PLCB Compromise Proposal

We get it. Lots of workers are going to lose their jobs if the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB) is abolished and there are lots of arguments for the state control of liquor.

But what about wine?
Only 3 other states (New Hampshire, Utah, and Wyoming) control the sale of wine (as opposed to the 18 states that control liquor). In New Hampshire, you can buy wine at grocery stores, but the state is wholesaler of wine. If the state were to sell wine licenses, they would still make a windfall profit as many entrepreneurs entered this new market. The state liquor stores could continue to sell wine and not waste the time and effort that they've spent on forging relationships with wineries.

In terms of annual profits, liquor sales account for more than 60% of the annual retail sales income which would maintain a steady supply of dough to the state coffers. The 6% State and Local sales tax would still bring $112 Million dollars to the state's coffers. And the 18% State Liquor tax would still bring $271 Million to the state's coffers.

So how about we exercise some bi-partisanship and compromise on this issue? Let's keep union jobs, expand options for entrepreneurs, make a windfall of profit, and maintain a fat revenue stream while still excessively monitoring the sale of liquor.

And maybe while we're at it, we can get a refund on the pathetic, malfunctioning waste of millions of dollars that are the wine kiosks? For those keeping track at home, the wine kiosks are back in action after over a month of being out of service.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Wine Kiosks

In the past, I have lambasted the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board's newest project: wine kiosks. However, now that the wine kiosks are rapidly expanding and making their way to 14 Western Pennsylvania Giant Eagles by September, I'm starting to embrace the idea.

How they work? You're allowed to buy wine from a sophisticated vending machine.

A customer must first scan his driver's license by inserting it into a slot on the kiosk, then peer into a camera so that an LCB employee working at an office in Harrisburg can determine that the customer is the same person pictured on the license.

So what's the next step? Why not have independent stores with the same "safeguards"? Why not have Giant Eagle employ sommeliers next to their wine kiosk who can answer questions and determine which wines fill up the kiosk? Why not let Dreadnought Wines in the Strip District have their own kiosk filled with their own chosen wines?

Who's complaining? The Independent State Store Union. Members of this union know their jobs are at risk. It's unfortunate for the folks who work at the state stores. They have a pretty swell gig with a guaranteed pension in a market that has been ever-increasing for as far back as anyone can remember. But change is inevitable and cushy state pensions are on the chopping block. Ultimately, more options for buying wine will mean more jobs. So I say: Bring on the wine kiosks and may more change keep coming.

The State Liquor Store Hoax

Once again, the subject of privatizing the state liquor stores has been raised, and once again we hear the alarmist cry.

Rebecca Shaver, state executive director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said she supports the current state system and is particularly concerned about an increase in the number of liquor stores."If there is a larger number of licenses being issued, which leads to more availability, which leads to more consumption, we prefer that the system that we have in place remains in place," she said.

But is it true that more liquor stores leads to more drinking and drunk driving? Yet 17.6% of our population admits to binge drinking (7th in the nation). In sheer numbers, Pennsylvania ranked 4th in the nation for number of alcohol related fatalities (which is partly reflected by our #6 population rank). When it comes to underage drinking, we fall in the list to #22 with 30% of our minors drinking. Though 20% of them binge drink (which puts us at #18). There's only one other state in the nation (New Hampshire) which has a state run liquor store. Shouldn't we be tied for last with them in all these statistics if state run liquor stores can prevent drinking and drunk driving?

The farce of the matter is that our politicians hide behind our well-meaning alarmists in order to keep the profits from the state liquor stores headed into the general fund. We do not maintain state liquor stores for safety or to prevent underage drinking. We maintain these stores because they bring in record profits every year. The state has no business in running liquor stores. It's a bloated business that sends out glossy advertisements in the newspaper every week, and severely limits entrepreneurship in the state. The 621 state-run liquor stores could be small businesses that pay taxes and contribute to our society. Instead, we have a monopoly which does not adapt to the individual needs of each region. Instead of attempting to limit alcohol consumption and educate consumers about the dangers of alcohol, the PLCB (Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board) is planning self-serve kiosks and wants to re-brand itself with a new name, such as "Table Leaf."

