Chicagoist: HB 429 and SB 123: The Big Wineries Mount a Counteroffensive

guest

Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:01:34 -0600

HB 429 is anti-consumer in the worst way. By prohibiting Illinoisans from purchasing wine from out-of-state retailer (something they've been able to do for 15 years) the law would be restricting consumers only for the purpose of enriching a very small, but powerful group: Illinois wine distributors. Over the past 5 years these distributors have "contributed" more than $5.4 million to politicians in order to assure that their interests are considered over consumers. The legislation could be changed in very simple ways to make it a very good law: --allow Illinoisans to purchase wine from out of state retailers just like they could from in-state retailers. --allow ALL Illinois wineries to sell wine directly to retailers and restaurants, rather than restricting that right only to the very tiniest wineries. This is what consumers should be demanding.

cellarkeeper

Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:36:19 -0600

And do not overlook the other significant consequence if HB 429/SB 123 is passed and becomes law: IL consumers would, overnight, be prohibited from buying wine through an online retailer based outside of IL and having that purchase shipped here. Say goodbye to the ease of researching and acquiring wine from multiple retail sources coast to coast. Then comes the fall out: Other states say, "OK, IL, if we can't ship to you, you (wineries and retailers) can't ship to us." Thus, eventually the upside for consumers resulting from the Supreme Court's Granholm ruling would be completely reversed, one state at a time.

Chuck Sudo

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:55:51 -0600

You mean you didn't read our story on Bell's first, #3. I meant to write "compliance", as what this legislation does is make it impossible for out-of-state retailers to sell their wines to Illinois residents, and it forces larger wineries in and out of Illinois to use the three-tier wholesale system almost exclusively to market their product. Illinois has long been a reciprocal state, but this legislation at best maintains reciprocity by effectively limiting consumers' options. HB 429 has passed in the House, so the main hope of maintaining full reciprocity is to call or write your local state senator and ask him or her to vote no to SB 123. You can find your state senator at the State Legislature's web site.

Scott the Jerseyist

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:50:08 -0600

Terrible law, Jersey would not allow any shipping either! I just kept getting distracted while reading the post...Bill should have a bottle (wrapped in brown paper) in his hand.

guest

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:14:20 -0600

How un-American is all this legislation? Reminds me of the Reader story on beer distribution a few months ago that ran Bells out of town. We are living in corrupt times.

discountsounds

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:43:07 -0600

I believe the guest's comments are correct: this legislation is designed to limit direct shipment of wine to consumers. Which would be a shame, because wine.woot.com is such a wonderful thing.

guest

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:05:00 -0600

The purpose of HB429 isn't to "intended to bring Illinois in compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Granholm v. Heald", Illinois already is in compliance with the decision. Illinois is a full reciprocity state presently. The purpose of the law is to limit direct shipment of wine to consumers. If the distributers could get away with banning direct shipment entirely, they would. Here's a related story: http://www.winebusiness.com/news/dailynewsarticle.cfm?dataId=48976