New York's Governor Is The State's Liquor Nanny
In closed-door negotiations, New York's governor Paterson, along with the New York state senate and house leaders, nixed a plan to sell wine in supermarkets -- like they do here in California...and without causing So Cal society to crumble on its foundations. An excerpt from a Consumerist post:
The corks have yet to stop popping for those who opposed the plan -- mainly drunk-driving awareness groups, the police, and small-business owners. Police feared an increase in underage drinking, since kids would have easier access to wine (uh, know any teens who crack open a bottle of Merlot on a Friday night?); and Mom and Pop wine stores claimed they would not be able to compete with the volume discounts offered at the supermarket.However, supporters of the idea, such as Vote Wine 2009 (a coalition of supermarkets, wine growers, and the New York Farm Bureau) note that "Without this proposal, consumers will continue to pay higher prices and have less choice."
A Consumerist commenter wrote:
The small business owners are right, they wouldn't be able to compete with the volume discounts and the ease of access would cause their business to decrease.
Boohoo. This is called capitalism.
via Wine Spectator







Up here in Quebec we can buy wine at the local supermarket without any problem and no convenience stores seems to have been harmed by this. Of course the small business owner will sell his wine at a higher price, just like his milk and bread. Supermarkets are cheaper, convenience stores are closer. This is how convenience store are making their money.
The whole "kids will get drunk" moral outrage is pathetic at best. When I was a kid, I used to hate wine because of the bitter taste. If they want to crack down on the alcohol kids drink, what about going against the hard lemonade and other coolers on sale today?
Toubrouk at April 14, 2009 5:38 AM
Where I live (Wisconsin), every grocery store I've ever been to sells not only wine but vodka and every other hard liquor. Somehow we still manage to have liquor stores and even a couple specialty wine shops. Which makes sense, because who would stand in line at a grocery store if all they wanted was a bottle of wine? I can just imagine the outrage if Walmart ever gets around to carrying beer and liquor.
Karen at April 14, 2009 6:35 AM
What the fucking fuck?
Really, the people are to be inconvenienced to keep the shallow end of the gene pool well-stocked? "For the children". My ass.
Around here (CT) we have beer in the supermarkets and some convenience stores, but no wine or liquor. Which is inconvenient, but not draconian.
The draconian part is the hours. Until a few years ago, we couldn't buy beer, wine or liquor after 8 PM, on Sundays or on holidays. They put through a law extending it to 9 PM, and LIQUOR STORE OWNERS FOUGHT IT. Bar owners too. They were originally going to remove the Sunday restriction too, but took that out to get the other half passed.
Nothing like using the government to hobble your competition. And don't get me started on the mandated three-tier distribution system in this state. It's now 9.45 for a six-pack of Sam Adams. I'll be brewing my own again.
brian at April 14, 2009 7:03 AM
New York State's governor is looney tunes.
He's so far out there that this is the least of it. He's on so many other insane rants and plans of actions that I really can't get off on this one even though I basically agree with you. Too many other fish to fry.
He's really fucking nuts and I'm not just talking about his "solution" to our tanking economy here being to lay-off close to 9,000 state workers. (Yep, that's what NY needs, more unemployed leaving the state in droves.)
He wants to add fucking taxes and surcharges to anything and everything he can fucking label. We need to move the "tea" party to NY Harbor this time!
T's Grammy at April 14, 2009 7:34 AM
TG -
Your (unelected) governor has already indicated that he wants people to leave. Specifically, the very wealthiest who are financing everything in the state.
Quote: "If I'd known all I had to do to get [Limbaugh] to leave was raise taxes, I'd have done it long ago."
This is not the kind of precedent you want to set if you want people who have the means to pay taxes to stick around and do so.
By attacking Limbaugh, he got nationwide attention outside of his (Limbaugh's) audience, and now someone (CNN, Fox something like that) has an interview with The Donald about how he might leave New York if the taxes get too big.
