This week, out-of-state corporations launched a last-minute attempt to slow down implementation of Maine’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for Packaging law, a practical and proven approach to reducing taxpayer costs and curbing wasteful packaging. As the Senate co-chair of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee, I want to clarify why Maine lawmakers passed this law, the rigorous process behind it, and the immense benefits it brings to Maine’s communities and environment.

The EPR for Packaging law is not an untested idea – it’s a proven model successfully implemented in dozens of countries and regions across the globe. In fact, the majority of the developed world already requires producers of packaging to share in the cost of managing the waste they create. Maine is following a well-worn path that reduces waste, improves recycling rates, and ensures the financial burden does not unfairly fall on municipalities and taxpayers.

This law took years to craft, with broad public input and careful deliberation at every step. It passed after a three-year legislative process that included multiple bills, work sessions and stakeholder input. Rulemaking has continued for an additional two years, with dozens of public meetings and opportunities for improvement. Contrary to claims that businesses need “more time” to develop a workable solution, there has been no shortage of engagement opportunities. Unfortunately, many of those now criticizing the law – including the large out-of-state corporations responsible for our waste crisis – have consistently failed to offer meaningful alternative solutions and instead are working hard to thwart the law.

Let’s be clear: Maine has a waste problem and right now the burden for dealing with it falls solely on our taxpayers. Voluntary efforts by some businesses have not been enough. Without systemic change, taxpayers and municipalities will continue to shoulder the costs of managing waste from packaging, while large corporations remain unaccountable. The EPR for Packaging law shifts these costs to where they belong – on the producers who have control over the materials they put into the market.

The statutory exemptions for small businesses and updated rules demonstrate the state’s responsiveness to business concerns. Yet opponents continue to mischaracterize the law, despite these concessions. Small- and medium-sized Maine businesses with annual revenues under $5 million are exempt from the law. This legislation is targeted at large corporations – such as Amazon, Walmart and Procter & Gamble – that are responsible for the majority of packaging waste, much of which is single-use plastic. These companies already comply with similar laws worldwide. If these companies can adapt in other markets, they can do so here.

Opponents claim uncertainty about costs, but these costs are not new. They are currently borne by Maine’s property taxpayers and municipalities, which budget for waste management without knowing what materials will come into their towns or if markets will exist for those materials. Under EPR, producers will have financial incentives to reduce packaging waste, creating a system that is both more efficient and environmentally sustainable.

Critics suggest these costs will be passed on to consumers. However, evidence from other jurisdictions does not support this claim. These scare tactics aim to manipulate public opinion and officials, undermining a law that benefits Maine people and protects our environment. Companies that produce plastic packaging are keen to keep the market for single-use plastics in packaging prolific, as it benefits their bottom line.

Finally, it is important to note that full implementation is still two years away, with clear guidance and support forthcoming from the stewardship organization. This measured timeline ensures that businesses can prepare and adapt effectively.

The EPR for Packaging law is a practical approach that addresses our waste crisis while supporting Maine communities and taxpayers. It aligns with practices around the world, where businesses take responsibility for the lifecycle of their products. Maine deserves no less.

On Dec. 5, the Board of Environmental Protection is expected to vote on this critical rule. I urge my fellow Mainers to see through the misinformation and recognize this law for what it is: a step forward for our state, our environment and our future.