Plastic Bag Ban Bad? - No Reason to Think So!

Not even a few decades ago, it was normal to bring bags to a store instead of receiving plastic bags. Of course plastic bags are convenient, as pointed out in “Plastic Bag Ban Bad”, and the ones we received in stores are very cheap in production, but there is no denying that they are bad for the environment.

Obviously, the city has regulated the use of those thin and cheap plastic bags. It regulated the use of them as extreme as possible. The city of Austin banned the bags. In banning the bags they found a way to bring less plastic into circulation. The problem is that the regulation of plastic bag use and plastic bag recycling in our society hasn't worked so far, and there is no reason to believe that it will work any time soon. There are laws concerning these bags. One example is, that people are supposed to throw them into the trash or recycle them which often isn't happening. This is obvious if we just look at the garbage patches in the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean. In those patches, collections of plastic pollute big parts of the oceans. They fall into pieces, but don't disappear since plastic isn't compostable. This causes a huge problem for animals and plants.

Paper bags don't bring such a big issue to the environment as mentioned in “Plastic Bag Ban Bad”. To produce paper bags, no new trees are cut. They are made of recycled paper. Also if those are tossed into the ocean, they dissolve pretty easily, which of course doesn't mean that we should do that.

The whole purpose in cotton bags is to reuse them. So you buy two or however many you need for one shopping trip, and then you bring them back the next time you go shopping. That's a one time investment! And I cannot see the higher taxes to a one time investment.

The environment is killed more by plastic bags in the ocean, than by the production of recycled paper bags. To use those plastic bags for trash and other things, it is probably best to use plastic bags that can be composted.

Voter ID Laws - The Troubles are There

Senate Bill 14 (SB 14) was passed in 2011. This bill requires voters to show one of seven legal photo identification to vote in elections. Even the Supreme Court decided that this bill is legal.

As long as the name matches the voter ID card, it is easy to vote, but if there is a slight difference, like the middle name's initial in a different spot on the documents, voters will have to sign an affidavit confirming that they are the same person. Only people with disabilities or religious reasons may be exempted from the law.

There are people who claim that the new Voter ID Laws don't cause any change to voters on election day, except that they have to show identification when they vote. Texas' politicians, such as Greg Abbott (Texas Attorney General) claimed on Twitter on election day, that Voter ID laws are “not a problem at the polls”. However he includes a link to an article on news-journal.com, in which problems of the voter ID laws on election day are stated – including examples.

In general the idea of identification at the polls makes perfect sense. Everyone needs an ID for some actions, whether they drive a car, open a bank account, buy alcohol, or enter a bar. And complaints of having to identify oneself for one of those actions are barely heard. So why is the fuss about Voter ID Laws so great?

Here lies the problem: It is generally known, if not before 2011 it is now, that not everyone in Texas who is eligible to vote has a state issued ID. It is not about the fact that some people don't want an ID, it is about the fact that some people simply don't own one. Still, the law was passed in 2011, and after that, it was made easier for people to apply for IDs at the DPS by extending office hours.

Now why were the hours extended after the law was passed, and not before? Wouldn't it have been sensible to take care of people who don't have IDs before the law was passed? By requiring people to have an ID to vote, they are limited if they don't fulfill the required needs of the law. If a law had been passed first that every citizen who is resident in Texas is required to have one of the seven forms of identification that is now needed to vote, it would have saved some people a frustrating election day.

The law was passed, but nobody cared that even if a person is arrested in Texas, they don't have to show identification. They only have to provide their name, their residency address and their date of birth, but not a state issued photo ID.

Now, after the elections on November 5^th, some of the problems have become obvious. Many women never adjusted their voter registration cards after they got married. Also, many people didn't think much of small name differences on their voter registration card, and on their ID until they stood in front of the ballot box and had to sign an affidavit, confirming that they are the same person.

These are just some problems that appeared due to the voter ID laws, and the probability that the majority of the people didn't have to fulfill any extra steps to cast their vote is high, but even if it had been only one person who was sent away due to the lack of an ID, or due to name differences (like the maiden name instead of the married name) it is one too many. The problem lies not in the law itself, but in the way it was enacted. If a law had been passed first, that required Texans of the age of 18 to have an ID, there wouldn't have been so many reasons to be against the law of voter IDs.