Green issues elevate election for plastics industry

The 2020 U.S. election has more significance than usual for the plastics industry, with the direction of national policy around plastic waste heavily influenced by which party controls the White House and Congress.

It may not be a front burner issue in campaigns, but legislation about plastics, recycling and waste has been flying around Congress the last two years in ways that are new for the United States. And both presidential candidates have weighed in on plastics bans and fracking.

"I see somewhat of a perfect storm in the political and policy issues around plastics," said Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, who has cosponsored several plastics related bills.

Pingree, who represents Maine's coastal communities, says there is growing public concern about plastics in the ocean and microplastics in food, as well as the impact on taxpayers from poor recycling markets, all driving legislative interest.

"We've seen the crash of recycling, which has presented a big dilemma for our communities," she said. "That's led many of our states and cities to ban plastics."

Lawmakers and industry lobbyists often point to the large amount of bipartisanship around the issue, such as in the Save Our Seas marine plastic legislation, and they say that concern from lawmakers in both parties will drive interest no matter the election results.

But there are also very different visions in Congress about where to go next, making control of the presidency and Senate key for determining which ideas stand a chance of becoming law.

Some proposals have a traditional focus, emphasizing more money for curbside recycling or research in areas like chemical recycling to help deal with low plastics recycling rates. Bills like the Recover Act, the Recycle Act and the Plastic Waste and Recycling Act fall into that camp.

Other lawmakers push ideas that are very new at the national level in the U.S., like single-use plastic bans, producer responsibility that would have industry paying more to bolster recycling, bottle bills and tougher regulations on pellet pollution from factories. The Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act is in that camp.

It's a very fluid situation, and that has the top lobbyist for one industry association concerned if the Senate and White House switch to Democratic control.

"If there is one party control in the House, Senate and the administration, the likelihood that legislation harmful to the industry could move through, it's very likely," said Matt Seaholm, vice president of government affairs at the Plastics Industry Association.

But Seaholm also cautioned that even with one-party control in Washington, it can be difficult to pass major legislation: "I think we've seen that in recent years."

If Democrats wind up controlling both chambers and the presidency, Seaholm thinks the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act could be the basis of activity in Congress.

"I think it's the start of a vehicle that moves next year, especially if there is one-party control," Seaholm said.

But he also said that even if control of the White House and chambers in Congress remain divided between parties, interest in plastics environmental legislation will grow.

Pingree agreed on both points: That the direction of legislation depends on the election, and also that if Washington remains divided, concern will keep growing.

"A lot depends on probably the partisan balance of the administration and the Senate," she said. "If the balance changes, I think you'll see a lot more climate change and environmental legislation move all the way through and be signed by the White House.

"But even if we don't have a change, I think that this is a growing issue," Pingree said. "I think we have a growing awareness of plastics."

Pingree, who signed on as a co-sponsor of both industry-backed Save Our Seas proposals and the environmentalist-favored Break Free bill, said she thought provisions of the Break Free act could be broken off and moved separately, or attached to language in appropriations bills. She sits on the Appropriations Committee.

"I think the demand will continue to increase for having legislation that moves forward, both at the federal level and in the states," she said.

Beyond environmental pressure and state and local government actions on plastics, industry positions have also changed in ways that could speed alignment for legislation.

One example: The Recycling Leadership Council, an ad-hoc coalition of about a dozen business groups, formed in early 2020 to try to fashion more comprehensive solutions to recycling, including with a specific push in Washington.

One of the lead members, the Consumer Brands Association, put out a policy paper suggesting fees on virgin resin and on packaging to help fund recycling, as well as much more nationalization of recycling policy.

In the following months, plastics groups also changed some of their positions: the plastics division of the American Chemistry Council in October endorsed packaging fees and extended producer responsibility (EPR) concepts to fund recycling.

EPR is also a major part of the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act. While the plastics industry opposes that bill — Seaholm notes product bans and language that would put a moratorium on large plastic plant construction while additional pollution rules are developed — some aspects of it are finding more support within industry.

For example, industry groups are voicing more support for recycled content legislation in plastics products, which is part of the Break Free Act and proposals in several state legislatures.

An executive with plastics packaging maker Amcor Ltd. noted a law that passed in California in August that requires plastic containers in California's bottle bill system to have recycled content, starting at 15 percent in 2022 and rising to 50 percent in 2030. Supporters call it the toughest standard in the world.

"I think you'll probably see more of this come in other states eventually," said Terry Patcheak, vice president of research and development and advanced engineering at Amcor Rigid Plastics in Ann Arbor, Mich.

Seaholm said he hoped to see a bipartisan interest on plastics legislation in Washington, similar to the Save Our Seas Act, rather than "getting some sort of political revenge on an industry."

"There's a desire by, I think, a lot of members of Congress to maintain a sense of bipartisanship and try to continue to down this path of something like Save Our Seas or anything similar that doesn't necessarily … try to enact some sort of political revenge," Seaholm said.

While environmental issues take up the most attention for plastics government affairs folks these days, other area likes trade and fracking are being watched.

President Donald Trump significantly changed the direction of trade policy with sizable tariffs on Chinese imports, duties on imports of steel and aluminum from many countries and withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement.

The renegotiated North American trade pact Trump pushed among Canada, Mexico and the United States was strongly supported by the plastics industry, but the administration's China tariffs split the industry, with large, export-dependent resin makers opposed but other firms supporting them.

For the Democrats, former Vice President Joe Biden has said he's open to reevaluating the China tariffs. But business executives expect trade tensions with China to increase no matter who is in the White House, according to a survey from consulting firm PwC.

"That outlook reflects a lack of significant differences in the trade policies of President Trump and approaches being signaled by former Vice President Biden," PwC said. "Trade is shaping up to be a rare bipartisan issue in Washington."

The American Chemistry Council, however, said it does expect a potential Biden administration to take a more targeted approach on tariffs, based on what campaign advisers have said, according to Ed Brzytwa, ACC's director of international trade.

He said the Trump administration has used tariffs as a policy tool to try to encourage reshoring of manufacturing to the U.S., although he argued that ACC doubts their effectiveness in doing that.

Fracking is also a point of contention, with the campaigns trading barbs over potential restrictions by a Biden administration.

Industry officials say low-cost natural gas from fracking is a key driver of the U.S. chemical and plastics industry's global competitiveness and has fueled major new investments.

The Biden campaign's stated policy is only to limit leases for new oil and gas fracking on federal lands, a small portion of overall U.S. production. But the Trump campaign accuses Biden of wanting to ban fracking and Trump's supporters have said a Biden administration could enact other regulatory restrictions.

The Department of the Interior has said that permits on federal lands account for about 10 percent of U.S. natural gas production.