are far more dubious. Moreover, as NJ.com reluctantly explored on the eve of the ban’s
implementation, the ban’s practical effects will be to make life measurably
more irritating, especially for the low-income and disabled, while forcing the
state to hypocritically avoid enforcing the law when it inconveniences constituencies
this one-party state favors.
This is just one of the many minor inconveniences that
are contributing to a major headache. In the name of this, that, or the other
urgent crisis, Democrats are forcing their eccentric lifestyle choices on the
broader public. Individually, they are hassles that could be absorbed without
producing any broader political effect. Cumulatively, however, the increased
cost of and burdens around daily life are becoming hard to ignore.
Before the onset of the pandemic, blue states and cities
across the country busied themselves with banning the distribution of
single-use plastic straws. The strictness of those bans differed depending on
locale—from total prohibition to just keeping the plastic stuff in reserve,
available only upon request. A public health emergency forced many legislatures
to pause the implementation of bans targeting single-use
plastics, their unparalleled medical value being inarguable. But the bans are
making a comeback as the pandemic recedes, even though no one has yet developed
a biodegradable alternative to plastic straws that won’t biodegrade in your
drink.
The state of California pioneered the now widespread
effort led by the environmentalist left to ban the use of small combustion
engines like those commonly found in lawn equipment. “Small gas engines are not
only bad for our environment and contributing to our climate crisis, they can
cause asthma and other health issues for workers who use them,” said one California assemblywoman. That logic was sufficient to
convince the state to force the individual residents, who own most of the lawn
equipment in California, to invest in and transition to battery-powered
equipment, even though those devices lack the power provided by gasoline-fueled
small engines.
The Biden administration may finish what California
started. The White House’s gimmicky efforts to drive down gas prices has led
the administration to approve the sale of 15 percent ethanol-blended gasoline
over the summer—a threshold that exceeds the limit that can be safely used in
small engines such as those found in lawn equipment. Consumers who don’t want
to see their small engines fused into an unusable hunk of metal will have to
commit the time and money necessary to go find specialized gasoline or purchase
additional chemical stabilizers.
The Biden administration is helping liberate Americans
from the conveniences and frivolities they enjoyed in other ways, too. The 46th
president entered office determined to implement the ban on incandescent
lightbulbs that the Trump administration paused. The new rules will supposedly
save consumers billions of dollars per year and cut global carbon emissions by
a measurable amount, and the National Electrical Manufacturers Association
insists LED lights have been “fully embraced by consumers,” according to NPR.
That is an odd assertion to make given the abundance of complaints raised by those same consumers
who don’t prefer LEDs to the warm light produced by incandescent bulbs. And
old-fashioned filament bulbs remain the preference of consumers farther down the
socioeconomic ladder.
Under the auspices of another imperative–the preservation
of public health–the Food and Drug Administration is reportedly preparing to
ban the sale of mentholated tobacco products. The alleged beneficiaries of this
crusade seem none too happy about it. According to the CDC’s data, young people and African Americans are most
likely to smoke menthol cigarettes, a phenomenon those who want to ban this
product attribute more to pernicious marketing than consumer preferences.
Advocates claim the ban will do more to “reduce health
disparities in the black community” than less targeted actions. But prominent
black activists and interest groups warn this meddlesomeness will have terrible
unanticipated consequences. Among them, the increased likelihood of police
interactions with African Americans whose legal means of stress-reduction has
suddenly been prohibited, and the hypocrisy of governmental efforts to protect
consumers of unhealthy commodities preferred by the gentry class (like
marijuana products) from the regulations imposed on the tobacco industry.
If anything unites these disparate crusades, it is that
modern progressivism has become a lifestyle brand—one that its practitioners
are eager to impose on you. You should avoid single-use plastics, not for
practical purposes but to contribute to the moral imperative of saving the
world. You should use electric equipment to maintain your property. And if your
property has a footprint that doesn’t fit within the compact urban/suburban
circumstances preferred by progressives over sprawling neighborhoods dominated
by single-family homes, too bad. All the horrors of prohibition—from illicit
marketplaces, to overburdening law enforcement, to the increased risk of
unnecessary conflict between police and formerly law-abiding citizens—are
dismissed. If reckless menthol cigarette smokers won’t do what’s best for
themselves, they must be forced to behave more responsibly by a beneficent
state.
There’s a strong whiff of condescension and inter-class
hostilities in these attempts at social engineering. While these and similar
initiatives are not cost-free, taken individually, they are mere annoyances.
Taken together, though, they are prods and shoves in a coordinated campaign
designed to homogenize the culture and stigmatize the private conduct
progressives dislike.
No comments:
Post a Comment