The question is the enormous cost versus the percieved benefit. Very little of the volume actually gets recycled. Ask any plastic company how much post consumer content they use and 98% will say zero because it wrecks their equipment and the contamination factor is way too high. How many products do you see made from post consumer plastic? Hardly any, yet all that stuff being collected has to go somewhere... The packaging waste you worry about brings other benefits: cost efficient, food safety and shelf life, optimal cube for shipping, and damage reduction. If you really want to be "green" with plastic, BURN it and create energy! Much of that resin was derived from natural gas in the first place.

L7 -

I don't know what or how Janesville handles their "recycleables". I know there are some - and I'd say more like a few - cities do reprocess plastic, glass, and paper. I doubt Janesville has a flagship process for these comodities.

I glanced at some of the comments in this thread by our fellow citizens and am amazed at the total disregard so many seem to have of the effects their comsumption habits have on their own enviroment. Talk about poopin' where you eat!

Is it so hard to buy a water bottle and drink from the tap? Take a cloth bag to the grocery store? Fix what you have instead of buying another?

On a somewhat related subject, times are tough in Janesville. You'd be shocked if you knew how many folks we see every day that are hanging on by culling the recycle baskets you leave out for cans and metal.

Tz7: Thanks for your note. Was that material that the City collected at curbside? That stuff is my gripe, not what people choose to turn in on their own. If that is curbside material, please also mention how much glass and plastic actually got recycled. My guess is: not. so. much.

L7, just some facts...

I work at Stateline Recycling. Last month we shipped over 200000 lbs of ferous metal - that's car bodies, old washers, dryers etc - to be melted down and reused. That's over $20,000 to the folks in Janesville who brought in their old metal. We also collect over 1100 lbs of aluminum cans a day - that's over $550 worth. I'm not sure about the metal, but for cans there is a 90% reduction in the energy required to make a can from recycled material than virgin metal, and I'd assume that ferous has very similar savings.

It seems that by recycling, everybody wins. Recyclers get cash in their hands, energy usage is reduced, and hundreds of thousands of pounds are diverted from land fill.

What's not to like?

Sorry to be the skunk at the picnic, but recycling is a COMPLETE scam in the first place. The vast majority ends up in the landfill anyway! Nobody ever reports how much actually gets recycled... The net percentage of what gets recycled would make you run out and cry on the the nearest tree. Extra Trucks, Diesel, special tubs, and union labor/benefits wasted to end up in the same hole anyway, or in an illegal dump in China... The only "green" in this program is our $$$.

The subject is the constitutionality of mandates.

garyprimer - happy to discuss it when the subject is health care reform. Lots to say on the subject.

I do protest.
I am not comparing apples and oranges.
You just don't want to answer the question.
I can respect that.

Thanks scotty
tic off the people some more scotty seems to be fitting
you want to save money sell all the state trooper cars they are not needed as their all in madison any way
instead of out there picking up speeders
or put them in smart cars save on gas ather you send them out on the road again

CA-Gal: I think you make a good point, but for the good side. You say California has a 10+ percent tax. How is it then that you are still in the worst financial situation of any state in the union. Proving of course that rasing taxes really is not the answer. Budget cuts and making state employees pay more benefits is a better start.

Bottom line is local taxes will go up to replace the loss of state funds. State taxes will not be going down. All that is happening is state problems are being pushed down to the local level. Just wait until next winter. Let's see the roads then with 10-15% of the budget chopped.

garyprimer you're off-topic again, plus you're mixing something federal Democrats forced through (health reform) with something state Republicans want to do. Doesn't matter which side of what you are on, that's mixing apples and oranges without a doubt.

But it is unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance?

No because no matter how nice you ask people they still dont.

Let's be consistent here.
Isn't it unconstitutional to force people to buy recycling?

Maybe the 14 democratic gypsies can take our recycling out of state with them each week and toss them into Illinois dumpsters.

justmy414 - no, I'm not all for unfunded mandates, either, but apparently since people would not otherwise do the right thing (IE recycle instead of filling landfills or polluting), we must in some instances endure a nanny state. As I said before, I don't mind paying for what I use. I get tired of paying for what others use. (I also get tired of paying for what others abuse, so if that means paying for recycling instead of cleaning up an environmental mess, I guess I'd rather do that.)

Joy, let me explain---mandate: you must recycle or face significant fines: unfunded-- despite requiring you to recycle as a state law we refuse to fund pick up. Thus I must pay for a service I don't want. Not at all like choosing to pay for a service.

CA_Gal, you pay that much and California is still in a world worse of budget hurt than Wisconsin. We're trying not to end up like your great state. Personally I would rather come to a halt before the edge of the cliff is upon me.

quit your crying u babies! the govs of ill and ca did the right thing by increasing taxes. u could suck it up and pay an xtra 2% at the store and all would be fine. plenty of $ for the state and plenty of $ for the state workers and plenty of $ for the unions. u only pay 5%, you are lucky, i pay 10.75% and U are CRYING.....

Watch our $40.00 fee double ! After all we were told the fee was a bargain to start with.

I think at the end of the day, as one poster pointed out, our state taxes will remain the same, yet we will pay locally for this service. In effect, this is a tax increase. Its just cleverly hidden in political theater, walker is a great player in this theater.

KingRizzo, I agree about the volume ratio and drop-off - and that wherever they can have burn piles, people will start burning if there is drop off instead of pickup.

Donegeal, we probably won't get any back, but he's trying to keep us from paying even more in state taxes. I don't mind paying for what I use. I get tired of paying for what others use.

Dropoff would suck. I put more recycling at the curb than I do garbage- probably 2:1. This is 2011. We can fund pickup. Watch people start burning the trash when pickup ends.

At least communities will have the option of raising money to make up for the shortfall, as compared to Walker slashing hundreds of millions from education and banning the communities from raising money to cover it.

That would be true, JoyM, if our tax money returned from that ethereal place and ended up back in our pocketbook; but that's not going to happen. Our taxes won't be reduced because the state no longer subsidizes recycling. That money that went to recycling will now go somewhere else and then our taxes will go up to help cover the lost state money toward our recycling program (although I must admit I didn't think about changing to a drop off).

justmy414, whether you pay more locally or pay more in taxes for your recycling, you still are paying. It just goes from some ethereal place your tax dollars go to being a clearly-defined line item on your property tax, water bill, or other billing document. It's not a new charge, and the subsidy didn't take the charge away. The only real change would be that the individuals or businesses that use the service are directly paying for it. What a concept.

Welcome to the world of unfunded mandates.