In 1988, when wine coolers and canned cocktails were popular, the Michigan legislature amended its 10-cent refund policy to include these bottled beverages. Today, statistically, each person in Michigan consumes up to 100 bottled drinks, including water, fruit juices, teas and sports drinks, every year without having to return the bottles for a cash refund.

New legislation has been proposed that would extend Michigan"s ten-cent bottle return policy to these other drinks. These beverages need to be included to maintain the high standards Michigan has set as one of the leading states in recycling.

The 10-cent refund policy has been in effect for nearly 25 years and has proven itself successful in reducing pollution and promoting recycling in the state of Michigan.

Adding other bottled drinks to the state"s policy would prevent these containers from littering roadways and parks, as well as contributing to already bulging landfills.

New drinks that didn"t exist when the bill was initially passed in 1976 now add approximately 600 million containers to the mass amounts of garbage spewed forth by people in Michigan yearly. These containers are just as easy to recycle as soda and alcohol containers, why not include them by providing a cash incentive? If such drinks had existed in bottled form in 1976, they would have been included in the refund policy.

It is only logical that the bill should be revised to incorporate them now.

As it is, Michigan recycles 98.4 percent of its bottles and cans, more than any other state in the nation. The deposit law saves millions of dollars by reducing the amount of trash hauled to landfills annually by up to 600,000 tons. Including additional containers would also add to the nearly 5,000 jobs already created by recycling in Michigan.

While the bill is being revised, the amount of the deposit should also be taken into consideration. Just as the cost of a stamp has been adjusted over the years to account for inflation, so should the amount of the bottle deposit.

Not only would an increase in the deposit be logical, it would provide more of an incentive to return cans and bottles. After all, if the cost of the beverage includes the deposit, they would be less likely to throw the bottle on the side of the road or one of Michigan"s beaches.

A higher deposit need not be implemented every year, but perhaps every decade. An adjustment for inflation since 1976 could put the cost of a current deposit adjusted for inflation at 20 to 25 cents, an ample amount to make someone think twice about throwing a container into the garbage. At the University, recycling is easy enough. Containers labeled specifically for containers, paper, etc. can be found in every University building around campus. However, in the world outside the University, recycling takes more effort. Steps taken by the legislature to encourage recycling and to make it easier for residents should be met with approval.

The policy was originally passed as an initiative approved by voters to provide incentive to recycle. Today"s proposal to include water, juice, tea and sports drinks containers must be approved by three-fourths of the legislature to pass. There is absolutely no reason that it should not.

As an environmentally conscious University community, it is our responsibility to show support for the preservation of resources and to encourage the state government to continue its efforts to improve the environment of this great state.