Washington’s recycling system may soon get a makeover. 

A proposal to require companies to reduce unnecessary packaging and fund statewide recycling services is making its way through the Legislature this year. 

The goal is to give more people the opportunity to recycle more types of products and to incentivize packaging producers to use sustainable materials, said bill sponsor Rep. Liz Berry, D-Seattle. Currently, what can be recycled differs by city, and 11 counties have no recycling services at all. Under this proposal, everyone in the state would use the same system. 

“Recycling will become really affordable, really convenient and really equitable,” Berry told the Standard. “It will create this circular, sustainable economic model for recyclable materials.”

Berry’s bill is similar to laws passed recently in Maine, Oregon, California, Colorado and Minnesota. Different versions of the legislation have been debated in Washington during the past two years but never became law. 

Under the program, manufacturers, brands and importers must join a statewide “producer responsibility organization.” 

Producers are required to pay membership fees to that organization to cover the cost of a new recycling system. Fees vary based on the types of products a company uses. If a producer uses more sustainable materials, for example, they would likely pay less. 

If a producer does not want to join the statewide organization, they must register as an individual and pay annual fees to the state.

A national producer responsibility organization already exists to help implement this type of system in California, Colorado and Maryland. 

By March 2029, producers who are not members of the organization or registered with the state could not sell their products in Washington.

Under the bill, the Department of Ecology would develop a list of recyclable materials in Washington. Most plastic packaging and paper products sold, distributed or shipped into and within the state would likely be covered. 

The Department of Ecology would also work on a new education campaign — paid for by producer fees — to make sure all residents know what products they can recycle.

Brenda Fincher, a Kent City Council member, said that the statewide education piece will help clear up confusion.

“It’s uncountable the number of times that I’ve heard that recycling is not happening or that everything can be recycled,” Fincher said at a Thursday press conference. “It’s confusing for the residents right now.”

There would be some exemptions under the proposal. Government entities and charitable organizations would not have to take part. Packaging on infant formula, nutritional supplements, medical equipment and drugs, and hazardous products would be among those not covered. 

If the bill passes, residents could expect to see a change in how they recycle within the next five years, Berry said. The program would be fully implemented within 10 years of passage.

‘Streamlined’ bill

This year’s proposal is supported by environmental groups, cities and counties, labor unions, medical professionals and some producers. 

Dr. Mark Vossler, with Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, said plastic pollution is having negative health effects, especially for those who live close to industrial sites. 

“This is a tremendous environmental justice concern,” Vossler said at a Thursday press conference. “Accountability measures will incentivize companies to move away from toxic or harmful packaging materials.”

Berry said she is hopeful this is the year the proposal finally passes. This version is “shorter and more streamlined” than in the past, and it’s mostly based on the Minnesota bill that became law last year and had broad support, she said.

Berry added that she’s worked on the bill for years and has found many compromises with those who were previously opposed.

“I’m really hoping that members of the Legislature will see how isolated the opposition is at this point and understand that what we’re trying to do is something positive for our state,” she said.

The bill is expected to receive a public hearing in the House Environment and Energy Committee on Tuesday.

Pushback

Despite broad support, the legislation could still run into stiff opposition, particularly from manufacturers, businesses and waste management companies. 

Rep. Mary Dye, R-Pomeroy, said in a statement that she and other Republicans have concerns that the bill would enact “expensive mandates” that could increase costs for consumers. 

“I believe we need to spend wisely by targeting investments to underperforming counties to increase recycling,” Dye said. “We do not need to put new fee increases on packaged products during our current affordability crisis.”

Dye is among those supporting a different recycling bill that does not require businesses to pay. 

That proposal would require producers to register and report their paper products and packaging to the Department of Ecology, which would create a public list of recyclable materials. The bill would also set new standards for how much recyclable material must be in certain products. And it would provide recycling discounts for low-income households.

Rep. Jake Fey, D-Tacoma, is sponsoring this other bill, which has bipartisan support. In a hearing on Thursday, it received backing from business groups, waste management companies, and food and hospitality organizations. Local government organizations, environmental groups and utilities were among those who testified against the bill.

