The clunkiness of the Commonwealth’s laws on alcohol sales was on full display over the holiday season, as lawmakers scrambled for a way to let charities keep holding wine auctions. No one noticed until close to the holidays, the State House News Service reported, that the law allowing the auctions was set to expire Jan. 1, and lawmakers were refusing to renew it as part of a larger bill to allow out-of-state wineries to ship directly to consumers. While the Legislature eventually extended the current law to allow the charities to auction wine, lawmakers are still stalling on the bill allowing direct shipment of wine. It’s time for Beacon Hill to get moving — and stop putting the interests of liquor stores ahead of consumers.
A US Supreme Court decision in 2005 struck down state laws that prohibit out-of-state wineries from shipping directly to consumers; Massachusetts had such a law. But the Legislature, under pressure from alcohol wholesalers and retailers, has dragged its feet about setting up licensing rules for direct shipments. And in the absence of such rules, few wineries or shipping companies will risk sending wine into the Commonwealth.
Comments
It is always about campaign contributions and getting elected/reelected. Oh, and threats, let's not forget those.
Maybe it is time we had a referendum as to whether businesses could make campaign contributions and to place a limit on personal contributions? Well, I can dream about having a real government, can't I? After all the Constitution starts out with "We the People..." not "We the People and the Businesses...", or, as seems to be the case here: "We the Businesses...."
Is it my imagination or is this state having a real problem moving into the 19th century?
To HistoryisJustThat- Perhaps a more practical initiative than calling for a referendum would be to aim for term limits. As things stand now, on all levels of government, including federal, the position of legislator has become a career choice. Therefore, getting re-elected is essential, and, campaign contributions are needed for that. And the retirement benefits include being able to keep contributions unspent. If we can limit the term of the president, why can't we insist on the same rule for all legislators and end the motivation to remain in office as long as possible?
Actually, term limits will make it worse. With term limits only the lobbyists and special interests will know how to get things done. By the time the legislators get a feel for the job they will be gone (to a job a lobbyist offered him for his vote). We need a better informed and involved electorate. We can only blame ourselves for the people we elect.
This comment has been removed.
I fully echo the points made in this editorial. The argument over competition is specious. The tiny wineries I visit out of state do not produce enough product to make it worth their while to fight the restrictions imposed here. As for under-age drinkers avoiding the law, what teen-ager is going to have the patience to mail order wine, pay with a credit card and wait by the door for delivery in the future? The restrictions have already been judged discriminatory and, perhaps, unconstitutional. Massachusetts remains one of about a dozen states with this dubious distinction of prohibiting wine mail order by citizens. The experience of those states that do permit mail import is that it does not adversely impact the alcohol wholesalers and retailers. It is simply a different market being represented. It is long past time for Beacon Hill to get moving.
This comment has been removed.
What is missing from the editorial - and requires a follow-up article - is what is being done in other states? I'd like to know what the other New England states do and if there are problems, for example
This comment has been removed.
Dear Representative Ted Speliotis,
Don't look to compromise with liquor stores and distributors. Allow Direct Shipment of Wine to Mass as the US Supreme Court decision allows. There isn't two sides to this story. Only one. Allow direct shipment of wine to Massachusetts.
And by the way, take a look at your email some time and reply. I've written to you numerous times about this.
--Steve
I'm a retailer and couldn't care less if wineries ship directly to Massachusetts consumers. While we offer most available wines there's definitely a lot of wineries that you can only buy direct from. Changing the law would have very little impact on our businesses. People aren't going to go through the hassle of importing wines from outside the US so you're talking about wines from California, Oregon and Washington state, for the most part.
Is this the only alcohol distribution law in MA that does not make sense. I think not.