Time for a Change.org

With the State Stores closed, and the PLCB's website essentially non-functional -- 

With restaurants and bars across the state reduced to take-out business --

With the PLCB refusing to service any but the largest accounts (while the Wolf Administration tells Pennsylvania that we should look to the private market to meet the demand caused by the closed State Stores...while denying that market the right to sell spirits)

With thousands of businesses on the brink of failure, tens of thousands of people unemployed -- 

Someone has to do something. 

Why not you? Sign this Change.org petition, asking Governor Wolf and the Legislature (or the PLCB, why not?) to immediately allow the sale of wine and spirits to-go (or local delivery) by all licensees, including beer distributors, through the end of 2020. Give them a chance to make the money that will allow them to stay open, employing some people, and giving others hope for re-employment when the crisis ends.

Buddy, can you spare a signature? 

Before you say, 'Oh, those Change.org petitions don't change anything,' last week a petition just like this one succeeded in getting the government of Ontario to allow restaurants to sell wine and beer to go. We can do that here, just as quickly, just as easily.

Until then, Pennsylvanians will continue to cross the borders, spreading the disease. Those taxes will be lost to the state, where they could help pay unemployment benefits, while the PLCB flounders, trying to serve the whole state from three warehouses with a patched-up website (while the wholesalers who service the PLCB's operations have their offers to help rejected), literally filling only hundreds of orders out of hundreds of thousands of attempts to place an order. 

Is this a total solution? No.
Will this save every restaurant, every bar? No.
Will it adequately compensate every beer distributor for the damage to their business? No.

Is it better than what the State's doing now?  Hell yeah. 

Over 11,000 people have signed as of April 14. This is not a fringe position. 

Please. Sign the petition and share it. Thank you.

Allow Pennsylvania licensees to sell spirits for take-out & delivery thru 12/31/20

The PLCB has nothing to hide...unless it makes them look bad

Chairman Tim Holden:
What's the PLCB hiding?

As reported Sunday in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review the PLCB, an agency with no business reason to hide anything (since they have no competitors), has not been very open or honest when dealing with their bosses — that us, the citizens of Pennsylvania. After all, that's what their supporters keep telling us, that we're the owners of a "valuable public asset." Shouldn't the "owners" be able to ask questions and get answers?

That's not what happened, according to the Trib's reporter, Kari Andren; instead, the LCB instructed their press secretary to delay the release of such information by forcing the Trib to go through Right To Know channels:

The agency's board members directed a press secretary not to provide basic information about a former employee, such as dates of service, job title and salary, unless the reporter filed a formal request — a move that could have delayed the release by more than a month, the emails obtained under the state's Right to Know law show.

“We have to watch what we ‘give' her regarding employees without going through the Right to Know channels, even if it is public information,” board member Michael Negra wrote in a Sept. 23 email. “Agree,” Chairman Tim Holden responded the same day.

LCB spokesperson Elizabeth Brassell said the agency, “fully respects and supports the release of public information to interested parties.” But Erik Arneson, head of the agency charged with overseeing the state's open records act, said the board members' actions were not in keeping with the intent of the law. “The Right to Know (RTK) Law was not designed to be a tool used by agencies to delay access to clearly public information,” Arneson said.

More proof of this use of delaying tactics is the now 111 days over which the PLCB has refused to release their yearly financial statements. Some were verbally stated during the Ross hearings over two months ago, but so far nothing has shown up on paper or online. If the PLCB were a "real" business, they would have had to release their yearly statement before the first quarter earnings statement. However, the PLCB doesn't update the citizens with quarterly statements. Why not? It's a painfully simple answer: they aren't a real business, and never have been, and never will be.

Melissa Melewsky, a media lawyer with the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, agreed that the LCB's approach doesn't follow the spirit of the open records law, or Gov. Tom Wolf's call for government transparency. Wolf said he was “confident in Chairman Holden's ability to continue to make the LCB more transparent,” and the previous Chairman (and still current board member) Skip Brion has said, “This is a state agency; we should be as transparent as possible.” Apparently he has changed his mind.

This is not the first time the board has used RTK to delay, or has done things in the dark that should have been in the sunshine of public scrutiny. Years of notational votes (where the Board members meet informally and off the record to make decisions, and then only vote on 'that thing we talked about' in official meetings) and vague to non-existent board meeting information have keep the "owners" (you and I) in the dark about the working of the PLCB.

Who knows, if the public were privy to the machinations of the State Store System, we may never have had wine kiosks, or $66 million in computer system cost overruns, or paid over $4 million for an out-of-state firm to come up with that snappy "Fine Wine And Good Spirits" branding. All money well spent, I'm sure...once the real facts finally come out in a few years, the brilliance of it all will shine clear. Or not.

This is not the first time the PLCB has been publicly charged with ignoring the intent of state law; this is not the first time they've lied by omission. This is not the first time they've delayed the release of reports on their performance. So we have to ask: why the delay this time? We see the smoke, what is the fire that the PLCB is trying to hide while privatization is still a very real possibility in the Legislature? We urge the Trib to keep digging — faster, if possible — and encourage the reporters at the Inquirer, PennLive, the Daily Record, and the Post-Gazette to do the same. Because we the citizens — the owners — need this story to come out before privatization slips away. It's clear that the PLCB feels threatened by it; that's enough reason to dig out the truth.

