Merger proposal isn´t the answer
By Clifford Case

Like Bill Heenan, I am an honorary director of the National Recycling Coalition. Indeed, I founded it, some 31 years ago. I value Bill as a friend and respect him as a supporter of recycling in general and of the NRC in particular. But Bill is dead wrong that the proposed absorption of the NRC into Keep America Beautiful -- resulting in the NRC´s compete elimination as an independent organization -- will be good for recycling [see "A vote in favor of NRC-KAB merger," July 20, Page 9]. It will not. NRC members should vote "No" on the KAB proposal.

I founded the National Recycling Coalition in 1978 because although there was widespread grassroots support for recycling, there was no national advocate to focus that support and unite recycling´s supporters. Even today, there is no broad-based national recycling advocate other than the NRC. And it is needed more than ever: We face major challenges in increasing recycling of traditional materials as well as addressing electronics and other hard-to-recycle items.

Most recycling supporters agree that structural changes in our nation´s economy -- not just voluntary actions by individuals -- will be needed if progress in recycling is to be made. At the same time, we can expect that greater demands will be made on recycling collection, processing and manufacturing systems to save energy and conserve resources in order to meet the massive challenges posed by climate change.

Is this the right time to eliminate the country´s largest independent national voice for recycling? I don´t think so.

But what about the argument that KAB will provide a good home for the NRC and will be an effective advocate for recycling itself? That position does not hold water. If KAB had had any intention of acting as an effective advocate for recycling, it would have already done so, and would not need the NRC.

The truth is that KAB is an admirable supporter of voluntary efforts to promote cleaning up litter. It is not and never has been an independent advocate for recycling.

KAB´s proposal calls for a council of recycling supporters within KAB. But that council will be subject to full KAB board control and will have little or no impact on KAB´s decision-making when the hard choices that will either advance or retard recycling and resource conservation have to be made.

The only argument in favor of the absorption of the NRC into KAB is financial, namely that KAB will bail out several hundred thousand dollars in NRC debt, built up over several years of apparent financial mismanagement. But selling out -- and silencing forever -- the only independent national voice for recycling for a few hundred thousand dollars is a truly poor bargain. This cannot be the right answer!

Instead, let´s negotiate ourselves out of the current financial bind, work out a responsible repayment plan and rebuild an effective, independent NRC. Our first step must be to reject decisively KAB´s wrong-headed "merger" proposal.

If you support recycling, you must vote "No" on the KAB proposal.

Case is a partner at the law firm Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP in New York City and Washington. He co-directs the firm´s environmental law practice. He founded the National Recycling Coalition in 1978 and served as its first president.

(Aug. 3 issue)