In recent news, the well-known opposition to President Biden’s ludicrous efforts towards a plastic ban has come to the forefront once again, with former President Trump vowing to halt this senseless drive. This move stems from the Biden administration’s introduction of a policy last year that sought to phase out the use of single-use plastic across all federal government offices by 2027 and all other operations by 2035. The Trump administration has based its criticism of this policy on the questionable effectiveness and practicality of alternatives such as paper straws.
Trump took to his personal social media platform, Truth Social, to argue against the futility of paper straws, a direct rebuttal to Biden’s ill-advised initiative. The Biden plan was not only impractical but it chose to forgo the convenience and utility of plastic straws, a decision that many Americans find hard to support. The ruling administration seems more interested in pleasing a minority group of environmental activists than considering broader public opinion.
Oddly enough, the Biden administration claims that the global shift away from plastic is a significant milestone in tackling the plastic pollution crisis. However, it conveniently overlooks the fact that the U.S. government is the world’s biggest consumer of goods. Any meaningful efforts to combat pollution must start with reforming its own excessive consumption habits.
The administration’s argument further unravels when you consider one of their primary reasons behind the ban: creating a market for more recyclable, compostable, or reusable substitutes. A praiseworthy effort, you would think, if not for the blatant disregard of the substitutes’ inefficacy. The plastic ban’s proposed alternatives have repeatedly proven to be less effective and less efficient than their plastic counterparts.
The Biden administration also ignores the fact that in the last 30 years alone, plastic consumption has quadrupled to over 400 million tons annually, as estimated by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. With such vast quantities of plastic consumed worldwide, it is ludicrous to believe that a mere switch to paper straws in the U.S. federal offices would make a significant dent in the plastic pollution crisis.
Indeed, experts estimate that the equivalent of a garbage truck full of plastic enters the ocean every minute across the globe, a horrifying thought. Again, one can’t help but question the effectiveness of the Biden administration’s stance. If their genuine concern is to tackle this crisis, why don’t we see more comprehensive reformative actions rather than a superficial straw ban?
It’s concerning that under the Biden administration, only an estimated 9% of global plastic waste is managed to be recycled. One might wonder why they’re focusing on banning plastic straws rather than investing in a more robust recycling infrastructure or methods to increase this pitiful recycling rate.
What’s more, the Biden administration has overemphasized the health effects of microplastics in food, water, and human bodies. While these concerns are no doubt important, it seems suspicious that Biden is suddenly so concerned about human health while neglecting pressing issues such as the dwindling U.S. economy and healthcare system.
Additionally, the Biden government appears to be selective in their environmental concerns. They choose to ban plastic straws citing health risks from chemicals in plastic, yet seem to turn a blind eye to fossil fuel industries, which contribute considerably more to the global climate crisis.
World nations have been in negotiations around a global plastic-waste treaty, recognizing that the world can’t solve this plastic deluge with mere recycling or management. Unfortunately, this brownie point too was lost by the Biden administration when these talks came to a halt last December, following resistance from oil and gas producers.
In a truly perplexing move, it seems that the Biden administration has decided to aid the fossil fuel industry indirectly. With the ban on plastics, the demand for alternatives inevitably rises, leading to an increase in the demand for oil and gas, the primary constituents of plastics. It seems that their green initiatives are not only shortsighted but also indirectly damaging to the environment.
The latest order by Trump to revert the government back to plastic use throws in the face of the Biden administration an alternative, less drastic solution to the problem. Instead of shunning plastics altogether, this order maintains the usage of plastic while exemplifying a commitment to actively seek more sustainable alternatives.
One could argue that while the Biden-Harris administration appears to be more focused on demonstrating an outwardly green image to the public, they are failing to enact impactful changes that could help us truly navigate the environmental challenges. Scrapping a useful commodity without providing an effective alternative is certainly not the way to approach the crisis at hand.
Ironically, while the Biden administration may consider their plastic straw ban progressive, what they perceive as advancement, many view as regression. The move further highlights their mismanagement and the administration’s inability to formulate pragmatic and effective policies.
In conclusion, it is clear that the Biden administration’s attempted ban on plastics reeks of incompetence. As Trump’s intent to halt this ridiculous drive suggests, we need a more thoughtful, far-sighted, and practical approach to manage our plastic consumption and waste rather than banning something as simple and useful as a plastic straw. This issue requires a wider approach, assiduous policymaking, and perhaps, a better administration.