Customers spend an average of three minutes in a liquor store, PLCB Chairman Patrick J. Stapleton told a state House-Senate committee recently. He called that “unacceptable.”

Officials said the renovations and new focus could generate more money for the state. The PLCB provided the state with more than $518 million for the 2008-09 fiscal year.

Rebecca Shaver, do you really want the PLCB chairman plotting on how to get customers to spend more time in the liquor store?

Grand Jury has Grand Goals

Until yesterday, the sole job of 35 Salaried PennDOT employees was to handle legislative requests - to the tune of 246,000 requests per year. On the Democratic side of the state house, there are at least 10 "PennDOT Specialists" who submit those requests.

The House Republican spokesman, Steve Miskin is livid about the changes. The Tribune-Review quoted the following:

"You're saying the legislator, the vocal representative for that community, can't help their constituents out? That is their job. That is what they're supposed to do."

Steve, your job is to enable constituents to get what they need. It's not to bloat our government beyond repair. What's next? Does the state legislature have special PLCB (Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board) specialists that will place special orders for you when you can't figure out how to do it yourself? Honestly, if you can't figure out how to register your car or get a driver's license, you probably shouldn't be driving.

The grand jury investigated the entire state house and identified these easy pickings as the first steps in attempting to reform Harrisburg. The grand jury is also recommending reducing the size of the legislature, implementing term limits, eliminating per diem supplements, and increasing the term length from 2 years to 4 years. Those changes are pretty radical and will require a constitutional convention in Pennsylvania. These changes will only happen when pigs fly unless we put pressure on the state government. This is an election year for governor, so us voters have some sway this year. Both Onorato and Corbett claim that they want state-wide reform. Let's push our candidates to implement real reform this year and start to chip away at the country club that is our state Legislature.

Beer Revolutions

I'm all for relaxing liquor laws and restricting the PLCB, so at first glance State Sen. John Rafferty's proposed new bill to expand beer sales sounds great. But even I have to blink an eye and hold on a minute when I read this:

'A crowd of about 150 people, many from the Sheetz store chain, held signs calling for a "Beer Revolution" in Pennsylvania, with others reading "I Drink and I Vote," "Free My Beer" and "Get Your Hands Off My 6 Pack."'

Sheetz is involved in this proposed beer legislation in a very heavy-handed way. And this multi-state chain is involved because they see a lot of dollar bills in their future, not because they truly believe in the freedom of beer sales.

When Sheetz is the business writing the bill, the beer distributors are going to be hurt. According to the Post-Gazette:

Currently, most beer is sold by state-licensed beer distributors, and only by the case or keg; under the new bill, they also would be able to sell one or two six-packs.

At least this is a start, but to get the beer distributors on board, a crucial piece of any beer law change puzzle, Sheetz Senator Rafferty is going to have to offer them a lot more.

And this "revolutionary" new law doesn't actually fundamentally change our antiquated system of limited beer licenses, it merely changes which business entities can buy which licenses.

Pennsylvania, it's time for a real beer revolution by the people and for the people - not a Sheetz gas station revolution. If Sheetz can be the motivator that's great, but let's have our state legislators actually tackle this issue in a fair and balanced way.

To Table Games Or Not

"Some think live table games are a bad hand." Some think over-legislation is bull shit. In particular, me. Either make live table games legal and tax them, or don't. Don't make certain live table games legal and others illegal so that an electronics game vendor can make an extra buck.

Not surprisingly, Rich Orlando, President of TDN Money Systems, "the largest supplier of electronic table games to the state's nine casinos", does not want live table games.

But Mr. Orlando also believes the demise of electronic table games could end up costing the state money. He argues that the games -- in essence slot machines -- produce on average more revenue than will the live versions, which are more labor intensive and will have a far lower tax rate.

Let's debunk this:
1) Table games are more labor intensive. Therefore, they require more people to be working at the casino? They generate more jobs? Which generate more taxes?

2) If casinos will make more money by having electronic table games than live table games, they will have more electronic table games. That's a free market. Let's not shackle yet another free market. Pennsylvania already does that enough (*ahem* PLCB).

