In 2006, for example, lobbyists or the groups they represented made $408,993 in contributions to state candidates and spent almost $287,000 to lobby the executive branch, state records show. Although 2007 contributions are not yet completely reported or updated, early figures indicate that groups lobbying the executive branch will outspend the previous year's total.

An issue at the forefront this year is Culver's proposal to double Iowa's 5-cent deposit on beverage cans and bottles and to expand the deposit law to cover juice, water and other beverage containers.

The idea is one of the major points Culver, the first-term Democrat, made in his Condition of the State speech to the Legislature last month. But since that speech, even the leaders of his party have said the issue is doomed for lack of support and is not expected to come up for debate this year.

Expanding the deposit law is an idea that has floated around the Capitol for more than a decade. But the proposal has been vigorously opposed by groups such as the Iowa Grocery Industry Association.

"I am not going to be deterred by the special interests. In fact, the more they push, the harder we're going to fight to do what is right for the environment and the people of this state," Culver said earlier this month.

Nearly three dozen lobbyists who represent about 20 interest groups have registered against legislative proposals made since Culver took office that would expand Iowa's bottle deposit law.

A review of 2007 campaign reports shows that those groups gave at least $29,450 to legislative leaders, their parties or the heads of the Legislature's environmental committees. Many of the groups have multiple issues before the Legislature, not just the bottle bill.

Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal received the most: $9,600, according to the review. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy received the second-highest amount: $5,550.

Even Culver has accepted at least a $1,000 donation from one of the groups registered against proposals to expand Iowa's bottle redemption law.

Gronstal pointedly said last week that the bottle-law expansion is doomed for lack of support from lawmakers. He also said Culver's plan to close a loophole that allows out-of-state corporations to avoid millions of dollars in state income taxes is unlikely to be debated this year.

Gronstal denied that special interests were to blame for the proposals withering before debate could take place.

"I commend him for putting that on the table, but, as I've said before, this is an issue that has vexed the Legislature," said Gronstal, a Democrat from Council Bluffs. "Consensus has eluded us. There continues to be real concern about the bottle bill, but there continues to be a lack of consensus on how to solve that."

Thousands of legislative proposals are made during a typical two-year General Assembly, which makes it nearly impossible to consider each proposal.

Leaders in both the House and the Senate hold closed-door meetings to help gauge which proposals have enough backing to pass. Oftentimes, a proposal that does not have the needed support is never called up for debate by the full House or Senate.

This is a process used by leaders like Gronstal to help maintain legislative efficiency. But it has also been criticized for stifling debate.

Critics have alleged for years that special-interest groups are able to persuade lawmakers early in the process to oppose various proposals. That persuasion, in turn, holds back debate.

"We've hired the Legislature to come to do what's in the best interest of Iowans first and then get re-elected second," said Eddie Mauro of Des Moines, who last week was advocating with a religious group known as AMOS for lawmakers to take up debate to close the out-of-state corporate tax loophole.

"It seems like when we have these tougher issues like this, their strategy is fearful first: 'How is this going to help me at election time?' " Mauro said.

Jane Clark of the Iowa Sierra Club said she believes manufacturers and big businesses often wield more influence. The Sierra Club, which also hired lobbyists, has generally supported proposals to expand the state's bottle deposit law.

"It doesn't matter what industry it is. If it's about change that's good for the population, industry isn't likely to go along with it," Clark said. "Why are these groups fighting so hard against the bottle bill? I don't know. Think about the money they've spent in the last 10 or 15 years fighting."

Groups such as the Iowa Beverage Association have resisted the idea, saying expansion would be costly for beverage companies and, in turn, would increase costs for consumers.

Other groups, such as the Iowa Grocery Industry Association, have argued that redemption of empty cans and bottles at grocery stores is unsanitary and that a better option would be to expand curbside recycling.

Craig Schoenfeld, a lobbyist for the beverage association, dismissed the idea that his group has placed an unreasonable amount of pressure upon lawmakers.

"I'm flattered to think that people think we have that much authority, power and ability, because we don't," Schoenfeld said.

Culver has said he will continue to urge lawmakers to review and debate the bottle bill. At the very least, the governor said, he wants the Legislature to debate expanding the 5-cent deposit to many noncarbonated beverages, such as water and sport drinks.

Gronstal said that idea is unlikely to gain support of the majority of lawmakers.

Reporter Jason Clayworth can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or jclayworth@dmreg.com