On Earth Day, it’s only appropriate to write about some “green” legislation making its way through the legislature.
Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia has introduced AB 2808, the “Green Schools” bill that would require public and private elementary and secondary schools to use “nontoxic cleaning materials.” According to the bill, cleaning materials include glass cleaner, all purpose cleaner, laundry detergent, and dishwashing liquid and detergent. “Nontoxic cleaning material” is defined as “a biodegradable and environmentally friendly product that is made with natural or naturally derived ingredients and free of ozone-depleting compounds and substances that contribute to air pollution or to the buildup of “greenhouse” gases.”
Last week the bill passed its first policy committee, Assembly Education, 6-1, with three abstentions.
The main supporter for AB 2808 is the Green Schools Initiative, an organization founded by “parent-environmentalists” who seek to implement environmentally-friendly policies via the legislature. The group is guided by the Precautionary Principle, which, as explained on their website, advocates “Anticipatory Action.” The group believes that “government, business, and community groups, as well as the general public,” have a “duty to take anticipatory action to prevent harm.” The Precautionary Principle is implemented through policies such as “no junk food, fast food or soda” in schools and “green buildings,” among other things.
As any of my friends will attest, one of my passions is promoting healthy living. This includes reducing environmental toxins that cause many people to become ill. We should all support efforts to create a healthier society—if they are led by private citizens and businesses.
While I applaud the goal of the Green Schools Initiative to create a healthier learning environment, AB 2808 is not the right solution. This bill imposes a state mandate on an issue that should be left to local school districts. Also, at a time when school teachers and administrators are picketing the capitol because of budget cuts, why are some lawmakers creating more costly mandates on cleaning supplies? Given a choice, I think most teachers would rather keep their job than have “environmentally safe” glass cleaner in their classroom.
One of the wonderful things about capitalism is that it responds to the demands of consumers. If consumers believe that a product is not safe for their families (or the environment), they will refrain from purchasing that product and the free market will respond accordingly. If parents and students are concerned about toxic cleaning supplies or unhealthy foods in their schools, then local communities should search for local solutions—especially from private businesses that specialize in this burgeoning “green” market.
I completely agree that we need to have toxin-free schools. And as a self-confessed “health nut,” I agree with having health foods in schools. But how such policies are implemented should be decided by local school boards and parents, not lawmakers in Sacramento.