Michigan Votes Forum

As traditional newspapers struggle to survive in this new digital age, Bruce Patterson (Republican??) wants to saddle them with the additional burden of collecting a rather substantial deposit from the sale of each paper.  This would, no doubt, discourage newspaper sales.  Who wants to keep all of their old newspapers, like so many pop cans, then drive them to a newspaper deposit redemption facility?  With the alternative being that their paper suddenly costs 50% more, I'll bet that many people simply drop their subscriptions and/or stop buying papers on the street.  Wow, way to stab a struggling industry in the back. 

Then there is the issue of these new newspaper collection centers, where people would have to drag their papers to get the money back.  These don't exist yet.  That means that stores, or maybe the newspaper publishers themselves, would be forced to establish a system for dealing with these paper returns.  Another wasteful burden on the employers of this state. 

Why the push to force recycling of newspaper?  It isn't like plastic.  It can be composted.  It's biodegradable.  It's really quite harmless - unlike this absolute stinker of a bill. 

For the love of all things good and conservative:  Please, kill this bill.

Yep, it's absurd.  And I wondered, as you did, who this Bruce Patterson is and why he's pretending to be a Republican.  Maybe a RINO?

My first impulse is to cancel our newspaper, if only on principle.  

This must be an attempt to avoid cutting costs at schools.  I wonder how many cans DON'T get redeemed and how much money Michigan makes on that scheme.  I'm sure it would be more for the newspaper scheme... unless everyone cancels their newspaper subscriptions.  Then the State of Michigan will merely lose the jobs that the newspapers used to provide.  

Way to fight unemployment, Sen. Patterson.

I second the motion:  please, kill the bill.

Recycling newspapers was thought to be a good idea to create cellulosic insulation for homes until massive warehouses were full of the stuff.  Michigan's recycling efforts with plastic soda bottles proves that these penny anny laws for recycling do not work.  The best place for used newspapers and corrugated cardboard is the local recycling center or the burn barrel.

Michigan Senator Bruce Patterson needs a paradigm shift or a new job elsewhere if these non-issues overwhelm his mind.

Good grief!

Newsprint (paper) is one of the first materials that I recall being regularly recycled.  As a Boy Scout I participated in newspaper recycling "drives" back in the 1950s.  As far as I know, it remains a mainstay of the recycling effort.

This legislation is neither necessary nor desireable.  It is not needed to encourage the recycling of newsprint, which is a staple of every recycling program I've ever seen.  It is not desirable in that it only seeks to further burden the already stressed newspaper industry with additional cost and rigamarole that does nothing to enhance the primary newsgathering and news dissemination functions of the business. 

 How do you tell if a newspaper is complete? And how do you put the same deposit on a large metropolitan newspaper versus a local 3 page newspaper? It sounds kind of difficult to implement and enforce.

16% unemployment, second highest auto insurance in the nation, a tax schedule that is in shambles, and now a tax on newspapers.  All deposits are really taxes - they all raise revenue.  Too much time on the legislators hands!  Maybe its time for that constitutional convention.

 It diverts them from focusing on giving themselves another raise (temporarily anyway)

The manpower and logistics required to get back the deposit based on returning more than 50% of the pages of a newspaper is very complex.

Weight varies with each day of a newspaper's printing. Not only that, but it varies by region depending on the addition of local advertising. You have to know, track, and keep records for the exact weight of each publisher's newspaper, from every region, from every single day's printing.

Then you need somebody to check each paper, one-by-one, ensuring you are over the 50% mark to get your deposit back.  This is an impossible task. 

This is just another bad bill by a short-sighted politician.  It has nothing to do with the environment. It's just an attempted revenue grab.

 Patterson just gave another reason to clean house of these idiots in November. Are they going to count pages? How about the inserts? Do they have to be returned?  Another attempt to employ the unemployable. Newpapers are having a bad enough time competing for subscibers. I guess the idiot sponsor of this bill wants to drive the final nail in their coffin. OUT WITH HIM, and those other idiots that want to stink up the neighborhoods with burning garbage or ruin what's left of Michigans economy by mandating utilities decrease production of electrical power and natural gas,

 I think it's time we impose mandatory drug testing for legislators.

 Love the drug testing idea!

What's wrong with less government intrusion - stop trying to make money on the fallicious global warming! Most people recycle at their local city already - so let's cost local government even more money.

Okay, I've thought about it overnight and I finally got it:  it's a joke.  They just wanted to see if we were paying attention.

Okay, legislators, we're paying attention.  Now delete this silly suggestion!

Our you people nuts, or just morons?
My college has free copies of the NYT for faculty/staff and students.  That's $2.50 a copy for news stand prices.  So let's says roughly a "deposit" of $1.25 per paper.  My local paper is $.75.  So a roughly $.37 deposit.  Is the average "recycling" center going to know the deposit rates of the different newspapers?  Will they know to give me 37 cents or $1.25?  So should I snag the unused NYT papers and turn them in for $1,25 deposit for each paper?  What if I cheated and just turned in 1/2 of the paper to get the full refund?  As the line goes from the show Home Improvement, "I don't think so Tim".  Stupid idea!

I'm with those of you who think it would be more beneficial to get rid of Senator Bruce Patterson since this is the best he can do. Eliminating his position would save much more money. (Is he taking stupid pills or what?)

I'm all for the drug testing and think they should also have to take a literacy test before they can run for office.

This would be great for Kindle sales!  Not so good for all the unemployed newspaper people.  This is one of those proposals that would DECREASE tax revenues as tax paying newspapers and their employees close shop...

 It is very difficult to imagine anyone being able to come up with a more idiotic bill as Senate Bill 1285. Mr. Patterson has opened the door to a myriad of other 'revenue generators', such as a tax every time someone sneezes, or maybe when someone passes gas, since both these actions have environmental effects that the government obviously needs to 'benefit' from! Is is any wonder that the taxpayers in this state are ready to 'broom the bunch out' in November? This is just another prime example of the 'brain drain' that currently exists in Lansing. Get REAL, Senator!! (with such a silly idea as this, I am amazed you even reached the position you are currently in...and it's good to know you are about to be a State Senator no longer!!) What a Joke!!