By adamg on Tue., 10/21/2014 - 8:44 am
Baker and Coakley debate tonight at 7 p.m. on WGBH. The three other candidates were not invited.
Baker is focusing on Boston, but he has little choice.
What can we glean from Baker's handling of mental-health services when he worked for Bill Weld back in '91?
Associated Press looks at the spending on the ballot questions this year.
Bill Galvin quietly gives state contracts to a firm that has worked on his re-election campaigns.
Speaking of bureaucratic positions still filled in elections, you get to choose a state auditor this year.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Headline on bostonglobe.com about Baker is great clickbait
By Nancy
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:16am
The headline reads "Mental health record may be predictor for Charlie Baker." When I first saw it I thought "Charlie Baker has a mental illness? Jeez - I wonder which one? Did he go through a period of depression? Anxiety? Mania?"
Then I read the article (skimmed, to be honest) and found that it's not about him having mental illness. It's an article about how he outsourced and cut mental illness services in Massachusetts.
I need another cup of Joe before I can cogently comment on the comments but BRAVO to the Globe for that headline. Well done!
p.s. - As someone who does have a couple of mental illnesses rolling around my brain, that Globe headline seems like a nice little jab that helps stigmatize it even more. My first response was "Well that's odd - it seems like this information about Charlie would have come out before now."
But no, it's just another "Vote for Martha" advertisement disguised as a news article.
Escheatage
By Dave
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:33am
More play money for the politicians. Every container that doesn't get returned, even those that get properly recycled, means another deposit goes to the state.
Well
By Kaz
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:36am
We could make the deposit money like the parking meter money and define a specific requirement that it be spent on so it's not "play money" for politicians, then bring in far more than is needed and have a well-funded account that we can't legally use for anything else at all even though there are needs everywhere and people are still paying well under market rate for parking.
We could do that instead.
Yeah
By Dave
Wed, 10/22/2014 - 11:50am
Because they have such a good track record of doing that it the past.
For instance,
AAA World Magazine, Jan/Feb 1991: $120M of revenue from a gas tax increase was supposed to be used to bring in federal matching funds for funding road and bridge projects, but they couldn't keep their hands off it and grabbed all but $7.4M.
No mention of Coakley
By anon
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:19am
receiving campaign donation from NationalGrid prior to their 37% rate increase?
http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnist...
Can someone explain what
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:22am
Can someone explain what possible benefit there is to passing question 2?
I recycle everything. I don't even need to put my trash out every week, so much of it gets recycled. But when I have home recycling pickup, why on earth should I be penalized for using it!? I buy a lot of bottled water, for a variety of reasons, and 99.9% of the bottles get recycled. In fact I even often reuse the bottles myself before recycling them. Having to pay a bottle deposit on these would be a significant amount of extra money, raising the price of a case of bottled water by 30% (from $4 to $5.20 for a 24-pack). And it's unrealistic to expect me to save all these bottles (many of which get recycled at work or in recycling bin on the street) and let them accumulate separate from my regular recycling, then carry them down to wherever I can redeem them, when it is several orders of magnitude easier to just place them in my recycling bin with all my other stuff as I use them.
I just can't possibly see how this would benefit anyone.
And the only people who seem to be opposing it are the supermarket and beverage industries.
Is there something I'm missing here?
It's not all bad.
By Boston_res
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:43am
I put an extra bag out with my trash which only contains deposit bottles. There are several low-income elderly people in my neighborhood who collect them to turn in for the deposit. If I can start adding more bottles to that bag then I will.
Of course, you can always buy a reusable plastic or metal bottle and fill it yourself. That right there eliminates any deposit you have to pay.
OK, I'll explain
By perruptor
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:44am
It's not about you. You recycle everything. Lots of other people don't. Lots of people don't even have curbside recycling. Some people wouldn't recycle their water and juice containers even if they did, because they're all about the convenience -- it's so much more convenient to just toss the bottle on the side of the road as they pass. A deposit addresses their littering two ways: If they know they can get a little cash for the bottle, they might not toss it. If they do toss it anyway, somebody will pick it up, because now it has value.
