Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Massachusetts Question 3, Recycling and Environmental Standards for Packaging Initiative (1992)
| Massachusetts Question 3 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Business regulations and Pollution, waste, and recycling policy |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Indirect initiated state statute |
Origin |
Massachusetts Question 3 was on the ballot as an indirect initiated state statute in Massachusetts on November 3, 1992. It was defeated.
A “yes” vote supported requiring all packaging used in Massachusetts starting July 1, 1996, to meet certain environmental standards by being reduced in size, reusable, recyclable, or made from recycled materials. |
A “no” vote opposed requiring all packaging used in Massachusetts starting July 1, 1996, to meet specific environmental standards by being reduced in size, reusable, recyclable, or made from recycled materials. |
Election results
|
Massachusetts Question 3 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 1,071,219 | 40.77% | ||
|
|
1,556,298 | 59.23% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Question 3 was as follows:
| “ | Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 6, 1992? | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
This proposed law would require all packaging used in Massachusetts on or after July 1,1996 to be reduced in size, reusable, or made of materials that have been or could be recycled. The proposed law would provide for exemptions for health, safety, and other reasons and would establish penalties for violations. Packaging would have to be either reduced in size by at least 25% every five years; or designed to be reusable at least five times, with at least 50% of such packaging actually being reused; or recycled at a 50% rate; or composed of 25% or more of recycled materials (increasing to 35% on July 1, 1999 and 50% on July 1, 2002); or composed of materials being recycled at an annual rate of 25% (increasing to 35% in 1999 and 50% in 2002). The requirements would apply to any packaging or containers used to protect, store, handle, transport, display, or sell products. These requirements would not be applicable to tamper-resistant or tamper-evident seals; packaging for medication or medical devices; packaging merely being shipped through the state; packaging required by federal or state health or safety laws or regulations; or flexible film packaging necessary to prevent food from spoiling. The state Department of Environmental Protection could also grant exemptions for packaging that represents an innovative approach for which additional time is needed to meet the requirements of the law; or packaging made of material that cannot be reused or recycled, and cannot be made of recycled material, but is being composted at a significant rate; or products for which there is no complying packaging and for which compliance with the law would impose undue hardship (other than increased cost) on Massachusetts residents. A person applying for an exemption would pay a fee to be used, subject to legislative appropriation, to pay the cost of administering the proposed law. The Department would be required to issue regulations to carry out the proposed law and would be required to investigate suspected violations. After issuing a warning, the Department could assess administrative penalties of up to $100 for each offense and up to $10,000 for any single shipment or single continuing act of noncompliance. The state Attorney General could also file court actions for civil penalties of up to $500 for each offense and up to $25,000 for any single shipment or continuing act of non-compliance, and could seek a court order requiring compliance. Each non-complying piece of packaging would be considered a separate offense or act of non-compliance. The proposed law states that if any of its provisions were declared invalid, the other provisions would remain in effect. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Path to the ballot
An indirect initiated state statute is a citizen-initiated ballot measure that amends state statute. There are nine (9) states that allow citizens to initiate indirect state statutes.
While a direct initiative is placed on the ballot once supporters file the required number of valid signatures, an indirect initiative is first presented to the state legislature. Legislators have a certain number of days, depending on the state, to adopt the initiative into law. Should legislators take no action or reject the initiative, the initiative is put on the ballot for voters to decide.
In Massachusetts, the number of signatures required for an indirect initiated state statute is equal to 3% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. Massachusetts also has a distribution requirement that requires no more than 25% of the certified signatures on any petition can come from a single county.
The state Legislature has until the first Wednesday of May in the election year to pass the statute. If the legislature does not pass the proposed statute, proponents must collect a second round of signatures equal to 0.5% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. The Legislature also has the power to place an alternative measure alongside the proposed statute via a simple majority vote of the state legislature.
A simple majority vote is required for voter approval. However, the number of affirmative votes cast for the measure must be greater than 30% of the votes cast in the election.
See also
External links
Footnotes
 |
State of Massachusetts Boston (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