I have 2 questions:
1) Why are table games being taxed less than electronic games?
2) Why is the Post-Gazette giving Mr Orlando the time of day?

2 More Ways the LCB Is Wasting Your Money

Attempting to be more "customer friendly", the hated Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board is unveiling more ways to waste taxpayer money. (As if giving away lucrative customer service contracts based on nepotism wasn't enough.)

1) Mechanized wine "kiosks". In a day and age when cigarette machines have been declared illegal in more states than not, the Pennsylvania Liquor Control board is patting itself on the back for being the first state to introduce wine kiosks. Oh, they say, you just swipe your license in to prove your 21, and breathe to prove your not drunk. Except without an actual person selling you things (or some pretty state-of-the-art-expensive cameras), there's no way to prove that the person swiping is the same as the person breathing is the same as the person buying. For decades college students have found ways around underage drinking laws. Now, the state wants to hand them the biggest loophole ever. I'll admit I originally thought wine kiosks were a great idea, but now I realize that it was just I'd been living in Pennsylvania too long.

2) Boutique wine stores.

"That has been done for decades in small groceries in Italy and is now being duplicated in states such as California and New York, said Mr. Stapleton and Joe Conti, a former state senator who is LCB chief executive officer."

Back up. No, states have not run boutique liquor stores in Italy, nor do they run them in California or New York. The reason that boutique stores thrive is because of the creativity and devotion of their owners who travel the world looking for special wines and cultivate relationships with small vineyards. Instead, we have stores like Palate Partners that are attempting to give customers the boutique experience while being repeatedly slapped in the face by the liquor control board. If I want a boutique store, I'll go to a state that doesn't shackle wine-lovers.

If the PLCB really wants to please customers, it should give us rock-bottom prices or a wider variety of wines. Or how about letting normal stores sell wine??? Why can you buy a six-pack at a bar but not a bottle of wine?

Keep Barking

Beer distributors continue to bark up the wrong tree. Wexford Beer Distributors is speaking out against the possibility of Giant Eagle selling six packs of beer at their "restaurant." They claim that it will hurt their sales. You know what hurts sales? Only being able to buy 24-packs of beer! We live in an antiquated state that insists that beer, liquor and wine must be doled out by the state (for a hefty profit) and instead of working for more freedoms, the beer distributors insist of fighting to maintain the pathetic status quo. I'm sick of my tax dollars paying for customer greeting programs and re-branding of our liquor stores, so that they can overcharge me even more for their limited, inconvenient selection. Obviously, anyone working in the state liquor stores with their pension and cushy state job doesn't mind the status quo too much, but beer distributors are fighting the fight for no good reason. In the end, Giant Eagle with its team of lawyers will win this battle and they will start to open up sales state-wide, and unless beer distributors jump on the progress bandwagon, I'll have a hard time feeling sorry for them when they fall by the wayside.

Back to Priorities

Like Obama listed his 3 priorities for the nation, I list my 3 major talking points on this blog: drinking, public transportation, and general political idiocy with a bit of my questionable morals thrown in to spice things up.

Back to the number one priority - drinking.

Pittsburgh is a drinking city. This guy chronicled bars in all 90 of our neighborhoods. We have a brewery in a church. Hofbrauhaus picked Pittsburgh as their 3rd location in the country. And from football games to art galleries, beer drinking goes with the territory. With proper precautions (i.e. drunk driving education and enforcement), I'm all for it.

For such a city, though, why do we put up with the yoke of the PLCB and the case law?

Oftentimes as a city we look to the East for inspiration. Is that it? We want to resemble the liberal state of Massachusetts (who historically didn't allow beer and liquor sales on Sunday) or Connecticut (who physically places tarps over the beer in grocery stores after 9pm and on Sundays ) or perhaps live-free-or-die New Hampshire (who runs a similar state-run liquor store plan yet somehow manages to have the cheapest prices in the region). If so, we need to start looking West to California, where if you want a bottle of vodka, you pick it up with your orange juice.

Do we really believe deep down inside that drinking is evil? And that we need the PLCB to protect us? After all the wording of the law which created the PLCB says the following:

This act shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the Commonwealth for the protection of the public welfare, health, peace and morals of the people of the Commonwealth and to prohibit forever the open saloon, and all of the provisions of this act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of this purpose.