The Donald, leaving The City. If that's not TEOTWAWKI, I don't know what is.
brian at April 14, 2009 8:10 AM
New Yorkers can't buy wine at the grocery store? That's stupid. In Texas, you can buy your groceries for dinner and pick out a bottle to complement what you're making. You can only get liquor at a liquor store, but you can get wine and beer at both grocery stores and convenience stores/gas stations. It's been that way for as long as I can remember. We still have thriving liquor stores, specialty wine stores,etc, even with the competition.
I also agree that this has nothing to do with children. Hell, when I buy alchohol at the supermarket, they SCAN my ID. Teenagers don't binge drink wine, anyway.
ahw at April 14, 2009 8:14 AM
In PA there are the state liquor stores where you get your wines and hard liquor. And there are beer distributors, where you can only buy beer by the case. You can only buy six-packs at bars. There's nothing harder than soda pop at the grocery stores.
You really have to plan ahead if you're having a party. These places are closed on Sundays and only seem to be open when you're supposed to be at work (9-5).
Elle at April 14, 2009 8:50 AM
This is New York, what did you expect, sanity? Freedom? Choice? We don't even have initiative, referendum, or recall. People here are sheep and get treated like it.
Oh, those 9,000 State workers to be laid off are a good start. One job in seven in this state is a government job. That was before New Venture Gear closed, laying off 1200, and Syracuse China, before that Carrier and Oneida Ltd. Those of us left are already struggling with taxes that are one third higher than those in PA. Private industry, not being insane, has been fleeing for decades.
Patterson made noises about reining in the state budget, but he got slapped down fast. The state motto is Excelsior (ever upward) and it refers to the tax burden. Nothing gets cut, ever. Even the tolls on the Thruway, which were supposed to be eliminated after the bonds were paid off were actually RAISED instead.
MarkD at April 14, 2009 9:20 AM
What's weird is that in most of NYS, supermarkets can sell beer (although in NYC that's also not allowed). Why not wine too?
Also, I've spent summers in several upstate NY towns, and despite the permit to sell beer in supermarkets, there have always been very successful, busy liquor stores operating there. Their prices are competitive, and they've got way more variety.
kishke at April 14, 2009 10:16 AM
Wow. Alabama is the world champion at state liquor-nannying, but even we can buy wine at the grocery store! Seven days a week. Somebody needs to check hell for snowballs. And no, wine sales at Sam's haven't put the wine speciality stores out of business.
Cousin Dave at April 14, 2009 10:59 AM
Sorry Dave but alabama has nothing on Utah.
I'm not aware of any changes, but in the last few years but by the time I graduated from highschoool Gas staions and supermarkets didnt even sell beer, you had to go to a state liquor store
lujlp at April 14, 2009 11:46 AM
Alabama and Utah are pikers. There are still DRY COUNTIES in Tennessee and Arkansas. In fact, the county where Jack Daniel's distillery resides is dry. They can't legally taste the product in the place where it is made.
brian at April 14, 2009 11:53 AM
Ohio has a patchwork of dry towns and townships. Alcohol and liquor sales for Mon-Sat are by vote of the local precincts. Sales of package and bar liquor on Sunday is a separate vote.
The state has gotten out of directly owning the liquor stores, but the grocery stores that sell liquor have the State of Ohio Seal on them.
Beer, wine and beer like (Mike's, Smirnoffs, etc.) are for sale in the grocery stores -- and diluted liquor (under 40 proof) as well. But the license changes for Sunday sales from the rest of the week. And the sale hours on Sundays as well.
Bar licenses are separated as well. Beer/wine sales all day Sunday or after noon. And liquor is split between all day and after noon.
And all of this is subject to vote by the local population, plus application to the Liquor Control Board.
Add on top that all alcohol has to be registered by the state. Beer tax is like 10%; liquor is 50% and wine has a 100% tax. The two-buck chuck at Trader Joe's costs $3.98.
Jim P. at April 14, 2009 1:01 PM
We have some dry counties in TX, too. You can still drink, though. Somehow, "private clubs" can serve booze... so you just go to the "club" (bar) and pay a $5 "membership fee" and fill out an application card. I don't know about purchasing beer and wine to consume at home, though.
ahw at April 14, 2009 1:31 PM
I'm always a little uncomfortable when something like this is called capitalism. Selling liquor in New York, as it is in other states, is a highly regulated endeavor. Small business owners pay license fees, deal with arbitrary bureaucracy, and no doubt hand over graft as well. This is unfair.
