It’s a direct marketer’s worst nightmare: state and national registries allowing millions of consumers to opt out of receiving commercial mail. Completely.

“Federal and state regulations that’s scary,” says Craig Blake, vice president of sales for W.A. Wilde Co., a direct marketing company based in Holliston, Mass. “I think of the impact of the national Do Not Call’ registry [the four-year-old federal program that allows consumers to opt out of for-profit telephone solicitations] and how that impacted the telemarketing industry pretty significantly from a sales point of view.”

If anything, that’s an understatement. The “Do Not Call” registry single-handedly decimated the outgoing-call telemarketing industry. The prospect of a similar cataclysm befalling direct mail chills the spine of almost every marketer. As of this writing, there’s no formal legislation to establish a national “Do Not Mail” registry but there’s plenty of activity at the state level.

“The movement is gaining momentum,” says Jerry Cerasale, senior vice president of government affairs for the Direct Marketing Association (DMA). In 2006, eight states introduced bills that would have created “Do Not Mail” registries; in 2007, that number rose to 15. At this writing, nine states have already introduced 11 bills preparing “Do Not Mail” registries, Cerasale says, adding that “we expect quite a few more.”

Cerasale cites three consumer-perspective factors driving those efforts:

1. Annoyance at receiving large amounts of unsolicited mail.
2. Concerns that unsolicited mail wastes resources and generates trash.
3. Fears unfounded, Cerasale says that being on commercial mailing lists increases the threat of identity theft.

Cerasale calls the local Do Not Mail registries too restrictive because they offer just one choice: shutting off all solicitation.

“That creates especially huge issues for new companies,” he says. “If there’s a Do Not Mail’ registry and your target customers are on it, you can’t reach them. It keeps people from knowing about new businesses even though they might want to.”

Eliminating mailings could also cause job cuts in related industries, such as paper manufacturing and printing, say opponents of Do Not Mail laws.

How can marketers work locally to help prevent Do Not Mail laws in their home states? Well, says Cerasale, it helps to be as “green” as possible, and to be perceived as such in the marketplace. For instance, one San Francisco retailer doesn’t just encourage its customers to recycle its glossy catalogs; instead, the home-goods retailer’s Web site steers them to a national database where they can search for the closest recycling center that accepts such direct mail discards.

Second, know who your legislators are, both on the state and national levels, and let them know that you’re in their districts. “Invite them to your company, or to your plant, so they can see the economic impact of what you do,” says Cerasale. “Make sure they understand how important the mail is to your business and to your employees who are voters, who are their constituents.”

In a major preemptive effort on a national level, the DMA launched its Commitment to Consumer Choice (CCC) initiative last October. According to its mission statement, the CCC initiative is designed to provide consumers with more “choice over the types and volume of mail they receive.” The initiative’s most significant guideline says that marketers should notify existing and potential customers on every commercial solicitation about how to eliminate or modify future mailings.

“One option has to be Don’t send me any more mail,’” Cerasale says of the notification requirement. “But they can also adjust the frequency or type of contact.” For instance, an apparel company might offer its customers the choice between receiving catalogs monthly or only during the winter holidays, or allow them to specify that they want mailings only for outdoor wear or kids’ clothes.