Vote for a Circular Economy
2024 United States Election
🌎 Did I cat-ch your eye? 🐈
As United States citizens stroll to the polls this season, I wanted to understand what is on the ballot for the Circular Economy. While the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal (2021) laid some foundations for recycling, there is much more to move on for a Circular Economy to become a reality in the United States. Read more about global policy here.
Below I’ve outlined current legislation related to the Circular Economy in the United States, with a specific focus on Washington State and Nationally. In summary, we have candidates backing battery recycling, extended producer responsibility (EPR), plastic recycling, chemical regulation, and water. I encourage you to write your representatives and vote for those aligned with this guidance, with the caveat — always consider a candidate’s full spectrum of issues before determining your vote.
📦Find Your Reps: The National Caucus of Environmental Legislators
I discovered this group in my search and love that they are tracking key issues nationally across environmental goals with helpful visuals too!
Extended Producer Responsibility: https://www.ncelenviro.org/issue/extended-producer-responsibility/
Plastic Pollution: https://www.ncelenviro.org/issue/plastic-pollution/
PFAS (toxic chemicals): https://www.ncelenviro.org/issue/pfas/#map
⚡SB 6319 / HB 2501 — Improving the end-of-life management of electric vehicle batteries.
Government: Washington State
Status: In Committee for 2025 Session
Candidate Sponsors: Senator Derek Stanford, House Rep Sharon Tomiko Santos, and House Rep Chipalo Street (King County), and House Rep Greg Nance (Kitsap County)
Why: This bill will aid in establishing a system for safe recycling and repurposing of EV batteries. Rare mineral supply chains are rife with environmental destruction and social crimes including child labor. There is also the reality of global resource scarcity, the need for supply chain resilience, and discoveries that new deep-sea mining resource paths are potentially more damaging than previously thought. Building a local resupply chain will ensure infrastructure electrification can scale and sustain affordable rates. EPR is also a gateway for Right to Repair because design for recycling means design for disassembly.
Critique: I would like to see this bill’s phrasing updated to include “electrification infrastructure” including batteries, e-waste, etc. Electric vehicles are a large sector although we also need to consider public infrastructure such as rail, home power-wall units, micro-grid storage, small mobility solutions like e-bikes, electric equipment, and devices.
Bill Info Here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=6319&Year=2024&Initiative=false
Lots more bills in WA State including Right to Repair! Learn more here: https://lwvwa.org/2024-waste-diverson/
♻️ H.R.9676 — Accelerating a Circular Economy for Plastics and Recycling Innovation Act of 2024
Government: National
Status: Introduced to the House
Candidate Sponsors: House Rep Larry Bucshon (Indiana — not seeking re-election) and House Rep Don Davis (North Carolina)
Industry Sponsors: American Chemistry Council
Why: This is a bipartisan initiative to establish standards and unify the over 9000 different recycling jurisdictions as well as technologies that exist in the USA. Requiring minimum recycled content standards for claims will help establish trust and stoke demand. This is also connected to the FTC’s Green Guides which may be updated to advise that a product must be recyclable within at least 60% of the jurisdictions (that means the processing equipment is available).
Critique: I like that there is a proposal to fund a lifecycle study for comparable materials however I have caution because similar studies have focused on a specific energy mix and processes to assign a decision to a material category with a diverse spectrum of possibilities. This could be an opening for accelerating the use of biomaterials — which I personally believe are best for any “consumable” (including fast fashion technology) with a lifespan under 2 years or that is meant to be damaged/degraded through use. At the end of the day, recycling is a downstream bandaid that is only part of the solution. Read more about technology for the circular economy here.
Bill Info Here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/9676
Related Initiative: In July 2024, the Biden-Harris administration announced the goal to phase out federal procurement of single-use plastics from events by 2027 and from all operations by 2035 🙌
💧 S.1430 / H.R.7944 — Water Systems PFAS Liability Protection Act
Government: National
Status: Introduced to the Senate
Candidate Sponsors: Senator Cynthia Lummis (Wyoming — up for re-election in 2026), House Reps John Curtis (Utah) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Washington State)
Industry Sponsors: Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, Water Environment Federation, American Water Works Association, National Rural Water Association, National Association of Clean Water Agencies
Why: In April 2024 the EPA designated certain synthetic chemicals as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, with the intent that “polluter pays,” however there are gaps in exempting water treatment utilities from liability claims (should they not follow the Clean Water Act). The bill seeks to point to the original water supply polluters (users of chemicals) as the sole entity liable, which I can get on board with.
Critique: The Government Accountability Office already tracks that only 50% of waters have been assessed at a point in time for cleanliness with the others having unknown contamination status. Water utilities currently rely on self-reporting and a dearth of government technology funding to track water quality. This bill is somewhat of an admission of the inability of utilities to comply, however, the true cost does lie in the hands of the polluters.
The EPA regulation also only covers a specific category of chemicals. Systemically, there is still limited pressure to shift chemical use to cleaner alternatives, upgrade disposal practices, and adopt improved treatment processes. The people who are most impacted and suffering from environmental toxins are still vulnerable with a whack-a-mole approach. This issue has been covered in the 2000 drama about PG&E crimes, “Erin Brockovich,” the 2018 documentary “The Devil We Know” addressing the impacts of Dupont pollution, and the 2019 film “Dark Waters” a drama adaptation of Dupont’s history of chemical pollution cover-ups.
As we run out of fresh water, protecting this resource is critical!
Bill Info Here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7944/text
💡Related Bill You Should Support: H.R.3490 — Water Infrastructure Modernization Act of 2023, introduced by House Rep. Ruben Gallego (Arizona) to authorize grants for smart water infrastructure technology and other optimization purposes. From my experience working in the WaterTech space and speaking with US Government representatives in the rural water sector — we are decades behind in public infrastructure modernization. This causes cybersecurity issues, slows and increases the cost of compliance (as certain folks are pushing to negate above), and impacts the health of every citizen.