Metal fences, concrete barriers and security checkpoints still line many the walkways and cross streets of the National Mall – extending from the U.S. Capitol down past some of Washington’s most noted landmarks – as the nation prepares to swear in its 47^th president.

But while the 0.6-square-kilometer (146-acre) swath of land is often the highlight of many a tourist visit, it is no longer the focus of security efforts for when President-elect Donald Trump takes the oath of office for a second time.

Frigid temperatures forecast for much of Monday led Trump to move the festivities inside – the inauguration to the U.S. Capitol Rotunda and the traditional inaugural parade to the nearby Capital One Arena.

The changes, first announced Friday, presented a last-minute hitch for security and law enforcement officials, who had been planning for the inauguration for the past year.

And it has left them, and the approximately 25,000 law enforcement and military personnel charged with security, with multiple challenges.

“We will shift those assets,” said the U.S. Secret Service’s Matt McCool, briefing reporters Sunday.

“We have not cut anything from what our original plan was,” he said. “I’m very confident, with our partners here, we will be ready.”

The numbers could make the situation especially trying.

Organizers had expected about 250,000 ticketed guests to descend on the U.S. Capitol and the National Mall to watch the inauguration.

Only a select few will be allowed into the Capitol Rotunda, which accommodates just 600 people. And the Capital One Area seats just 20,000.

If even just a fraction of the 250,000 people who had planned on attending the inauguration try to get to the arena, there could be a crunch.

Washington Metropolitan Police Chief Pamela Smith said Sunday her force, bolstered by and about 4,000 police officers from across the U.S., will be ready.

“Nothing has really changed,” Smith told reporters. “The police officers that were committed and dedicated to coming here, we’ll be flexible in how we’ll adjust [their] movement. … So, we will still have police officers in places and spaces around our city as we initially planned.”

Some of those officers, Smith said, will still be assigned to the original parade route in anticipation that some people will try to get a glimpse of the presidential motorcade as it goes by.

U.S. Capitol Police said they also anticipate having officers on the periphery of the West Front of the Capitol – now closed off with the inauguration moved indoors – ready to direct ticketed guests who will no longer be able to attend.

In addition, the inaugural security contingent, which includes the U.S. Secret Service, the FBI, U.S. Capitol Police, Washington Metropolitan Police, and some 7,800 members of the U.S. Army and Air National Guard, will all be coordinated from a command center linked into an expanded network of cameras keeping watch on the city.

And though security measures in some areas, including along parts of the National Mall, have been relaxed, officials said there will be plenty of reminders for anyone coming to Washington that this is no ordinary time.

“They will see tactical teams,” McCool said, during an earlier briefing with reporters last week. “They’ll see, officers and agents on rooftops, they’ll see checkpoints. They’ll see road closures and barriers in concrete.”

Even before the inauguration was moved inside, officials had been preparing for what they described as “a higher threat environment,” cautioning the security plans for this inauguration were already more robust than in the past.

“The biggest threat, I think, for all of us remains the lone actor,” said Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger. “That threat … remains the biggest justification for us being on this heightened stage state of alert.”

Those concerns were heightened following the New Year’s Day terror attack and truck ramming in New Orleans and the Las Vegas Cybertruck explosion outside the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Earlier this month Capitol Police arrested two men suspected of trying to disrupt the state funeral for former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, one who tried to bring knives and a machete into the Capitol and another who set their car on fire.

Research, including a recent survey by the University of Chicago Project on Security and Threats, adds to the concerns.

“Over 5% of the American public supports the use of force to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president,” Robert Pape, the project’s director, told VOA.

“That equates to 14,000,000 American adults,” he said. “That’s an unfortunately disturbing number.”

Already, Trump was also the target of two attempted assassinations.

There is also an ongoing threat from Iran. Despite repeated Iranian denials, U.S. security and law enforcement officials have accused Tehran of trying to kill Trump, unveiling one plot set to be carried out last year, in the days after the U.S. presidential election.

For now, though, U.S. officials see no signs of impending trouble.

“The FBI is not currently tracking any credible or specific threats to the inaugural ceremony or the Capitol complex,” the bureau’s Washington Field Office told VOA. “We will continue to work closely with our partners to share information and identify and disrupt any threats that may emerge.”

