The state Legislature has plenty to do during this last scheduled week of the session and during the weeks following when it starts to spend extra tax money to complete its work.

With that in mind, lawmakers shouldn’t waste time bothering to make alterations to the state’s laws for beverage container returns. The law, as it exists, is good government and should be retained.

Grocers, consumers, environmentalists and legislators have all expressed concern about the law this year. Grocers are tired of paying for the service and running disgusting, sticky redemption centers. Consumers don’t care for the beer-soaked mess either, but they like the convenience of redemption centers at grocery stores. And environmentalists argue that the law, written in the 1970s, is archaic and doesn’t cover enough of the new kinds of containers.

No, it isn’t a perfect law, but no law ever is. And some of the complaints are more than a little spurious — have you ever heard of somebody getting sick because an outdoor redemption center somehow contaminated food inside the walls of a store?

None of the proposed alterations to the law do much in the way of improving recycling because they don’t remove any substantial barriers to recycling. Clearly, any system will work best when Iowa citizens, taking pride in their communities, will make all reasonable efforts to recycle not just their cans but also their paper, plastic, cardboard and whatever else can be remade. But many people, hampered by a lack of time or a lack of caring, won’t do this unless all impediments to recycling are removed, and proposed changes to the law don’t change anything about this on the consumer end.

As for grocers wanting a 1-cent piece of the prize for recycling, it’s understandable for any business owner to want to improve revenue slightly and to be paid for services rendered. But the added cost of providing recycling services is not at all prohibitive, and there seems to be no justification for taking money from beverage drinkers and giving it to grocery stores.

And don’t forget the timetable. The state would be best served to send the slew of lobbyists on this issue home for the year and concentrate on bills that will actually affect the state’s future, particularly its immediate future. The state budget comes immediately to mind, all the more so since there is no compromise apparent at the moment.

The bottle bill has served Iowans well for almost 30 years, and it can continue to do so for a while longer. Maybe a more effective Legislature can work out some of the kinks — later. To try to do that now would be overgoverning at its worst.