Sunday, December 05, 2004
Pivotal Case For Winos
On Tuesday the US Supreme Court will hear a case about interstate wine shipping. At issue are laws in about half of the states that make it illegal to ship wine across their borders. Many of these states allow wine to be shipped within their states. North Carolina and Virginia had laws like this in place until 14 months ago, when federal courts struck them down.
Advocates of the current restrictions include wine distributors and smaller wineries. The distributors do not want to lose profits to direct winery-to-consumer shipments. Some lesser wineries want the protection of shipping within their states without the same right extended to outside wineries.
Both groups frequently submit two canards. First, they claim that states will not get the sales tax from direct shipments. Second, the groups claim that underage drinkers will order and receive wine. Both arguments are bogus, as documented at Free the Grapes, a coalition of wineries and consumers advocating nationwide wine shipping.
Putting aside the fact that shippers are required to get age verification at delivery, the underage drinking argument is a joke. I drank plenty of alcohol when I was underage. Never did I consider ordering a case of wine (typical minimum cost of $100) a week and a half before I was going to drink. That is moronic.
Many small wineries cannot induce a distributor to carry their labels in North Carolina. As a result, the only way to get their wines is by direct shipment or visiting their winery. Approximately 100 of the 400 bottles in my cellar were accumulated by carrying the wine back from wineries on the west coast.
The specific case will not matter to many people, but the broader concept of interstate trading is important to all of us and guaranteed by the US Constitution. Let's hope that the Supremes come down on the correct side of this issue.
Advocates of the current restrictions include wine distributors and smaller wineries. The distributors do not want to lose profits to direct winery-to-consumer shipments. Some lesser wineries want the protection of shipping within their states without the same right extended to outside wineries.
Both groups frequently submit two canards. First, they claim that states will not get the sales tax from direct shipments. Second, the groups claim that underage drinkers will order and receive wine. Both arguments are bogus, as documented at Free the Grapes, a coalition of wineries and consumers advocating nationwide wine shipping.
Putting aside the fact that shippers are required to get age verification at delivery, the underage drinking argument is a joke. I drank plenty of alcohol when I was underage. Never did I consider ordering a case of wine (typical minimum cost of $100) a week and a half before I was going to drink. That is moronic.
Many small wineries cannot induce a distributor to carry their labels in North Carolina. As a result, the only way to get their wines is by direct shipment or visiting their winery. Approximately 100 of the 400 bottles in my cellar were accumulated by carrying the wine back from wineries on the west coast.
The specific case will not matter to many people, but the broader concept of interstate trading is important to all of us and guaranteed by the US Constitution. Let's hope that the Supremes come down on the correct side of this issue.