You are not going to be penalized for recycling. The expanded deposit law will make you responsible for generating water-bottle waste. Currently, people who don't buy water in bottles have to pay for the disposal of the things, so those people are penalized.
If the extra $1.20/case is a burden, perhaps you should consider saving the entire $5.20 by filling a reusable bottle with tap water. Tap water supplied by the MWRA is at least as good as any bottled water, and is rigorously safety-tested, which bottled water isn't. It's also available practically everywhere.
But I'm not "generating water
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:59am
But I'm not "generating water bottle waste" because I recycle them.
And you never did explain how this doesn't penalize people who recycle at home. You merely scolded me for buying bottled water and suggested I not do so. (Side note, Aquafina tastes SO MUCH BETTER than what comes out my taps up on the North Shore. I'm not sure where exactly my tap water comes from but it's gross. That's not the only reason I buy bottled water though.)
Lets try a different example. I buy cases of tea that I like to bring with me to work, and in the car, which I think would alai be covered by the expanded deposit law. It sounds to me like I would be penalized for recycling these at home. Like I'm being penalized because some other people don't/can't recycle. Why doesn't the state spend money on subsidizing recycling pickup for the towns that somehow in this day and age still don't have it? Are bottle deposits a revenue stream? (Genuine question)
Hey DTP, I get that you are
By Carty
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:09am
Hey DTP, I get that you are being thoughtful. But you are most certainly generating waste (it's not free to generate new bottles from the ones your recycle) that others choose not to, for whatever reasons.
I live downtown, there are no-deposit water bottles littered all over the fucking place, when this law passes there will be none.
Making bottles out of
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:21am
Making bottles out of recycled plastic is not free, no, but it's certainly not wasteful, especially considering I often reuse bottles before recycling them (whether by refilling them with tap water and freezing them to become free ice packs, or by filling them with things like orange juice to drink on the T - which is way less wasteful than buying individual bottles of juice! ).
And no, actually, an expanded deposit law would not make those bottles in the street magically disappear. It would just give homeless people an incentive to pick some of them up, and then push them down the sidewalk in a stolen shopping cart.
Honestly, having grown up somewhere without a deposit law, I don't see any difference in the amount of litter, and I don't see any more people recycling here.
My experience says you're mistaken
By perruptor
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:37am
I remember when all beverages came in returnable bottles. Then the bev industry changed to disposable plastic bottles, and roadside litter exploded. It was unbelievably ugly, and it cost a huge amount of public money to try and clean it up. The Bottle Bill almost completely eliminated bottle litter -- until bottled water became popular. Used to be, nobody bought water in bottles. Why would they, when the stuff was essentially free? Advertising convinced people that paying money for it was somehow a good idea, and water bottles started winding up all over the countryside.
I am 100% sure that expanding the Bottle Bill to water bottles will do for that class of litter what the original bill did for the beer and soft-drink litter. Those "homeless people" you seem so scornful of would pick up what the hydrated litterbugs left, and they would put the litter into the recycling stream, just like they do with soft-drink bottles today.
And no, actually, an expanded
By Carty
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:49am
and ... then redeem them for the deposit. Dude, they don't just hoard them.
While I have you, people scavenging for deposit bottles are not all homeless, it seems to be a popular activity among some of my elderly Chinese-American neighbors. "Frugal" does not equal "Homeless".
"Universal Hub - Come By to See How Little People Actually Understand About the Homeless."
Thankfully
By Felicity
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 12:00pm
we'll still have used Dunkin' cups littered every-fucking-where
And also the discarded losing
By kvn
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 12:36pm
And also the discarded losing Lottery scratch tickets. There should be a waste disposal surcharge on those, half a buck, with credit applied to the next purchased ticket.
That's a good idea
By Stevil
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 12:48pm
I care less about the lottery tix than the damned cigarette butts all over town. How about a nickel deposit on every cigarette butt?
