Time to step things up. I just sent the following to Governor Rendell, Senators Wonderling, Tomlinson (my local senator), Greenleaf, and Rafferty, and Representative Farry (my local rep), cc;'d to the three PLCB Board members. If you feel like it,
send them something similar, but
don't use my letter; they'll just write it off as kook action. You can get their e-mail addresses (and those of your legislators) easily: here's a list of
senators,
representatives, and the
governor.
Have at it.Gentlemen,
As a Pennsylvania citizen, taxpayer, and native, I strongly believe that the time has come to
end the Commonwealth's monopoly on the
sale of wine and spirits. This week's reports of a $173,820 consulting contract with Solutions 21 to train State Store clerks and managers "how to greet someone, where to stand, and how to read a customer's cues", and the ensuing concerns over a
possible conflict of interest when it was revealed that the head of Solutions 21 is married to one of three PLCB regional managers, put a cap on a building series of
questionable decisions by the Board. The people of Pennsylvania deserve better from their state agencies.
But this is almost beside the point. There is
no good reason why the State is in the
booze business. Approximately 75% of the monies transferred to the general fund from the PLCB are taxes that could just as easily be collected by private businesses, as is done in other states, as is done in Pennsylvania by beer distributors now. The "profits" from the PLCB stores are
not insignificant, but it is
very likely that any revenue loss from privatization would be more than made up by
greater in-state sales when Pennsylvanians ceased going across the borders to buy spirits and wine in other states. There is, after all, a very good reason that there are huge booze superstores
right across our borders; people can get the service and selection there that they simply cannot get in the State Stores. Privatization would bring those stores into Pennsylvania,
keep those sales and taxes in Pennsylvania, and bring those
jobs to Pennsylvania.
It has been argued
since Repeal of Prohibition that the Commonwealth's
'control' of liquor and wine sales is in the interests of the citizens, that control serves, in the words of the Pennsylvania Liquor Code, "for the protection of the
public welfare, health, peace and morals of the people of the Commonwealth and to
prohibit forever the open saloon, and all of the provisions of this act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of this purpose." But all control has proven to be is
an inconvenience and annoyance to the citizens. Pennsylvania's record with underage drinking, alcoholism, and drunk driving is
not significantly better or worse than neighboring states that have fully privatized wine and spirits sales. The State doesn't sell
gasoline, guns, or prescription drugs: why does it sell wine and spirits?
If there is
no benefit to the citizens in tax revenue, convenience, satisfaction, or safety, there is
no compelling reason to continue with the State-controlled retail (or wholesale) of wine and spirits. Indeed, the State's image suffers from the
accusations of favoritism and patronage that dog actions like the Solutions 21 contract and the non-competitive appointment of PLCB CEO Joe Conti.
It has been estimated that privatization would bring the State
a windfall of over $1 billion from sale of product stocks and other assets, and the sale of new store licenses (and I would urge the Legislature to set up any new licensing structure to
benefit the State rather than the holders of licenses; it angers me, as a taxpayer, every time I hear of a restaurant license sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars that the State should be getting). Even if that's
generous, and the windfall is only $500 million, that would go a long way towards plugging the current budget deficit, and tax revenues should increase
dramatically. It's a win for almost everyone, excepting current PLCB employees. Some of the windfall could perhaps go for
early retirement packages and re-training for the clerks and managers, they could be given preference on other state jobs, and perhaps even low-interest loans to open their own,
private stores.
There may never be a better time for privatization to succeed; times such as these favor bold solutions. Pennsylvania could find new jobs and new tax revenues while pleasing the majority of the citizenry. Please consider this in the coming session.
Sincerely,
Lewis Bryson