The time to privatize is now.

Not a Mistake, Not perfect...Good Enough

Last post I asked if we would be calling Senator McIlhinney's privatization proposal "McIlhinney's Mistake." Here's what I thought we'd see in it:

Best guess at that, from things he's been saying: bars and restaurants should be allowed to sell full bottles of wine and spirits to go, the State Stores stay open, the case law stays and the beer in grocery stores situation remains in its ridiculous "cafe needed" state, and the PLCB remains as the state's sole wholesaler...and that's going to be "privatization," McIlhinney's Mistake-style.

Here's how that went when we got a revamped version of his SB100, yesterday:

• Beer distributors and bar/restaurant/deli/hotel license holders can sell wine and spirits to go (for an $8,000 annual fee ($4K for just wine/just spirits, and $2K for "specialty spirits," single category), and a limit of four bottles per sale unless you're a distributor); there are about 14,000 such licensees, and another 1,000 in escrow (some kept there deliberately by anti-drinking types).
• The State Stores stay open
• Distributors can sell sixpacks (as packaged by the manufacturer...killjoys); taverns can sell up to a case
• Grocery stores still need a deli license -- no new licenses created -- and a cafe area, some minor restrictions on what can be sold at each register area are loosened
• The PLCB remains as sole wholesaler; study of situation required after 2 years, if divestiture will not have "significant impact on the fiscal stability of the Commonwealth," the Legislature may consider selling the wholesale operations
• PLCB as wholesaler is required "to buy any specific liquor or alcohol requested by a permit holder"
• PLCB will ship to "permit holders" by the case for a fee; manufacturer/distributor can drop-ship directly to permit holders 
• State Stores get "flexible pricing"
• Licensees get an 18% discount on PLCB prices
• Elimination of the Johnstown Flood Tax!
• Direct wine shipment to citizens
• "Windfall" money goes to senior citizen property tax relief
• All retail liquor stores (State and private) to have consistent hours: 8 AM to 11 PM.
• PLCB and permit holders are prohibited from selling private labels (buh-bye, TableLeaf!)
• Creation of a Wine Industry Promotion Board (nothing about brewers or distillers)
• Did I mention that the State Stores stay open?

 Well...My major issues, in another bullet point list.

• The State Stores stay open, and with NO formula in place to close them. That's left to the discretion of the PLCB. Bad idea, verging on very bad idea. Rip off the band-aid.
• Why stop at sixpacks? Take away all restraints on volumes: distributors and taverns can both sell everything from single bottles to kegs. And why "as packaged by the manufacturer"? Why no mixed six? They'll be pulling the wings off flies, next. If they do keep the stupid "compromise with no one" sixpack minimum, I nominate "as packaged by the manufacturer" as the first thing to go in the amendment process. It's just petty. If the store doesn't want to sell mixed sixes, they can make that a policy. Doesn't have to be a law.
• Limits on wine and spirits sales for taverns/hotels/delis. If you're going to charge everyone $8,000, everyone should get the same deal.
• Kick the licenses out of escrow with a "use it or lose it" clause. Any license unsold in escrow for more than two years reverts to the state.Why should they be wasted just because some Mennonite doesn't want me to have a drink?
• Kill the cafe: this is an advantage for large supermarkets and hurts small grocers. 
• End the police-enforced monopoly.
• Privatize wholesale. Period.

Now...what I think we might get? Not much. I think this bill is either going to pass with relatively minor tweaking, or it's going to die. I'm hoping for more complete "package reform," and I'd really like to see an end to the insulting police-enforced monopoly, but I'm not holding my breath.

Actually, my hat's off to the Senator. I'd love to see all my major issues dealt with, and I do think that leaving the PLCB as wholesaler is going to be a disaster, but...he always said the hard part was coming up with something that could pass. I think he may have finessed that. He won't get any Democrat votes -- and bad cess to them, and especially the mule-mouthed Senator Ferlo -- but I think this could get 26 Republicans. I've got my fingers crossed.

And on that note...write your senators! Urge the Republicans to vote for this, and beg the Democrats to abstain. CC the Governor and make sure the Republican Senators you write to know that he needs this bill; CC your local representative to they know how you're pushing your senator. You know the union's doing it. Get off your ass and make it happen; this is the best chance privatization's had in 75 years. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Here's what I wrote to my Senator:

Dear Senator Tomlinson,

Senator McIlhinney's proposal for eventual liquor privatization is out, and I'm sure you have the details. The proposal doesn't close the State Stores, doesn't slash jobs, keeps the wholesale monopoly, covers the revenue, provides for senior citizen tax relief, gives Pennsylvanians at least some of the beer package reform they've been begging for, and gives beer distributors an affordable way to add wine and spirits to their businesses. Most importantly, it ADDS competition, choice, and convenience to wine and spirits retail for Pennsylvanians, without harming family-owned beer distributors.

It seems like a very good compromise, one that the House can approve, and that the Governor can sign for a much-needed legislative victory for the Republicans. I hope I can count on your vote for this proposal in its final form; it is, as I've told you, very much a ballot box issue for me.