Cambridge St - Cambridge
By Alex_Toth
Wed, 10/22/2014 - 9:33am
Top litter source in the front yard:
Bottles (deposit or not) are pretty low on the litter list. I'd rather they just tack money on to problematic products to pay for people to deal with the resulting litter.
MWRA (Quabbin) water is usually considered quite good
By Ron Newman
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:22am
so I'm curious if your town gets its water from MWRA, or somewhere else.
Have you considered a Brita or Pur water filter? Yes, those generate some waste too, but a lot less than continually purchasing bottled water.
No, my town does not get its
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:28am
No, my town does not get its water from the MWRA. MWRA water is the best tap water I've tasted, but it still doesn't come close to the taste of Aquafina (which is imo the only bottled water that actually tastes better than tap).
And yes, for a while I did have a brita filter, but it still didn't come close to the taste or convenience of bottled water.
You didn't know?
By perruptor
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:44am
Aquafina IS tap water.
As for filters, if you buy and install a countertop or undersink filter unit (about $75), you'll get excellent-tasting water and save hundreds of dollars a year. Every few months, you'll have to spend $15 and about two minutes replacing the filter element.
Of course Aquafina is just
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:50am
Of course Aquafina is just tap water. Everyone knows that! But whatever they do to filter it makes it taste significantly better than my tap water. If it didn't, I wouldn't pay for it!
And again, I tried a filter, but it still didn't taste as good as Aquafina, and still isn't as convenient.
Aquafina is just filtered tap
By SL
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:58am
Aquafina is just filtered tap water!
MWRA Water
By cybah
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:49am
and water in New England is some of the safest, and freshest drinking water in the world. We, as New Englanders, take our water source for granted. I've yet to see why bottled water is so popular in New England when we have such good water here.
I have friends in Arizona, where brown water coming from the tap is the norm. He wishes he could drink it like he did when he was in New Hampshire. Instead, he has Nestle Water delivered.
As a condo owner, we receive these newsletters every year from the MWRA. And just about every year, they win awards on taste and water quality against other muni's across the US. I think last year they won "best tasting water" in some nationwide completion.
If your water doesn't taste good, it's your town or supply from the street (some of these old houses still have the original 1920s water line to them), not the MWRA.
Living on a dead end
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:00am
We live on a dead end, and did have some issues with water quality before they replaced all the pipes in our area. It is even better now that they are replacing the gigantic mains on the main road, but during all this construction there has, at times, been sediment, brown water, and off odors.
We solved this when we re-did our kitchen and bought a fridge that dispenses filtered water. We got a selzer machine, so we don't even buy that anymore.
I do keep some multi-gallon tubs of Poland Spring or whatever in storage, which we rotate out by using it when camping. We got caught out without it when the Aquapocolypse hit.
Seltzer Machine
By cybah
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:08am
Is probably the best thing I bought for myself in a very long time. I love soda, my teeth not so much, so I found a good alternative. Seltzer with a spritz of fruit juice is yummy.
It's the pipes
By bohemka
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:33am
The water is only as safe as the pipes carrying it. People living in old houses with lead (or even brass) pipes, fittings and solder are in danger of ingesting neurotoxins with water from their tap, and this can cause a whole range of issues with young children.
It's not just stupid consumerism or mindless preference. There are real health-related reasons why people in New England buy bottled water.
Test your water then
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:42am
Don't assume that you have lead pipes as a rationalization for incredibly wasteful (and expensive!) bottled water use. Get your water tested. Some municipalities will do this, or you can arrange for it.
http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/water/dri...
http://www.mwra.com/04water/html/qual6leadinfo.htm
http://www.bwsc.org/COMMUNITY/lead/lead.asp
BWSC Lead Hotline: (617) 989-7888
I have tested my water
By bohemka
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:45am
Don't assume? Physician, heal thyself.
But the links are likely useful for others.
Even if one HAS lead pipes....
By Michael Kerpan
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:46am
... is this a problem if one runs the water for 2 or 3 minutes before drinking/using it?
