kopia lustrzana https://github.com/thinkst/zippy
271 wiersze
14 KiB
Plaintext
271 wiersze
14 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
|
||
H.R. 5034: The Lies, The Facts, The Fictions
|
||
|
||
|
||
With so much at stake for America's alcohol wholesalers and their protected
|
||
monopoly status that props up unearned profits, it's no surprise they would
|
||
swing for the fences with all their state-granted political power and
|
||
attempt to pass H.R.
|
||
5034 . This bill, currently in Congress, would give wholesaler
|
||
lobbyists the means to turn back the clock on consumer access to wine, lead
|
||
to the passage of laws that override federal regulations on alcohol, kill
|
||
jobs and business that focus on artisan production of wine, beer and
|
||
spirits, punish and dismantle small specialty wine retailers that serve the
|
||
consumers that wholesalers won't and override the critical Constitutional
|
||
principle of a single American economic union...all for the sake of
|
||
protecting wholesaler profits by giving them unprecedented control and
|
||
influence over the entire American alcohol industry.
|
||
But what is truly remarkable (and likely a result of the wholesalers' hubris
|
||
stemming from 75 years of being granted government welfare) is their
|
||
willingness to misrepresent facts, ignore the truth, and mislead in their
|
||
defense of H.R. 5034.
|
||
The recently launched www.hr5034.org
|
||
website is the creation of the National Beer Wholesalers Association and and
|
||
appears to be the repository all the misrepresentation, ignorance and
|
||
misleading ideas supporters of H.R. 5034 could possibly muster.
|
||
For the sake of context and setting the record straight, this post address
|
||
many of the misrepresentations and misleading claims made at the middlemen's
|
||
disingenuous new website.
|
||
On their homepage ( http://www.hr5034.org/ )
|
||
|
||
"Today’s system balances competition with public safety to
|
||
ensure that consumers can enjoy alcohol without suffering the negative
|
||
effects of an unregulated marketplace"
|
||
|
||
|
||
Is there really any competition when the state-based
|
||
regulatory system the wholesalers love so much require that producers of
|
||
alcohol use a wholesaler to bring their goods to market, meaning that
|
||
without use of a wholesaler a producer cannot enter a state's market? It
|
||
also means that wholesalers get to decide what consumers drink, not
|
||
consumers.
|
||
|
||
|
||
"Unfortunately the effective state-based regulatory system in
|
||
the U.S. is under attack. Over the past 10 years,more than 25 states
|
||
have faced challenges in federal courts to their authority to regulate
|
||
alcohol and their ability to maintain a licensed system of alcohol
|
||
controls."
|
||
The only challenges to the state-based alcohol regulatory
|
||
system are those that discriminate against interstate commerce for
|
||
protectionist reasons. Even in the wake of successful suits that
|
||
challenged the protectionist laws that wholesalers originally pushed,
|
||
the state retained extraordinarily broad authority to maintain a robust
|
||
system of alcohol controls.
|
||
|
||
ON THE "LEARN MORE" PAGE ( http://www.hr5034.org/learn-more ) "Litigation
|
||
against the states brought by those wishing to deregulate alcohol for
|
||
their own economic interests is of great concern to state alcohol
|
||
regulators, state attorneys general, public health advocates and many
|
||
others."When the economic interests of producers,
|
||
retailers and consumers are horsewhipped by states doing the bidding of
|
||
wholesales who receive more government protection and welfare from the
|
||
state than any other industry in america, you might expect them to fight
|
||
back. As for those that have "concern", let's recall that it's only a
|
||
tiny fraction of state alcohol regulators, that there is no formal
|
||
support from state attorneys general, only a mere handful of public
|
||
health advocates, a selection of recipients of campaign contributions
|
||
from wholesalers and wholesalers themselves that support H.R.
|
||
5034 .
|
||
|
||
"According to a recent national poll conducted by the Center
|
||
for Alcohol Policy, 79% of respondents support the right of individual
|
||
states to set their own laws and regulations surrounding the sale of
|
||
alcohol and 87% agree that state and local laws regarding alcohol
|
||
regulations should be decided by lawmakers and citizens, not by
|
||
judges."
|
||
I'm shocked, shocked i say, that the "center for alcohol
|
||
policy" is an arm of the national beer wholesalers association and that
|
||
it would conduct a poll that finds results supporting those that funded
|
||
the poll. Does it get any more illegitimate?
|
||
|
||
On the "Fact v. Fiction page ( http://www.hr5034.org/fact-vs-fiction ) "FACT: This
|
||
bill does not address direct shipping or any specific state alcohol law.