Sincerely,
Lew Bryson

Feel free to use some or all of it. DO IT!

Give Rep. Petri an Earful

Rep. Petri -- well-known as fairly soft on privatization -- has a liquor privatization survey up on his website. It's lengthy, it's somewhat slanted, but I'd encourage you to take it, and give thoughtful -- not shouty-stupid -- answers. We need to give him something to think about, not an excuse to dismiss. Beer is very much included, by the way.

I find this interesting, because it indicates that Petri does believe that some kind of privatization bill will come back from the Senate -- likely at the very last moment Senator Chuck "Footdragger" McIlhinney can engineer -- and he wants to be ready. We need to help him.

When he asks you where you want to buy booze, tell him YES. Sell it in groceries, gas stations, convenience stores, Target. Why not? Wegmans has a great record on preventing underage sales, and no gas station chain will want the fines that come with such sales. When he asks you what you want to buy there, tell him YES: beer, wine, and spirits. Again, why not? 

When he asks you "Do you think that Pennsylvania should retain the wholesale operation in order to avoid raising taxes to fill the loss of approximately $80 million in revenue?", tell him NO! Tell him that his numbers are speculative and pessimistic, and don't take into account all the revenues from a private system; privatization is going to be, at worst, a wash. And if it isn't? We already have some of the highest liquor and wine taxes in the country; maybe it's time the rest of the Commonwealth's citizens paid a little more of their fair share.

And it is a little: $80 million is a lot of money, but it's a tiny shred of the state's annual budget; they could recoup most of it by cutting out some of the ridiculous overspending at the Legislature itself (starting with the size of the thing). The main point here is that if Pennsylvania retains the wholesale operation, we're still leaving selection in the hands of a committee in Harrisburg: not what we're in this for at all, and he needs to understand that.

Take the survey, and think about it as you do. What do YOU really want from privatization?

• Lower prices
• Better in-store selection
• More stores 
• Better service
• An end to the police-enforced monopoly
• Wine and beer sales in supermarkets, drugstores, convenience stores
• End the case law
• End the state wholesale monopoly

Think about it...and then write your own senator and representative and tell them. And then tell them that this is a ballot issue for you, and you'll be watching how they vote. You might as well...because every State Store union member is.

Tell your Senator everything the PLCB's doing!

I copied this from a Facebook post; I don't think the original poster will mind. The idea is that while the Senators fiddle and diddle and talk about "modernizing" the PLCB instead of privatizing it -- privatization that the majority of Pennsylvanians continue to support -- we should remind the Senate what a great job the PLCB is doing. So...get on the phone, send an email, and let your Senator know that the PLCB deserves credit for all the things they're doing!

• Tell them that you really thought the wine kiosks were innovative 
• that you thought the date-rape ads were on target 
• that your mother liked the vodka 
• that you didn't mind that your wine sat in an non-air conditioned trailer in the summer 
• that you think the PLCB didn't have anything better to spend the now $35 million+ in computer cost overruns on 
• that bringing back the CEO under investigation for graft is a great idea 
• that TableLeaf is the best thing since the PLCB spent over $4 million to rename Wine and Spirits to Fine Wine and Good Spirits
• that you're impressed with the string of record annual sales figures (and the bookkeeping skills needed to explain why the net assets of the PLCB are negative)
• that thy have an amazing jobs program going that has more employees now with 601 stores then there were with 692 stores in 2000
• that it's great that the PLCB spend more on advertising than on education
• that they're saving money as the 3rd largest purchaser of wine in the world by not bothering to have a trained sommelier on staff?
• that smile training should be mandatory for all state workers (especially when you can keep it "all in the family")
• that you really appreciate having 90 stores less than there were in 2000 so there wouldn't be a liquor store on every corner. 

Pretty amazing when you add it all up, isn't it? Remember: call your senator today...and then call them again next week. And the following week. And so on, till you get a good reason why they'd rather vote against what the citizens want than for it.

Historic Day

My fingers are crossed (okay, not literally...I am typing this), but it looks like the House Republicans have the votes to pass HB790, the privatization bill, this morning, or sometime today. I have not let up: sent out emails to southeast PA Republicans urging them to support the bill -- and their party, and their governor, and the majority of Pennsylvanians -- and vote in the affirmative. I would suggest you do the same.

Here's what I said:

Dear Representative XXX,

Today's the day! Privatization of the State Stores is coming down to the line. I sincerely hope that you are planning to vote with the Republican party and with your governor on this issue. They need your vote on HB790, as do the majority of Pennsylvanians who have supported privatizing the State Stores for decades. I strongly support privatization of the State Stores, and think the state's beer distributors are getting a pretty good deal in this bill. As amended, the bill has a lot of what I've wanted for years, and does it in a relatively gradual way.

You're not my direct representative; that's Frank Farry, here in the 142nd District, over in Bucks County. But on this issue, you're representing all of us. Please vote for HB790, and support Republican values in the PA House!