Ideally, there would be real capitalism: meaning, any merchant would be free to sell alcohol without interference from government. But expanding wine sales to supermarkets is not being done to promote freedom; it's being done to satisfy large corporations. The cost is the sudden change in the business climate to the little guy.
The shame is small-time liquor store owners will now feel the pinch of "the government giveth, and the government taketh away." They are really not at fault here. The supermarkets will be able to corner the market for wine, and the small guy will suffer.
I'm all for transitioning to a freer economy; but I think there should be some kind of "heads up" when it's going to affect long standing small businesses. There are people who have invested their life savings who now, because of government whim, are going to possibly take a big loss. They should have the chance to plan for this change.
Mario at April 15, 2009 4:24 AM
Exactly, brian. He's fucking nuts!
About the layoffs: he's basically taken it into his head that he's king of NY and can do this and the consequences be damned. I wish I thought it was about the economy but it can't possibly be. This won't just affect state workers but all the businesses that cater to state workers.
I've seen estimates that it will affect up to 70,000 jobs. Albany will be dead, dead, dead for the lunch places, little stores, etc., going belly up. Charities will be hugely affected too. A good deal of their income comes from the state strongarming it's employees every year to sign up for payroll deduction.
The unions have offered alternative after alternative but Patterson is determined to have a pissing contest. I'm glad they're sticking by their guns not only because no future contracts will be worth a damned if the governor can just say I want to ignore them but because I don't think he'd keep his word to do no lay-offs if the unions concede. I think he'd do 8,000 instead of 8,700, and laughed hysterically thinking himself king of the hill. Just look where he's threatening to cut positions if you doubt it's meant to be a strong-arm tactic to bully the unions into submission: education, corrections, medical, and the like. Meant to scare the public. Idiot!
Will all right. Right out of NY. Much as I love NY, I've given thought to leaving. Know my daughter has. The only thing holding her here is T's family's here. Daddy and all the relatives. He leaves, we'll both most likely be gone.
And he's also nuts with things like this one that Amy's blogging about. Thinks he decides the laws and the State legislature has nothing to do with it. Today he's introducing gay marriage and while I agree with that, I don't agree with his attitude that if he says it should be, it should be and it's not up to debate. Besides, it's probably only to take attention off this bill and all the taxes and surcharges, he's been raving about levying. You want your absurd sin taxes? He wants to put a 18% tax on soda!!!
He thinks himself king of the hill, fool on the hill is more like it.
T's Grammy at April 15, 2009 10:01 AM
Wow, maybe we Alabamians are slacking. ;) There are still some dry counties in AL, but in a dry county, any town of over (I think) 5,000 population can vote itself wet, and quite a few have done so. And dry counties cannot prohibit possession of alcohol, only sale. There are still some goofy regulations regarding micro-breweries, but those are getting torn down bit by bit.
And Alabama is phasing out its state stores. There are still some, but they've been closing them in areas where privately owned liquor stores have opened up. Any quick-stop or grocery store can sell beer and wine, and commercial liquor stores can sell all three.
Cousin Dave at April 15, 2009 2:29 PM
The small business owners are right, they wouldn't be able to compete with the volume discounts and the ease of access would cause their business to decrease.
Gee, here in California we have wine sold at the grocery store AND mom-and-pop liquor stores. Both seem to be doing fine.
The grocery stores only carry a limited selection (granted a 500-brand limited collection). The smaller stores are free to specialize in wines their customers might like. And to feature hard-to-find brands.
THAT'S called capitalism.
My favorite wine shop when I lived in Jacksonville, FL featured thousands of bottles and a knowledgeable owner. He had no problem competing against the state-licensed package stores that were his main competition and which carried very few bottles that didn't have the word "Gallo" on the label.
All NY has to do is stop forcing everyone to go through the wholesalers and allow the small businesses to order directly from the supplier (California vintners). But, that would result in a politically-connected crowd losing money.
Conan the Grammarian at April 17, 2009 7:18 PM
Leave a comment