|
||
It does not preempt a state law that allows direct shipping. It does not
|
||
mandate a direct shipping law where there currently is not one. The bill
|
||
does PROTECT a state’s wine shipping law if someone were to challenge it
|
||
in court by providing the shipping law with the same presumption of
|
||
validity granted other state alcohol laws."Disingenuous in the extreme. And what's worse, the wholesalers knew
|
||
this when they wrote this. H.R. 5034 gives states the ability to pass
|
||
laws unchallengeable in court that would discriminate against
|
||
out-of-state wine shippers. And we know such laws would be introduced
|
||
into various states since wholesalers have seen to it that such laws
|
||
have been introduced into state legislatures for the past 20 years. In
|
||
fact, H.R. 5034 would allow states to pass laws that make consumers
|
||
receipt of a wine by in-state shippers legal while making receipt of a
|
||
wine by out-of-state shippers punishable to a greater degree than rape,
|
||
home invasion or selling cocaine to children. "Fact:
|
||
Protection of a state’s power to regulate alcohol is not an “industry
|
||
food fight.” "food fight" may be the wrong word.
|
||
Better to call the introduction of H.R. 5034 what it is: an attack on
|
||
the entire alcohol industry and consumers for the sake of protecting
|
||
wholesaler profits. It's no coincidence that brewers large and small,
|
||
wineries, spirit producers and importers, retailers, wine education
|
||
organizations, wine consumers and free trade organizations all oppose
|
||
H.R. 5034.
|
||
|
||
|
||
"This bill does not amend or alter the Federal Alcohol
|
||
Administration Act (FAA Act) which provides federal guidelines in many
|
||
of these areas"
|
||
No it doesn't "amend" the faa act. It overrides it entirely.
|
||
To quote from H.R. 5034:
|
||
"not withstanding that the state or territorial law
|
||
may burden interstate commerce or an act of congress, the state law
|
||
shall be upheld..."
|
||
This claim by the wholesalers that H.R. 5034 "does not
|
||
amend" federal regulations on alcohol is a straight up
|
||
misrepresentation. It's like saying "i didn't kick the dog, but rather
|
||
his ribs fell on to my boot".
|
||
|
||
|
||
"It is the intent of this language to make clear the
|
||
congressional support for the holding in Granholm-prohibiting state laws
|
||
that allow an in-state winery to do something a similarly situated
|
||
out-of-state winery cannot do. Language that bars facial discrimination
|
||
is included in the bill to codify this prohibition"
|
||
I have great faith in the wholesalers' ability to mislead.
|
||
But this goes beyond even my expectation. The intent of H.R. 5034 is
|
||
precisely to overturn the granholm v. Heald supreme court decision that
|
||
did away with protectionist state alcohol laws. More importantly, the
|
||
very language of H.R. 5034 gives states the explicit right to
|
||
discriminate against out-of-state wine shippers. All the state needs to
|
||
do is offer the feeblest of justifications. Read for yourself: "state or
|
||
territorial regulations may not facially discriminate, without
|
||
justification, against out-of-state producers of alcoholic beverages in
|
||
favor of in-state producers." one of those "justifications", the bill
|
||
states, is maintenance of the "structure of the state alcoholic beverage
|
||
distribution system." in other words, discrimination is ok as long as
|
||
the discrimination is written into the state's alcohol beverage
|
||
distribution laws. Furthermore, note that wine retailers are not even
|
||
covered by this duplicitous language on "justification". The state needs
|
||
no justification to discriminate against out-of-state retailers.
|
||
|
||
|
||
"Over half the states have been sued challenging their
|
||
alcohol laws. The lawsuits have attacked items such as commonsense
|
||
safeguards that require a face-to-face transaction (needed for I.D.
|
||
checks) to buy alcohol"
|
||
In fact, face-to-face transactions are not needed for I.D
|
||
checks. We know this because states have written laws that have gone
|
||
unchallenged that require I.D. Checks to be made at the point of
|
||
delivery of the wine.
|
||
|
||
|
||
"Unelected judges should not set alcohol policy; this
|
||
responsibility rightly rests with individual state legislatures, as
|
||
guaranteed under the 21st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution."
|
||
Judges never have set policy. State legislatures always
|
||
have. This is the big lie the wholesalers tell. Judges merely tell the
|
||
state when they have reached beyond what the 21st Amendment allows.
|
||
After that, the state legislatures, in every state where litigation has
|
||
affected badly crafted laws, went about legislating a fix. Surely the
|
||
wholesalers don't mean to say that state alcohol laws should in no way
|
||
be required to abide by the principles in the u.S. Constitution. What
|
||
next, will the wholesalers argue the 21st amendment give the states the
|
||
right to prohibit women from buying alcohol? Will they argue that state
|
||
laws banning African-Americans from being distributors is legal under
|
||
the 21st Amendment?
|
||
|
||
|
||
"State laws that raise concerns can and should be addressed
|
||
in the state legislature."
|
||
Lucky for Americans it wasn't this attitude that ruled the
|
||
day when jim crow laws were in place. The wholesalers would have argued
|
||
that the racist "separate but equal" philosophy had no business being
|
||
litigated and that we should wait for the legislatures that enacted the
|
||
racist laws to overturn them with new laws. We have courts precisely to
|
||
adjudicate concerns with the fairness and constitutionality of state
|
||
laws. But of course, wholesalers know this. They to have brought states
|
||
to court over alcohol distribution laws they didn't think were fair or
|
||
constitutional. It appears that wholesalers don't like the courts
|
||
involved when the decision don't go their way.