Sincerely, and thanks,

Lew Bryson

Feel free to use this text. Among others, I sent it to Representatives Barrar, Clymer, DiGirolamo, Farry, Miccarelli, and Petri, the Republicans who most needed bucking up. (I copied Corbett (governor@pa.gov) and Rep. Turzai (mturzai@pahousegop.com) on all those emails too, good idea for encouraging party support.) Um...didn't bother sending any to Democrats. This has become a party issue for them, and their discipline is striking. So it's about shoring up Republican votes.

Send those emails, please share this around, and let's get this over the line and on to the Senate!

Suggested support letters

I don't like form letters. Don't like getting them, hate sending them. But this is an exception, so...here are two suggested emails to send to your Pennsylvania Representative to support HB 790, the current bill for State Store privatization. I know Democrats are lining up solid on this, so...let's ask them to consider abstaining, or just not being there for the vote. That's an easier decision than actually going against the party, and every abstention helps.
 
Find your representative here, and then send them one of the two letters below: it works better if you modify it a bit, personalize it, but the important thing is to be a name, a voter, in favor of privatization. Remember, it's crucial that you include your full name and address, and they like to see a phone number, too.


If you want to suggest any changes to HB790, suggest that the representative strongly consider lowering the fees on wholesalers. The current bill aims to reap about $500 million from that licensing process, and as an informed consumer and voter, you should know that all of that will be passed on to you as higher prices, and will come right out of your pocket. Tell your representative that there are better ways to find a billion dollars for education than grabbing it from Pennsylvania's wine and spirits drinkers.

TO A REPUBLICAN:

Dear Representative XXXX,

As one of the approximately 60% of Pennsylvanians in favor of the privatization of the PLCB State Stores, and as one of your constituents, I ask you to please consider supporting your party and your Governor by voting yes on HB790.

Pennsylvanians have polled in favor of privatization for over 30 years, and thousands of them cross the border to buy our wine and spirits every week instead of going to the State Stores. They'd much rather be buying in Pennsylvania, and bring those millions in tax revenue home, but the State Stores just aren't filling their needs. They go for better selection, or better prices, or better service, but thousands of them do go, and it's costing Pennsylvania millions. Having all that here will save citizens money, and bring in millions of additional tax revenue.

Please consider how many Pennsylvanians favor privatization. I hope you will vote for HB790, and make a public statement of your support. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE


TO A DEMOCRAT:

Dear Representative XXXX,

I know you are opposed to privatization of the PLCB State Stores, but as one of the approximately 60% of Pennsylvanians in favor, and as one of your constituents, I ask you to please consider changing your mind, or abstaining from the vote on HB790.

Pennsylvanians have polled in favor of privatization for over 30 years, and thousands of them cross the border to buy our wine and spirits every week instead of going to the State Stores. They'd much rather be buying in Pennsylvania, and bring those millions in tax revenue home, but the State Stores just aren't filling their needs. They go for better selection, or better prices, or better service, but thousands of them do go, and it's costing Pennsylvania millions. Having all that here will save citizens money, and bring in millions of additional tax revenue.

Please consider how many Pennsylvanians favor privatization, and consider abstaining or changing your vote. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE

YES! Amended HB790 would end police-enforced monopoly!

Check out the sidebar list in Brad Bumsted's piece in this morning's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on the newly amended HB 790. It's got a lot of good stuff, but down at the bottom is this little nugget: Criminal penalties eliminated for bringing booze in from other states.

YES! That is the end of the Police-Enforced Monopoly, and that is something we've wanted for years. It is a component of true privatization; the recognition that "competition" is meaningless in an arena of full or partial monopoly. It is an end to the unAmerican restrictions on Pennsylvanians' booze-buying freedom, it is a gust of freeing air. It is a triumph for US, people: this is a topic WE made happen.

So...win this. YOU need to call or email -- or both -- YOUR representative this week -- especially if your rep is a Republican -- and tell them you WANT liquor store privatization, you WANT HB 790 to pass, and that this IS a voting booth priority for you. Pass the word, get your friends and family to send in support; this is one time we have to try to match the union. Get on it!

The House Republicans have given us a shot at booze freedom; we have to let them know we want it!

House Liquor Control Committee passes HB790 to the House for consideration

Just watched the House Liquor Control Committee debate numerous amendments to HB790 -- Rep. Turzai's PLCB privatization bill -- and pass one of them, Rep. Mustio's, which did bring down the license fees a bit. It still squeezes one hell of a lot of money out of the wholesale end of the business, and that has to change, or we're going to see price increases in PA just like they did in Washington. But that can change, and must, on the floor of the House.

It's also clear to everyone on both sides of the aisle that beer has to join the process. It should be clear to beer wholesalers and retailers as well; things ARE changing, and it would be a good thing for beer lobbyists to get to Harrisburg and make their best deal possible to advance liquor/wine privatization. It's not a time for greed on either side; this is a time of opportunity that needs to be seized. It's also a time of change, no doubt, and many folks would rather not change. Well...maybe then it's time to bring in new blood.

Interesting times. Now it's up to Rep. Turzai to get this through...while still maintaining real privatization that doesn't get Washingtonized. Cross your fingers, people, and then uncross them and talk to your reps about what you want in a privatization bill. Contact them TODAY, because it may come to a vote quickly. I'm emailing my rep right now.

