It may not become a major issue in the governor's race, but the future of the state liquor monopoly highlights a pivotal difference between the leading candidates.
Last week, Democrat Ed Rendell and Republican Mike Fisher, in their first joint appearance since the primary election, restated the positions they've espoused on the future of state stores. Mr. Fisher, the state attorney general, wants to replace the 638 government-owned and-operated stores with private merchants, while Mr. Rendell, the former Philadelphia mayor, says there are too few votes for it in the Legislature.
The Associated Press reported that Mr. Rendell thinks liquor-store privatization is "basically a good idea," but that the prospects are bleak since the Republicans, under former Gov. Tom Ridge, couldn't make the change despite controlling the Legislature.
While his analysis may be astute, that sort of defeatism explains in part why Pennsylvania has the nation's most archaic retail system for wine and spirits. Some place Pennsylvania's degree of government control in the same league as Utah's, but it's not true. The Mormon state is more real-world, with three-quarters of its stores in the hands of private owner-operators (under contract with the state) and all of its stores selling beer under the same roof as liquor and wine.
In Pennsylvania, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers are tyrannized by an unholy alliance of liquor employee unions, Mothers Against Drunk Driving and religious conservatives. These defenders of the status quo maintain that only the state monopoly stands between its residents and all sorts of alcohol- fueled maladies.
The truth is more complicated, and it's hard to demonstrate statistically that so-called "control" states do better than free-enterprise states on stifling the ill effects of alcohol. The stringency of liquor laws and the quality of law enforcement, which are more difficult to gauge, can play a greater role than who is doing the selling. If that weren't true, then how can Pennsylvania dare let private merchants sell beer?
The only way the state is going to shed the remnants of Prohibition -- on convenience, competition and enterprise -- is if prominent elected leaders are bold enough to condemn the system.
Mike Fisher needs to do more than make the normalcy of liquor sales a campaign item; he needs to be ready to broker a deal with the House and Senate. Ed Rendell does himself no favors as a candidate of bold ideas to settle for the status quo of government monopoly.
While every other state allows some degree of private liquor and wine sales, Pennsylvania distinguishes itself as a commercial backwater. The next governor, regardless of party, should have a game plan for bringing retail liquor into the 21st century.
E-mail this story 