|
||
|
||
The hypocrisy, misleading notions and disinformation being featured at the
|
||
wholesalers website supporting H.R. 5034 is staggering. However, they do the
|
||
right thing when they invite readers to sign up for emails that will deliver
|
||
"the latest developments". I urge all readers to sign up for those emails .
|
||
In the mean time, please checkout the website that spurred the wholesalers to
|
||
launch their own: http://www.stophr5034.org. It is published by the
|
||
Specialty Wine Retailers Association and upon reading through it, you should
|
||
find yourself feeling much cleaner and less soiled than after wading through
|
||
the misrepresentations of the new wholesaler-sponsored website on H.R.
|
||
5034.
|
||
|
||
> Comments
|
||
Scott said... Too bad there's not a way to shout louder
|
||
than all caps. Maybe try more exclamation points.... July 16,
|
||
2010 at 06:13 AM
|
||
Judd Wallenbrock said... Tom -- thanks so much for
|
||
keeping us all up to date and informed regarding this silly...but very
|
||
real threat...not only to our industry but to our basic rights as
|
||
consumers. July 16, 2010 at 08:14 AM
|
||
Tom Wark said... Scott: Thanks for the tips. Judd: my
|
||
pleasure! July 16, 2010 at 09:42 AM
|
||
Bill Sprow said... Get rid of thewe beer and wine
|
||
distributor associations, ie make them illegal, and you would really be
|
||
showing a free market work in progress. If I as a resident of Ohio want
|
||
to purchase a bottle of Californis wine on line and have it shipped to
|
||
me in Ohio without interference from anyone else. July 16, 2010
|
||
at 10:41 AM
|
||
Austin SEO said... Interesting!, Wholesalers
|
||
issue.Thanks for sharing your link. I enjoyed reading your post.
|
||
July 17, 2010 at 12:35 PM
|
||
JohnLopresti said... Thought I would post a link with a
|
||
cute title related to the post. NB: the article is in a trade journal
|
||
available by online subscription $ only.
|
||
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202463630848&Alcohol_bill_means_happy_hour_for_lobbyists
|
||
July 19, 2010 at 08:53 AM
|
||
Steve said... Tom: Thanks for this passionate polemic, a
|
||
foreceful and sorely needed rebuttal to a bogus bill. July 19,
|
||
2010 at 09:10 AM
|
||
Tom said... Seems like some old geezers are filling
|
||
their pockets with some major greenbacks getting this bill passed
|
||
through. Its a blatant anti-competition bill that will crush the
|
||
uniqness of the alchohol/wine industry, kinda like Wal Mart moving into
|
||
a town and crushing the boutique shops. Since I live in Texas Ill have
|
||
to resort to buying O'Douls and Welchs grape juice after the Baptists
|
||
take control of the law in the State legislature. Dont even get me
|
||
started on the still enacted Blue Laws of this state (cant buy liqour on
|
||
Sundays)... July 19, 2010 at 09:12 AM
|
||
r said... Wow! I am speechless. I will not even waste my
|
||
time rebutting you point by point because you do not have a clue in many
|
||
instances what you are talking about. You do have a few valid points but
|
||
they too may be predicated on false premise, I do not claim to be the
|
||
all knowing expert. By using the same sensational BS Tactics you rail
|
||
against, instead of a balanced and fair assessment you render the
|
||
entirety of your rant incredible. In short the wine has to go from point
|
||
A to B in some way. Do you work for FedEx? It sounds like you would
|
||
prefer you government welfare to go there instead? Wholesalers compete
|
||
against each other... perhaps you forgot. They do not operate
|
||
monopolies. In Oregon for instance there are about 60 wholesalers
|
||
competing for partnerships on both the supply and the demand side,
|
||
hardly the ideal monopoly situation. In most cases where state laws
|
||
allow shipping you can get a bottle of wine shipped from the winery of
|
||
your choice. A very important point to remember: While large "commercial
|
||
wineries" (Factory wine producers) may have the ability to market their
|
||
own wine, smaller growers whom you seem to be so concerned about do not
|
||
have the proper infrastructure to allow wine sales on line in many
|
||
cases, let alone having their own transportation infrastructure. They
|
||
are experts at farming and producing wine, which is what they likely
|
||
prefer to do in most cases. July 27, 2010 at 09:08 PM
|
||
alean said... wine facts are really good
|
||
http://www.facts-about-wine.info/
|
||
arunrob@gmail.com October 13, 2010 at 12:39 PM
|
||
crystal ortizz said... Quite informative blog.My friends
|
||
would definitely appreciate knowing these facts. As being a student such
|
||
blogs help me a lot.It is rather interesting for me to read this blog.
|
||
Thanks for it. I like such topics and anything that is connected to this
|
||
matter. I definitely want to read more on that blog soon.
|
||
December 06, 2010 at 05:11 AM
|
||
dissertation writing service said... This is my Good
|
||
luck that I found your post which is according to my search and topic, I
|
||
think you are a great blogger, thanks for helping me outta my problem..
|
||
December 07, 2010 at 12:22 AM
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|