Wednesday morning: privatization 'debate' on WHYY's Radio Times

I've just been asked to be on WHYY-FM's Radio Times with Marty Moss-Coane program to discuss privatization of the PLCB. The show will be this Wednesday at 11 AM. They're working on getting someone on the other side; so far, the candidates have not been "stakeholders," but rather just interested parties like me. So that's cool, because I don't really intend to debate Wendell W. Young IV, or Joe Da ex-CEO Conti. Ever. And here's why:


It's a call-in show, and if you can, please, come up with some good questions -- NOT "I want privatization!" or "The State Stores Suck!" statements, like the lame-o stuff the State Store Supporters call in with -- and do call in. Some sample questions: Why are the private license fees so high? What's the deal with privatizing wholesale? If the past is any indicator, the phone lines will be filled with pro-State Store callers (who have nothing better to do than call these shows and don yellow t-shirts to shout at people at the Capitol), and I'd be appreciative of a friendly voice!

Here's the number: 1-888-477-9499. Listen in -- on the radio, or on the Web -- and give us a call!

Privatization is Not a Piñata

Looks like the Legislature's been here...

I'm looking at HB790, the proposal that Governor Corbett has put forward for privatization of the the State Store System, and it's becoming clear what the Legislature is in this for: the money. It's not about us, it's not about doing the right thing, it's not about doing what we want, it's about the money.

It's about campaign donations from the unions and businesses, it's about the tax revenue, it's about the shiny promise of a billion bucks in "windfall" money from license fees and wholesaler fees and higher fines and continuing fees... And like I always tell people in other states when their legislators want to raise booze taxes, where do you think all that money's going to come from? Duh, guys: out of your pockets. Because the wholesalers and the retailers aren't going to eat that increase (and no reason we should expect them to), it's part of the price of goods. So the higher the license fees...the higher the prices. It's just a tax under another name. Why, much as I'm pissed about Representative Taylor's planned amendment for HB790, at least he recognizes that, and lowered those fees.

The problem is that the Legislature doesn't look at the booze business like we do: producers and wholesalers and retailers all bringing the wines, spirits, and beers we love to shelves near us, hopefully sold by folks who have the same kind of passion for it that we do (or, hey, by guys who want to make picking up the basics quick and easy). They don't look at it like those in the industry do, as a fair business that makes a decent profit and pays good wages. They don't even look at it like MADD and the neo-prohibitionists do, as the devil's handmaidens, selling pure liquid evil.

No, the Legislature looks at the booze business -- brewers, distillers, vintners, importers; wholesalers, retailers; bars, delis, restaurants, taverns, stadium concessions -- as a big piñata, stuffed full of revenue, the money that makes things work in Harrisburg. Yes, the money that builds roads (and drips down to corrupt the fat cats), and pays for the State Police, and higher education, and state parks, and so on and so on, and it's also the money that gets doled out to make friends happy, and pay for patronage work, and all the semi-shady crap that's been going on in Harrisburg...it's all revenue, and that's really how the Legislature sees the booze business: a piñata, dangling in front of them, bulging with bucks, and the stick's in their hands.

Step right up, Senator! See the beer distributors, gorged with the fruits of their semi-monopoly? WHACK! The bars, making money in cash, helped along by the limited competition the licensing system creates? WHACK! The wholesalers, a layer of markup forced onto the others by three-tier laws -- WHACK! -- the brewers, newly successful craft brewers and the roaring Yuengling -- WHACK! -- Pennsylvania's wineries, ignored by the State Store but making people happy with festival fun -- WHACK! --the new distillers, better teach them how it works before they get too big -- WHACK! -- and the grocers and drugstores, wow, new blood! -- WHACK! WHACK!

 WHACK!

And then...the piñata breaks. The revenue tumbles out! Oh boy, grab it, shovel it into your committee bags, scoop it up to take home to your campaign contributors! Don't worry about the broken shell of the piñata. Don't worry; the system has limped along for decades, made to work by dedicated people who worked within the ridiculous cage of complicated laws you made, who did their best to try to bring the citizens what other states' peoples took for granted. It doesn't matter if you don't get this right: you've been ignoring what's wrong with the State Store System for over 40 years, you can ignore the mess you're going to make with privatization, too.

Don't let this happen. Call your representatives, email them, visit them if you can. Go to Facebook, tell Representative Taylor that you want real privatization, not some watered-down "modernization." Here are some talking points, bullet points, really.

• License fees are too damned high.
• There are too many different types of license, and the mistake of the "case law" is repeated in multiples with all the different arbitrary limits on how much each license can sell in one transaction.
• Beer distributors should not be charged a special fee to sell sixpacks, and there shouldn't be a minimum sale of a sixpack: do away with these ridiculous minimum and maximum sales altogether.
• Privatize fully, NOW. Give them 6 months. 

Don't break the system to get at all the money inside. Free it up, and collect the extra taxes you'll get when people no longer feel the need, the urge, to avoid the screwed-up mess we have and buy across the border.

And most of all...there is no windfall. If the State Store System really were the "valuable public asset" the unions keep trying to tell us it is, some company would be offering you money to take it over and run it. It's not. It's an annoyance. The people of the state despise it, and can't wait to see it gone. Forcing the new licensees to pay for it is just...whacking the piñata.
 

