Bitter draft: Wine, beer and government monopoly don't mix
Share with others:
If it's one thing that keepers of the Republican brand would have us believe, it is that members of the conservative party are people of principle. They don't flip-flop, you know where you stand with them, they are as good as their word.
Don't believe it.
•
The case for disbelief and skepticism comes in full measure from Harrisburg this week, where -- principle be damned -- members of the House Liquor Control Committee shamelessly played Pennsylvania consumers of wine and spirits for fools.
Before the committee was a sound bill -- HB 11 -- to privatize the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board's creaking post-Prohibition monopoly, one of the last such in the nation and in its powerful reach the most complete. The proposal was offered by Rep. Mike Turzai of Bradford Woods, the House majority leader -- an influential person for getting any legislation through. Or so it would seem.
According to the estimates of a report by consultants commissioned by the Corbett administration, selling the 620 state-owned stores to private merchants would reap the commonwealth between $1.1 billion and $1.6 billion -- this at a time, we would add, when state aid for important priorities such as education and transportation has been reduced to the point of inflicting serious harm.
But the chairman of the committee, Rep. John Taylor, a Republican from Philadelphia, had another idea. He took the bill and subjected it to a "gut and replace" amendment. He might as well have called it the switcheroo amendment or the old bait and switch -- the offense would be the same. Plus, it's no way to treat a majority leader's legislation.
In so doing, Mr. Taylor became the prime defender of the bulwark of socialism in Pennsylvania government, the state-owned and -operated wine and liquor monopoly. An odd line of work for a Republican.
Under the new bill, there would be no privatization of the state stores. Instead, it merely would allow the state's 1,200 beer distributors to sell wine. Other minor irritants would also be addressed: Beer distributors would be able to sell six-packs, not just by the case; bars and taverns would be allowed to sell 30-packs, not just one or two six-packs; more state stores could open on Sundays and have longer hours.
What the committee has done is give a government Christmas present to beer distributors. But wine consumers walking cavernous warehouses stacked high with beer cases in order to find a decent bottle of red to go with Saturday's dinner won't be so jolly, especially if the LCB, in all its inefficiency, retains its function as wholesaler.
If the point of this exercise had been to give consumers more places where they could buy wine, more state stores could have been opened or more state stores within supermarkets could have been allowed.
But that hasn't been the point of the reform. The point was about a principle that Republicans, if they were at all sincere, would wholeheartedly embrace. Instead, it lies gutted and replaced. For shame.
The state has no business being liquor seller, supplier and enforcer, a system which for conservatives would spell socialism. And we remember when other Republican leaders -- Dick Thornburgh and Tom Ridge -- championed the cause.
Gov. Tom Corbett campaigned, too, on committing to privatize the system, and he received the Post-Gazette endorsement last year because he promoted this reform along with others. House Majority Leader Turzai became the champion of this move in the General Assembly. Yet, after his bill was drastically reworked and approved on a vote of 15-10, the representative had the gall to say that the Republican-controlled committee "acknowledged the current state store system is broken and beyond repair. This is a huge step for Pennsylvania consumers."
Huge step? (Makes you wonder which well-positioned lobbyist got to him.) Consumers will recognize this as a step toward betrayal. They know that the system is broken precisely because it is the wayward offspring of government. It won't be repaired until state government gets out of this business and allows complete privatization. The alternative is Pennsylvania continues to be regarded as a backwater of old ideas and archaic thinking.
•
The bill must be changed after it moves to the House floor for debate. With Republicans in control of the House, Senate and governor's office, this is a test of whether they can lead, govern and bring Pennsylvania into the 21st century.
Mr. Turzai needs to be the leader his title says he is, or he will have failed his party as much as his constituents. And if Tom Corbett doesn't lay down the law to weak-kneed Republicans, he will be a one-term governor who sold out his party's brand and the promise of strong leadership and principle.
Remember, these are his party's foot soldiers, not members of the opposition, who want to perpetuate a monopoly that the GOP would label socialism anywhere else. In the end, you can count on this: progressive Pennsylvanians and the Post-Gazette will remember.
First Published December 15, 2011 12:00 am
