The opposition by House leaders to expanding the reach of the bottle deposit law is becoming more and more bizarre.

It’s one thing to say there are unacceptable costs associated with expanding the bottle deposit law to noncarbonated beverages such as water and juice. It’s also possible to argue that the bottle deposit law is redundant since most communities already offer curbside recycling. But to call a bottle deposit a tax is like calling a pig a giraffe.

Yet that’s what Rep. Joseph Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat, did this week after the Senate attached an amendment to a jobs bill that would expand the bottle deposit law. “We view it as a tax in the House and the speaker and the House have been clear with their opposition to increases in taxes,” Wagner, the House chairman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development, told the State House News Service.

Others have joined in the charade. Chris Flynn, president of the Massachusetts Food Association, said the state stands to recover an extra $20 million a year in unclaimed bottle deposits if the bill passes. He called the unredeemed bottle deposits the equivalent of a tax. “If it walks like it and talks like it, it is a tax,” he said.

Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, knows a tax when she sees one, and she admits a bottle deposit isn’t a tax. In a memo to lawmakers this week, she said CLT has always been careful to differentiate between a tax and fee. She said a bottle deposit falls in neither category, since the nickel deposit can be reclaimed when the bottle or can is returned.

Yet because Anderson feels an expanded bottle deposit law would hurt smaller food stores, she has nevertheless jumped on the deposit-as-tax bandwagon. “Let’s consider it a tax and urge the House conferees to reject it, as the House has commendably rejected taxes this session,” she wrote in her memo.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo started all the tax double-talk to justify his refusal to let the bottle deposit expansion come up for a vote. His actions prompted supporters of an expanded bottle deposit law to explore alternative routes to passage.

It started a couple weeks ago when Sen. Robert Hedlund, a Republican from Weymouth who takes pride in his opposition to new taxes, filed an amendment to the state budget that would have expanded the bottle deposit law. The amendment had enough votes to pass, but some senators didn’t want to publicly cast a vote for the controversial bottle bill if it was only going to be defeated in the House. They urged Hedlund to push for a voice vote, but Hedlund pressed for a roll call, prompting a backlash that led to the bill being sent off to legislative limbo.

Then the jobs bill, a high priority of DeLeo, came over to the Senate and Hedlund filed his bottle bill amendment again. This time he listened to those who counseled for a voice vote, and Senate President Therese Murray gaveled the amendment through. “If they’re going to give me a layup, I’ll take the layup,” Hedlund said.

Hedlund finds it ironic that Republicans like himself who oppose tax hikes favor the bottle deposit expansion, yet Democrats who have voted for many tax increases in the past are opposed to it. Rick Sullivan, the governor’s secretary of energy and environmental affairs, backs Hedlund on the tax issue. “It is absolutely not a tax,” he said. “Take the bottle back and get your five cents back.”

Rep. Alice Wolf, a Democrat from Cambridge, said the bottle deposit expansion belongs in a jobs bill because it will create new economic opportunity. “There are glass manufacturers who are waiting for these glass bottles. There are plastic recyclers who are waiting for these plastic bottles,” she said. “The bottle bill will create jobs in the Commonwealth.”

Hedlund is not optimistic, however, that his amendment will make it out of the House-Senate conference committee working on a final jobs bill. DeLeo can’t let the amendment pass without losing face. Only one of the five conferees, Senate Republican Richard Ross of Wrentham, publicly supports the bottle deposit expansion.  Wagner is the lead House member of the conference committee. And the only debate about the bottle deposit expansion has been focused on the non-sequitur that it’s a tax.

“It’s baloney. It’s a fig leaf,” Hedlund said.

Bruce Mohl oversees the production of content and edits reports, along with carrying out his own reporting with a particular focus on transportation, energy, and climate issues. He previously worked...