The State Stores have had 80 years to get it right. They haven't, they won't. Game over. PRIVATIZE.

Percolation and Progress

Things are popping in Harrisburg. Check out this headline on the Harrisburg Patriot-News website:

Liquor privatization picking up speed in Pennsylvania as bill is introduced 

House Bill 790 was introduced today, and will be moving through committee. According to the bill's primary sponsor, House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, the bill will move quickly. From the article above: 

“Because there is a lot of energy, a lot of enthusiasm … There is widespread agreement in our caucus,” Turzai said. He said the House Liquor Control Committee will take up the bill March 18, and he expects the House will vote on it later this month.

You may recall that last year the privatization bill was shredded in committee by Rep. John Taylor. That's not how he's talking this time around, according to quotes in this article.

“It seems like we’re going to agree on most of it, but the speed of what we’re doing is really a big part of it,” Taylor said.

Taylor wants to slow down the privatization process. Well...if that's what it takes, okay. As long as we avoid the pointless "modernization" the PLCB sycophants in the PA Senate are still gassing about. That tune may change when they find themselves with a passed privatization bill from the House with the Governor standing behind it. Impaired though Corbett may be, he's still the governor, and Senate Republicans will soon find themselves under the spotlight.

Still, one day at a time, do the work that's in front of you. That's getting a privatization bill out of Taylor's Liquor Control Committee in decent time and in decent shape, not gutted like last time. So...PLEASE send emails of support to as many of the members of the Liquor Control Committee as you can; you can find them here. Definitely thank Taylor for his support this time, and thank Representatives Kampf, Killion. Lawrence, Mustio, Reese, and Regan for co-sponsoring HB 790. And if you want, send an email to the 9 Democratic members of the committee, asking them why, if a majority of Democratic voters polled support privatization, not one Democratic legislator supports it.

Keep your fingers crossed, and your powder dry. But get on the email, and on the phones, because I guarantee you that the State Store unions are doing that, calling every week. Make yourself heard for a change!

The Beer Law Forum at Yards last week

As I warned you, we had another Beer Laws Forums at Yards Brewery in Philly last Thursday, set up by Philly Beer Scene. Senator Chuck McIlhinney was there, as were Bill Covaleski, of Victory Brewing Co., representing the Brewers of Pennsylvania, and Mike Gretz Sr. of Gretz Beer Distributors, representing things from the wholesalers point of view. I was on the panel representing the drinkers, and Tom Kehoe of Yards moderated. 

This was quite timely. Senator McIlhinney is going to be the new chairman of the Senate Law & Justice Committee (which handles liquor control), and to have him this engaged was great. He's obviously actively seeking input on this. We went right to him out of the box, asking why we had no sixpack sales in beer distributors. He started going off about grocery stores and the three tier system, and I interrupted him to explain that we were talking about the case law: why can't beer distributors sell beer by the sixpack? It would seem to be pretty simple.
 
But that set the tone for the whole night, and a frustration that has become familiar to those of us who want to rewrite The Almighty Liquor Code. It's because, he said, there are 22,000 licensees (tavern and deli licenses and such) in the state who don't want to lose their sixpack business, and they all vote. It quickly became apparent from audience comments that their employees vote too. But what about us, I responded: there are millions of us, and we vote. How can we make that important? It was a question we tried to get answered all night; we got something toward the end.

That led into a fairly simple question by Tom Peters at Monk's Cafe: if a beer is not registered in the state, and they want to get it in for a trial run, or a special event, is there some way to get it in without giving all the distribution rights to a wholesaler? Mike Gretz took that one and seemed to be saying that you could already do this under current state law (but several people in the room who are quite conversant with The Almighty Liquor Code told me that this was simply not so; I'm not sure). 

(Gretz took the opportunity -- as he did at least one other time -- to speak about the family businesses wholesalers represented (and the jobs), and the almost sacred trust of controlling alcohol abuse. I didn't agree with some of it -- it's just a defense of the three-tier system that wholesalers have been using successfully for years -- but I'm not insensitive to it, either. It's just that I can't help noticing that other states have sixpack sales AND sales in grocery stores, and there are no roving gangs of boozed-up semi-zombies there. Food for thought.)

Tom Peters would be quite vocal in support of the tavern owners' interests (understandably so) through the night. What are the tavern owners' interests? They have an asset -- their license -- that is quite valuable, worth tens of thousands (or even hundreds of thousands) of dollars, and they don't want to see anything happen that will decrease the value of that license. Beer distributors selling sixpacks will cut into their sixpack business. Well...maybe. But the grocery stores that bought bar licenses to sell sixpacks are cutting into it now, and the fact is that for most licensees, sixpack sales are a tiny part of their income. Even those who have used their license to run sixpack stores would probably be able to compete, though with lower markup and more effort. But if they're going to give that right up, they want something in return, and that...is where politics and the art of the possible will come into play. 

And that is why we have no sixpack law, because the tavern owners haven't been happy with any deal they've been offered. I get that it's their family business, their livelihood, but...we vote too. Maybe, with an activist leader coming to the committee, it's time to cut that deal.