Sure
By bohemka
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:57am
Well it should flush the contaminated water from the line, and it's fine for me, but if you have little children in the house, or are mixing formula, whatever, running the tap for a few minutes each time isn't very practical.
I was simply saying there are valid reasons for purchasing water. The community here of course knows better.
I don't think you have to pre-run water....
By Michael Kerpan
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 12:05pm
... every time you use a faucet -- only if it hasn't been used for several hours. I feel more confident over MWRA water than bottled water -- and we used tap water (pre-run) even when our kids were still actually kids. ;-}
True
By bohemka
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 12:11pm
True, if the water hasn't been standing for hours it should be fine.
Okay then
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:55am
I assume that you are also aware of problems with the plasticizers in some plastic bottles as well (BPA?) and their potential effects?
Seems you just can't win.
Yes
By bohemka
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 12:05pm
Of course you cannot win, but you have to pick your battles with risk mitigation. Lead is to be avoided with young children. Period.
Exactly! Thank you! We're not
By anon
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 1:53pm
Exactly! Thank you! We're not buying luxury items like sugary soft drinks, we're buying water. Water is essential, Pepsi, Mountain Dew are not. Old building, old pipes, lead pipes, over chlorination, etc. There are plenty of reasons NOT to shame those of us who buy bottled water and recycle. No need to penalize people who do the right thing.
So get a filter
By perruptor
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 2:19pm
Like I said, an undersink filter will take out all your lead, chlorine &c, and will save you hundreds of dollars a year. Don't be a chump and buy somebody else's tap water, clean up your own.
Yeah, get a filter, you
By Scratchie
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 3:00pm
Yeah, get a filter, you fucking moron! Geez, it's amazing that you can even breathe on your own without perruptor telling you how to do it correctly!
Will the 5 cents break you?
By Waquiot
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 3:21pm
I'm going to be honest, I am undecided on this one, but some of the arguments against are pretty tough to take.
When I go to a beverage vending machine, everything costs the same. A Pepsi will cost $1.50, a Diet Pepsi will cost $1.50, and the Aquafina will cost $1.50. Essentially, either the deposit is being subsidized or you are being charged the extra nickel for bottled water.
The argument on the other end (how do I bring my bottled water bottles back, or do I even want to? Does this mean the end of curbside recycling, which is a means by which the deposit scavengers get their materials to make money and thereby make the deposit system work) are out there, but crying poverty in a place like Boston because somehow you "have to" buy bottled water is a bit much. Lead pipes are barely an issue (oh, yes, they are an issue, but not for almost all of the city), and purifiers or softeners should handle other issues.
If you can afford the added expense of bottled water, would the extra five cents really destroy your budget?
Is there a reason you aren't fixing the problem?
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 3:30pm
Or making your landlord fix the problem? In some places, this is required, particularly if you have small children.
Bottled water is a luxury item. Period. Most people have perfectly good tap water, yet many still buy bottled water out of the phony notion that it is healthier.
I suppose it is a "luxury"
By Bob Murphy
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:45pm
I suppose it is a "luxury" item, but the amount of scorn for bottled water drinkers in this thread is alarming. I could care less about an extra nickel but many of you need to lighten up over the fact that some people simply prefer bottled water from time to time.
I'm very aware of, and grateful for, the MWRA and our excellent water quality (growing up in Winthrop, home of Deer Island's enormous water treatment plant meant an entire childhood full of annual field trips to the Quabbin as part of the town's "mitigation" package). That said, once in awhile, or perhaps when I'm out and don't have water with me, I'd like to think I can splurge on a simple bottle of cold water (regardless of its real or phony health benefits) without others acting as if I've just cut down an entire rain forest!
And if you do buy that bottle of water
By Ron Newman
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:34pm
I'd like to see it end up in the recycling stream, not in the trash (or, worse, in a nearby river). That's why I support Question 2.
Nothing against bottled water
By Waquiot
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 11:33pm
However, why should bottled water be treated different than tonic or iced tea or some other beverage? When someone says they "need" bottled water and that the deposit would be onerous, sure, hackles will be raised.
