Iowa business lobbyists are pushing to make 2018 the year that the Legislature repeals or revises the so-called bottle bill, a 5-cent deposit law that many Iowans applaud but grocers despise.

The Iowa Grocery Industry Association has helped to spearhead a push to replace the bottle deposit requirement with an expanded statewide recycling and litter control program. The association continues to discuss the issue with key stakeholders, said Michelle Hurd, the association's president. The coalition supporting the repeal includes Hy-Vee, Iowa's largest grocery chain.

"We want to keep the conversation going and provide a solution to move Iowa forward," Hurd said. She contends the beverage container law, authorized in 1978, needs to be revisited, and grocers say they don't want to be bothered with redeeming nickel deposits on unsanitary cans and bottles.

State Rep. Andy McKean, R-Anamosa, vice chair of the House Environmental Protection Committee, told The Des Moines Register he favors an "improved and expanded bottle bill" that would eliminate the redemption requirement for grocers.

McKean's proposal would increase deposit and handling fees, broaden the program to include additional types of beverage containers and be aimed at encouraging Iowans to return their cans and bottles at local redemption centers.

"This would assist our struggling redemption centers and encourage the opening of additional centers," McKean said. "It would be a positive step for the environment, economic development, and would make it possible to remove cans and bottles from Iowa grocery stores."

Iowa currently recovers 86 percent of its beverage containers, according to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. The law covers all carbonated and alcoholic beverages, and about 1.65 billion containers are redeemed annually in Iowa. The combination of the beverage container law and existing curbside recycling makes Iowa one of the top recycling states in the nation.

If the Legislature repeals the deposit law, the percentage of beverage containers recycled would be expected to drop to the national average of 29 percent, opponents say. They contend large volumes of cans and bottles would be tossed out of car windows, creating unsightly litter in urban neighborhoods and in rural ditches. However, Hurd said any repeal legislation would address litter and recycling.

The legislation aimed at scrapping the bottle law is also supported by Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Kum & Go, Casey's General Stores, Kwik Trip Inc., Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Stores of Iowa, Iowa Beverage Association, Iowa Association of Business and Industry and Iowa Retail Federation.

Polls through the years have shown widespread public support for the law. A statewide poll conducted in February by J. Ann Selzer, president and owner of Selzer & Co., showed that 77 percent of Iowans surveyed favored either retaining the current beverage container law or expanding it. The poll, which had responses from 700 active Iowa voters, found broad support from Republicans (74 percent), Democrats (81 percent) and independents (81 percent). Nearly nine in 10 Iowa voters (88 percent) said the bottle bill has been good for the state.

Mick Barry, president of Mid-America Recycling in Des Moines, the state's largest recycling business, spoke against repealing the deposit law during the 2017 session of the Iowa Legislature. But he confirmed that he is now working with an Iowa Bottle Bill Coalition to consider alternatives during the 2018 session.

However, scrapping the existing redemption law and putting more beverage cans into curbside recycling bins is not a "silver bullet" solution, Barry said. The problem is that it would dramatically increase the volume of recycled materials, overwhelming recycling operators and increasing recycling costs, he said.

"This is not simply a matter of getting rid of the bottle bill. And it is not simply a matter of leaving the bottle bill where it is. We would be OK with that, but it is not the solution," Barry said. "We need to ask, 'What is the next evolution for the bottle bill and recycling?'"

During the past legislative session, the Iowa House Environmental Protection Committee narrowly approved House Study Bill 163, which would repeal the 5-cent bottle deposit program and replace it with a broader recycling and litter reduction program. The Republican-sponsored measure was subsequently assigned to the Iowa House Ways and Means Committee, where it remains alive for consideration in the legislative session that convenes in January.

However, two Republicans who voted for the deposit repeal bill in the House committee last session are now voicing doubts about the legislation.

"I think repealing the bottle bill would be extremely difficult. When the repeal was floated last session, I heard from constituents en masse that they would be opposed to it," said Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton. "As far as a floor vote in the House, I am not there, and I am not sure I would get there" to support a repeal.

Rep. Clel Baudler, R-Greenfield, said he has concluded that repealing the bottle bill "is wrong for rural Iowa," and he will "never, ever again" vote in support of the legislation considered last session.

But Baudler added that he would "absolutely" support an increase in the bottle deposit to a dime or more. "I would also expand it to water bottles and juice containers," he said.

Nathan Cooper, executive director of the Iowa Wholesale Beer Distributors Association, said his organization opposes the repeal bill advanced last session.

"From our perspective, it's a pretty successful system, and it's good not only for litter control, but putting valuable materials, especially aluminum, back into the system," Cooper said.

State Rep. Chuck Isenhart of Dubuque, the ranking Democrat on the House Environmental Protection Committee, said he is open to talking with majority House Republicans about possible legislation on the issue in 2018. But he said he has been rebuffed by GOP legislative leaders when he's suggested a bipartisan approach.

"My position is that a recycling bill has to be written by a bipartisan group of legislators and not negotiated among lobbying groups and handed to us, which is certainly what the bill was that we got last year," Isenhart said.