Speaking of cutting deals, we did get into privatization. The senator is backing a plan to sell wine and spirits by the bottle for takeout at bars. The licensee would pay a $10,000 annual fee for that right (this would obviously lead to the equivalent of specialty bottleshops like The Foodery, but for wine or spirits, or both). Tom was skeptical; many places don't have the room for the inventory that would require. Well, then don't get the license, or figure something else out: if there's money to be made, people will figure out a way to make it. 

That's 22,000 possible additional liquor stores, of course, and that sounds interesting, until you understand that the Senator's plan still has the PLCB as wholesaler. So there's your selection, shot in the arse. Although who knows, if they don't have to figure out how to sell it, maybe they'll actually get some good stuff in? Thing is, we don't know, and that's when I blew my top and started shouting. I thought this was an idiotic plan -- I still do -- and that it's not really what we want, which is privatization. I calmed down, embarrassed, but still angry.

Then the Senator pointed out that while he would like to replace the state stores with private outlets (that's a paraphrase, I didn't get the exact quote, but it's very encouraging from a state senator running Liquor Control), we had to realize what he had to work with. "40% of the townships in Pennsylvania are dry," he said. Let me repeat that: Senator McIlhinney said, "40% of the townships in Pennsylvania are dry."*

That may seem crazy in 2012, but consider. NONE of the townships in the five counties in southeast PA are dry, so we're not the best judges down here. I do know of dry townships where I grew up in Lancaster County; they're still out there, and they don't go wet. As the senator said, increasing the number of licenses sounds great to you here, but when he goes out and to try to convince a senator from Adams County (west of York) on this, he doesn't get a lot of support from the area. It's pretty rural, pretty conservative. 

I think that was when we got a great comment from the audience: If alcohol is so important and dangerous that you can't privatize it, why are we privatizing schools? The wholesalers and tavern owners talk about family businesses, my parents are educators, this is my family business, and you're privatizing the education of your children. If you can do that, why not wine sales? The Senator denied that schools were being privatized -- maybe not up where he is, but in Philly they were -- and the whole thing got a bit disjointed, but it was an excellent point. It also underscores that most of the arguments against privatization are about union jobs and tax revenue, not health and safety.

We decided it was time to wrap things up, so we asked the Senator: what do we do to get through to our legislature that we want this to happen? Show up at things like this, he said: done. Write to your legislators: do it. What about other legislators? He kind of chuckled: you don't vote for them, so they won't really be impressed. Maybe, but...it can't hurt (I wrote the governor, too, BTW).

The thing is...to get their attention, you have to write often, and there has to be a LOT of you. We are going to have to organize, and as this is all going to start up again in February, and we don't even have buy-in on what it is we want...that's daunting. So by the end of the week: I'll have a punchlist of what it is we want. We'll go from there.

Remember: Privatization IS Modernization; an End to The Case Law.





Note that this 2009 newspaper piece gives a number of 28% of the townships and municipalities as dry, and 12% of state's population lives in them. Even though that's less than 40%, it's still a lot.

The Election's Over, It's Time To Get Back To Work

The PLCB clerks have a "Save the PLCB" page on Facebook -- can't blame them, but they're standing in the way of progress toward modernity -- and this was just posted early this morning:

"Back to the subject the time to promote modernization is today! New reps need our input! Modernization is the way we move forward! Write, call, visit your Reps new and old. Strike while the iron is hot!"

We need to meet this. PLEASE reach out to your legislators (almost all of them were re-elected, so don't delay: HIT IT NOW) today and congratulate them, and let them know that you're counting on them to come up with and support a solid plan for privatization, NOT "modernization."  

Privatization IS modernization: that needs to be our slogan. The thing is...the PLCB's "modernization" plans are untested, their execution on modernization in the past has been problematic at best (the wine kiosks are only the most visible failure), and really...why would you go to an agency that has so many issues with customer service and central command-itis for ideas on how to "modernize"? 

Privatization IS modernization. There's nothing untested about private retail, it's not only how most other states (and countries) sell booze, it's how Pennsylvania supplies food, clothing, books, housewares, fuel, electronics...everything else people buy. Total Wine knows how to sell booze, Joe Canal's knows how to sell booze, almost every drugstore in Maryland knows how to sell it: it's not rocket science, and it's definitely NOT so dangerous that the state has to do it. 

It's also not really about revenue: the taxes will continue to come in, and all the Legislature will have to come up with is less than $100 million out of a $27 billion annual budget. I think there are some cuts in the Harrisburg establishment that could neatly cover that...and it's well worth it to stop treating Pennsylvanians like children. Besides, border bleed will go down significantly and we'll actually get MORE tax revenue. 

Privatization makes more sense than "modernizing" a system that most Pennsylvanians would really rather do without. Solve it all, simply, and you'll actually create jobs. Sure, the jobs of the PLCB will be largely lost, but they'll be replaced by jobs in the private liquor stores. 

Write your legislators. Today. Tell them you want privatization, not modernization.   

Is Privatization Dead? Not at all!

