Overview

California businesses face increasing regulation related to air management and waste disposal. Solutions to improving air quality, safely handling waste, and reducing waste in our landfills must take a broad, science-based approach that does not place the entire burden for funding these programs upon businesses.

California law currently contains a plethora of statutes limiting or banning the use of chemicals in consumer products. The body of law governing the use of chemicals in products, producer responsibility for products, and local government responsibility for diverting portions of the waste stream continues to grow. Legislation dealing with these issues has historically been piecemeal and there is an increasing interest in developing a comprehensive approach to regulating these issues.

Goals

Oversee issues related to air quality and hazardous and solid waste, and recommend policies that meet the mutual objectives of protecting human health and the environment, while conserving the financial resources of business to the fullest extent possible.

Major Victories

• Blocked barriers to economic development, including legislation discouraging emission reductions (AB 1404), levying a climate change tax increase (AB 231, AB 1405, SB 31) and unreasonably increasing fines and penalties on business (AB 846).
• Stalled expensive, unnecessary regulatory burdens, including an expanded waste bureaucracy (AB 283, AB 479, AB 737).
• Sidelining expensive, unnecessary regulatory burdens: Halted proposals that would have increased costs for food packaging (AB 904), plastic packaging (SB 899) and consumer electronics (AB 48).

Issue Summaries

Consumer Product Ingredient Regulation
Position: The task of chemicals management is a long-term endeavor driven by ever-changing developments in science. Regardless of the resources directed toward developing data, there will always be more questions to ask and more data to gather—it is after all the nature of the scientific process. The issue is not whether there is a data gap, but rather, how the state can manage its finite resources to best identify and prioritize the uses of the chemicals of greatest concern in consumer products. In the current and foreseeable economic climate, California must adopt regulations that focus on exposures to substances in consumer products sold or used in the state. Consumer Product Ingredient Regulation

Environmental Regulation
Position: The current recession may be prolonged if California’s business climate is further degraded by an environmental policymaking process that does not consider economic impacts. One solution would be establishing a comprehensive economic impact analysis committee in the Legislature or creating economic impact review panels in relevant regulatory agencies that analyze policies before they are passed or adopted. An economic impact committee would help policymakers confront the tough tradeoffs that surface during implementation, ensuring that the best, most cost-effective strategies for environmental protection become state policy. Environmental Regulation

Waste Reduction
Position: California’s success in managing its waste has provided the flexibility to postpone consideration of a costly expansion of waste reduction measures when businesses are struggling to stay afloat and keep citizens working. Rather than charging ahead on more aggressive policies like extended producer responsibility—which would increase costs to businesses and consumers during a historic recession—the state should focus on more reasoned, incremental efforts to keep California’s diversion rates at superior levels without inflicting further damage to the state’s ailing economy. Waste Reduction  

Related Top Stories