You don’t need a law to lead on plastic waste

<A response to SC Johnson CEO H Fisk Johnson’s post on LinkedIn>

I admire any CEO who wants to tackle plastic waste. But saying the only way forward is regulation is a counsel of convenience, not courage.

1) If CEOs agree, act—don’t outsource willpower to Washington.

You sit on a CEO coalition that already spans a huge share of packaged goods. If “everyone wants it,” then set binding industry rules now: common packaging standards, reuse/refill targets, recycled-content procurement, shared take-back infrastructure, contract terms that penalize laggards. The Consumer Goods Forum literally publishes EPR playbooks and “coalition of action” guidance; if you have alignment, you don’t need a federal umpire to blow the whistle you can blow yourselves.

2) Regulation freezes the present and fortifies incumbents.

Complex EPR schemes create reporting burdens, fee tables, and compliance departments that big firms can absorb—and startups can’t. That is a textbook barrier to entry. The result is fewer new materials, fewer novel business models, and fewer upstarts snapping at the heels of complacent giants. Even advocates concede the state rules are diverging and administratively heavy; the “solution” proposed is a single federal regime—which then risks being written by (and for) the largest participants.

3) The price tags aren’t imaginary—and they land regressive blows.

You’ve pointed to British Columbia’s model as proof regulation works, but its own fee schedules show meaningful, rising producer charges that ultimately hit households. Even you’ve acknowledged the all-in cost is around $100 per household per year. That might seem like “only 1%” from the boardroom, but it’s not trivial for families already stretched by inflation.

4) “Patchwork” isn’t proof of federal inevitability; it’s a market opening.

Seven U.S. states now have EPR laws—each different. That’s not a reason to federalize; it’s an invitation for firms to standardize voluntarily across all markets: publish one gold standard for design-for-reuse, recycled content, pellet loss, and truthful labeling—and meet it everywhere. Compete on execution, not on lobbying.

5) Regulation dulls incentives to innovate.

When compliance costs can be passed through, the board’s sharpest tool becomes a checkbook, not R&D. The surest path to less plastic in nature isn’t a thicker Code of Federal Regulations; it’s credible, public, measurable voluntary commitments—backstopped by transparent third-party audits and consumer choice.

A better direction than regulation-first:

* Set time-bound, public goals together (design, reuse, recovery) and publish results quarterly.

*Create real market pull for better solutions (long-term purchase commitments, outcome-based rewards), open to startups as well as incumbents.

*Adopt simple, common standards and transparent data so anyone can verify progress and improve on it.

*Make it effortless for customers to do the right thing with clear labeling and convenient return/reuse options—validated by independent audits.

If the big brands truly want change, they don’t need a statute—they need a spine. Real progress will come from a room full of determined adults deciding to do hard things now.

See all my piece in National Review “Feel-Good Bans on Straws and Plastic Bags Don’t Help the Ocean“