Yes, this
By perruptor
Wed, 10/22/2014 - 10:51am
I suppose I'm one of the people being accused of having "scorn for bottled water," but it's not that. Buying the stuff is a choice, and some people may honestly believe that they have good reasons for that choice. When they then go on to claim it's a necessity, and that a nickle deposit is punishment, I do tend to lose patience with them. It's not a necessity; free or much cheaper alternatives are readily available. A nickle deposit is not a punishment; it's a fee for contributing a specific item to the waste stream.
Recycled material is still part of the waste stream. Towns pay to have recycling bins emptied. They pay less than for emptying trash barrels, but they still pay. Yes, lots of other things are also common litter, and I would not object to seeing lottery tickets and Dunkin' Donuts cups and the like having a deposit.
I don't hate bottled water; I just don't want to pay for the collateral waste, or have to pick it up from in front of my house.
The process of recycling is
By zz
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:24am
The process of recycling is not without waste, nor is the creation of the bottles in the first place. Sure, you may contribute less to a pile of garbage, but you are contributing more to pollution and other negatives by not just using tap water.
It seems to be pretty well documented that bottled water is evil in pretty much every way.
Triple the recycling rate
By jeffkinson
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:50am
According to supporters, the recycling rate for bottles with a deposit is 80% (that includes both redemption and regular recycling). The recycling rate for bottles without a deposit is 23%.
Unfortunately I can't find any more detail about where those statistics come from, but if the deposits are anywhere near that useful, that's an amazingly successful program.
Best source I could find: http://www.yeson2ma.org/wp/learn-more/
Do you redeem your beer bottles?
By Kaz
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 9:55am
If yes, then you'll probably redeem your water bottles too. They're a lot nicer to deal with after a few weeks of sitting around waiting to be taken in than a beer bottle is, that's for sure.
If no, then what do you care? You are already willing to pay $1.20 for a 24 pack of beer cans and lose the $1.20 to whomever is collecting them from your recycling or it's just being lost to the government who can use the money to deal with any societal ills that come from selling beer in boxes of 24 at a time.
So, what's the point? We waste a lot. If waste has value, then there'd be less of it. How many littered soda cans do you see around the city? How many Dunkin cups in comparison? Now, imagine if Dunkin cups had a 5 cent deposit on them...
I currently rarely buy
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:06am
I currently rarely buy anything with bottle deposits. I sometimes buy soda out of vending machines at work (no deposit), and I rarely ever buy beer or soda or similar at the grocery store. That's why I care. Not sure why you made this about beer.
And I've never seen anyone dig bottles out of my recycling, but maybe that's because I live in the suburbs.
Again, if the bottle deposits overall increase recycling rates, that's great, but isn't there some other way to accomplish this besides penalizing people who already recycle? Like ensuring everyone has curbside pickup, and making recycling cans as ubiquitous on street corners as trash cans?
Soda from vending machines has a deposit
By Ron Newman
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:20am
if it's dispensed in a bottle or can, as most vending machines do. Maybe you have one of those old-fashioned machines that dispenses the soda into a paper or plastic cup, but I doubt it.
It's actually a very modern
By DTP
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:25am
It's actually a very modern machine that even takes credit cards, and dispenses all manner of bottles, cans, etc.
The price is $1.50 for 20-ounce soda bottles. Maybe the deposit is included in that $1.50, but it's certainly not in addition to the regular price, and $1.50 was a fairly standard vending machine price back when I lived in a state without a deposit law as well, so it sure doesn't feel like I'm paying anything extra.
Yes, the deposit is included
By perruptor
Tue, 10/21/2014 - 10:50am
Soda in bottles or cans cannot be sold in MA without charging a deposit. Because someone doesn't tell you doesn't mean you're not paying the deposit. If you read the label on the bottle, it will tell you it's returnable for deposit in MA. the price may be the same as when you lived in that other place, but that's just because the price is wildly inflated . . . for your convenience.
Pages