Another source for concern is the tens of thousands of protesters, though so far, there have been no major incidents.

Saturday’s People’s March, which was permitted to have as many as 50,000 protesters, sparked only brief tensions with Trump supporters.

Another group, called We Fight Back, has permits for protests involving about 10,000 people in across several locations on Monday.

“Please note that [we] will ensure your right to peacefully protest and assemble,” said the Metropolitan Police Department’s Smith.

“However, I want to reiterate, as I always have, that violence, destruction and unlawful behavior will not be tolerated,” she said. “Offenders will face swift and decisive consequences … anyone who thinks that they can come into this city to destroy property, we will be prepared to deal with them.”

Kim Lewis contributed to this report.

While Monday’s inauguration ceremony for President-elect Donald Trump is set to break with tradition and take place inside the Capitol due to dangerously low temperatures, it’s not the first presidential swearing in to take place in an unusual place — one president was even sworn in aboard a plane.

The first inaugurations in U.S. history didn’t happen in Washington, D.C. President George Washington was sworn in for his first term on April 27, 1789, on a balcony of Federal Hall in New York City, which was serving as the temporary capital of the U.S., according to the Library of Congress. He was sworn in for his second term at the Senate Chamber of Congress Hall in Philadelphia.

The first inauguration in Washington, D.C.

John Adams was also sworn in as president in Philadelphia. It wasn’t until Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration that the swearing in ceremony was moved to Washington, D.C. Jefferson took the oath of office inside the U.S. Capitol in 1801.

“Wanting to get away from pomp and circumstance associated with aristocracy, he simply walked the few blocks from his boarding house to the Senate, where he was sworn in by Justice John Marshall,” according to the National Park Service. “When it was over, he simply walked back. Returning to the boarding house late for dinner, Jefferson took one of the only remaining seats at the far end of the table. Given the occasion, someone offered him a better seat near the fireplace. Staying true to his egalitarian platform, Jefferson refused.”

Being sworn in outside Washington

While most inauguration ceremonies in the years since have taken place in Washington, not all of them have happened there. 

After President James Garfield was shot in 1881, then-Vice President Chester A. Arthur took the oath of office in New York City at his private residence shortly after Garfield’s death.

President Theodore Roosevelt was sworn in following the assassination of President William McKinley, who was shot on Sept. 6, 1901. McKinley was expected to recover, so Roosevelt, then vice president, went camping in the Adirondacks. Roosevelt rushed to Buffalo, New York, when he heard that McKinley was not expected to survive. He was sworn in as president on Sept. 14, 1901 at the Ansley Wilcox residence in Buffalo.

After President Warren G. Harding’s unexpected August 1923 death following an apparent heart attack, President Calvin Coolidge was sworn in at the Coolidge family home in Plymouth Notch, Vermont. 

President Lyndon Baines Johnson was sworn in aboard Air Force One at Love Field in Dallas, Texas, after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It was the first time a woman administered the oath of office. It was also the first and and only time a president took the oath of office on an airplane. 

Inside the Capitol or outside, east or west

Jefferson brought the inauguration to Washington, but his ceremony took place inside. President Andrew Jackson in 1829 became the first president whose inauguration was held outside on the Capitol’s east portico. From Jackson’s inauguration until President Jimmy Carter’s in 1977, the ceremony largely took place outdoors in front of the Capitol’s east portico, according to the Library of Congress. 

The inauguration was held in March until Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s second inauguration in 1937, so the threat of freezing cold temperatures were not as dire. But in 1841, William Henry Harrison’s inauguration was held on a bitterly cold day and he delivered the longest speech to date — and he died one month later of pneumonia.

President William Taft in 1909, amid heavy snow and strong winds, was sworn in at the Senate Chamber of the U.S. Capitol, although the parade still place outside.

President Ronald Reagan’s inauguration in 1981 was the first to happen on the west front of the Capitol, which has been the customary site in the years since. His inauguration for his second term, however, happened inside. Wind chills made it feel below zero on that day in 1985, so Reagan took the oath of office in the Capitol Rotunda.