Congress should let consumers define the market

Published: July 31, 2010

Article Tools
Font size: [A] [A] [A]
Sign Up newsletter

Congress is pondering whether to forsake millions of consumers in order to protect a narrow special interest - alcoholic beverage wholesalers - from the realities of modern competition.

The Comprehensive Alcohol Regulatory Effectiveness Act of 2010 would enable state governments to restrict interstate shipments of wine, beer and other alcoholic beverages from producers directly to consumers.

Many small wineries and some small brewers have been able to prosper by shipping their products directly to customers. They have been aided by the Supreme Court of the United States, which ruled in 2005 that states may not pass laws that discriminate between in-state and out-of-state wine shipments.

(That's of little help to consumers in the People's Republic of Pennsylvania, where the commissars of the state liquor monopoly discriminate against out-of-state and in-state shipments.)

Under the CARE bill, the Congress would cede its constitutional control of interstate commerce to states, regarding alcohol. It would amend an 1890 law to allow states to distinguish between in-state and out-of-state shipments, and create legal burdens of proof that would make it impossible to challenge restrictive state laws.

Congress should reject the bill. Wholesalers are free to compete for business on the basis of price and selection. Lawmakers can trust consumers to define the market.

Ads by Yahoo!
We welcome user discussion on our site, under the following guidelines:

To comment you must first create a profile and sign-in with a verified DISQUS account or social network ID. Sign up here.

Comments in violation of the rules will be denied, and repeat violators will be banned. Please help police the community by flagging offensive comments for our moderators to review. By posting a comment, you agree to our full terms and conditions. Click here to read terms and conditions.
comments powered by Disqus