Or perhaps it's because our state continues to make money hand over fist because of the aforementioned slick setup? In this year of economic downturn, the only bright spot in the economy appears to be liquor sales. PLCB reported record sales last year. They're making so much money they've even hired an image consultant to make us like them more. Fat chance. Personally, I feel if the PLCB is going to pillage my wallet, they should at least turn their excess profits over to the state instead of working on their branding.

Is it really a surprise that when the state gave Pittsburgh options for funding Port Authority their only viable option was a drink tax? No. What's surprising is that we continue to put with it.

Barking Up The Wrong Tree

There was a recent court case involving Wegmans cafe's selling beer in six-packs. For me, this paves the way to Giant Eagle one day selling a six-pack in a place where I dare to tread. Naturally, beer distributors are upset. They have the monopoly on reasonably priced beer. And by and large, they and their six-pack bar brethren rake in the dough without a thought of appealing to anyone with taste. I see ads on TV with scantily clad woman walking the aisles of concrete-floored walk-in garages lacking any semblance of heat or even warm lighting. They appeal to the common base who wants to walk in, cart out some cases of beer and leave. Currently, the homeless guy scraping together $10 in change to buy 8 oz Coors Light by the 24-pack seems more at home than I do. Most six-pack bars barely edge out in decency with their sticky floors, dim lighting and lack of windows. Now, Wegman wants to sell beer in "cafes." Why are they so far away?

And what do the beer distributors have to say about this landmark courtcase? "NOOOOOOO!!!!! We will fight you in court till the day you die!!!!"

I have a few alternative suggestions for these beer distributors.

1) How about you increase the appeal of your stores? If people want to shop at the beer distributor, they will continue to do so in spite of other options. Painting your garage door is not enough.

2) How about fighting for a tax break on cases of beer? It's often-times more reasonable (and always more convenient) for me to buy a beer at the bar than lug home a case. It's also cheaper to drive across the border to another state.

3) Better yet, how about fighting for the right to sell six-packs, even 12-packs? Then you could be an actual full-fledged store that could actually service well-rounded customers. Unless we revert to Puritan society, laws regarding alcohol will continue to get less and less strict. Things should get easier for businesses catering to this vice. Embrace that. It's not like you're selling cigarettes, which are the target of a public witchhunt.

The state of Pennsylvania's liquor laws encourages people to buy six-packs in bars as "travelers." That is sick. I welcome Wegman's to the beer distributor market and can only hope the laws continue to evolve. By the way, if you're not familiar with Why The PLCB Should Be Abolished, you've got some catching up to do. Go read. I echo his call to write to your local paper. The only way the PLCB and its ilk will be abolished is public outcry against it.

Happy Halloween!

City told to fix police station it is vacating. Perhaps they should leave it as it is and open it up for an annual Halloween party. What's better to scare kids with than cockroaches and mold? They might also consider doing some work on the place they're moving into up in Allentown.

In other construction news, after a long delay, the Hofbrauhaus Pittsburgh is well on its way. Perhaps they will actually meet their latest grand opening date of January 20, 2009. Something tells me that if the drink tax stays at 10% instead of dropping to at most 7%, there will be some more delays. Luckily, they're at least brewing most of the beer on the premises and can side-step the notorious Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board.

Houses appear to be getting worked on or demolished thanks to the neighborhood sweep program. That translates to one less eyesore on my street. If only progress didn't pair with corruption...

And straight from the horse's mouth, the Ravenstahl's have welcomed their baby Cooper.

Wine kiosks!

While I internally rebel against the concept of the PLCB (Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board) and all the red-tape and over-pricing and over-taxing associated with it, I am happy to find out about their upcoming plan for wine kiosks to be located in grocery stores or malls.

Of course, one has to wonder at a time when many states have banned cigarette machines on the basis of enforcing underage restrictions, that our state would create liquor machines. Thankfully, the legal problem is out of my hands and I only have the potential that wine will be easier to acquire in PA.

(reference: http://www.lcb.state.pa.us/plcb/cwp/view.asp?a=1334&q=559289)