The Legislative session is effectively over, and the privatization bill has died with it. No one's doing anything till after the election, at which point privatization would have to be re-introduced. Mike Turzai, the vocal champion of privatization in the State House, damaged himself badly with a gaffe about voter ID, and by failing to bring privatization to a vote. Governor Corbett has said recently that privatization is still a top priority, and that he will present a proposal next year, but the Legislature may change hands, and his approval ratings are low.

We're screwed, it appears.

Oh, shut up. That's just what the PLCB partisans want you to believe! The truth is that the PLCB's incompetence is the gift that keeps on giving. As long as they keep screwing up, privatization is going to be in the Legislature's face, and the Internet makes it even easier to keep up the pressure.

Don't believe me? Take a look at this recent Philadelphia Inquirer poll. "The poll found that 55 percent of respondents supported privatization, 28 percent opposed it, and 17 percent either did not know or did not answer." That's almost 2 to 1 in favor among those who have an opinion. It gets better: "61 percent of respondents in the bipartisan survey said they supported allowing grocery stores to sell beer and wine." Even the clueless Legislature can't ignore numbers like that forever (except they will, because the unions that represent the State Store workers continue to get right in their faces and remind them that they vote and that they give lots of juicy campaign donations).

The PLCB stepped in it again during Sandy last week, when they shut down the entire State Store System for two days. Now, some of the stores were without power, and some were in areas where it was dangerous to drive...but the PLCB drove home the problem with a stupid state-wide monopoly by shutting down every single store, regardless of local conditions. Even some of the employees admitted it was a stupid thing to do.

Want more? How about even more bad press for the goofballs who run the PLCB and the State Store System? That's right, Joe Da CEO was in the news again, and it wasn't because he's a great humanitarian. It's about that dopey Tableleaf in-house wine brand they shoved down the throats of Pennsylvanians. The Legislature wanted to know how and why this lowball wine brand came to be on the State Store System Shelves in (unfair) competition with other brands, and Conti told them that vendors approached the PLCB with wine samples. But that's not the story PLCB marketing director Jim Short tells: he says he went to the wine companies looking for cheap wine to put under the Tableleaf label. Hmmm...a falling out between two of the people at the PLCB under investigation for corruption with vendors? 

It gets worse, according to a story on the TribLive website:

Conti told the House committee that the Wine and Spirits Advisory Council, a group of consumers and liquor license holders empaneled by the LCB, tasted samples of wine submitted for consideration by a number of vendors competing for the TableLeaf brand, transcripts show. But those council members deny being involved.

...

In later interviews with the Trib, Conti changed his story again, stating that an LCB wine educator and outside sommelier tasted samples submitted by vendors.

But Judy Carroll, a wine educator for the central region of the state, said educators don’t play a role in choosing products. “I do classes and seminars with the people who work in the (state) stores,” Carroll said.She said her six counterparts elsewhere in the state all do the same thing: conduct classes to educate state store workers.

And Melissa Monosoff, the sommelier under contract with the LCB from December 2007 through November 2011, said she was not involved in the development or selection of TableLeaf wines “in the slightest” and had “no idea who was.”

Conti, once again, has apparently misspoken. That's the arrogance of the PLCB for you.

Want more? How about this: The LCB, the Board itself, is making a dumb show of its obligation to meet publicly. Check this out, again from the TribLive website:

A Tribune-Review analysis of nearly three years of LCB meeting records, along with attendance at meetings, shows many of the board’s twice-monthly meetings lasted just 15 to 20 minutes with little or no public discussion before votes. Critics speculate the lack of discussion means the bulk of the agency’s decision-making occurs out of public view.

“It appears that ... the staff and the board members have developed a way of doing business that is difficult, if not impossible, for an average citizen to follow,” said Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware County, an advocate for increased government openness.

“Certainly, these issues of how the board operates will be given a fresh look as we work through the legislation for changing the way citizens are able to buy alcohol,” Pileggi said.

Unfortunately, what Pileggi means here is that the Legislature is still considering the ill-advised "Modernization" program that the PLCB is advising! Does this make sense? Here's an agency that is crippled by incompetency, riddled with corruption, consumed with its own arrogance...and you think it's a good idea to let them tell you what's needed to fix their problems?! 

We have a big job ahead of us in 2013. We need to remind Governor Corbett of his promises. We need to remind the Legislature and Senator Pileggi that we want privatization, not some crappy "modernization." We need to get a good, fair bill that gives us privatization that makes sense, not the cock-eyed greedfest that got passed in Washington (that people still seem to prefer to the old state store system). And we need to get serious about it. 

Get started now. If you're in the Philadelphia area, please come out this Thursday to Yards brewing for our second beer laws forum: if you WANT it to cover privatization, I'm willing to expand the conversation. We had 100 people at the last one, I'd love to have an overflow crowd. We're going to be talking about how to take action. It's time to get rolling.

Next month: beer law forum at Yards Brewing

If you're in the Philly metro area, you ought to join us at Yards Brewing on November 8, at 7 PM for another Beer Laws Forum, put on by Philly Beer Scene. Here's the scoop:

Join us for the 2nd of our Beer Laws Forums. Last February we had an open forum discussing the different beer laws affecting Pennsylvania. Senator Chuck McIlhinney who writes our Beer Laws column and Lew Bryson answered questions and Tom Kehoe of Yards moderated.
For this forum, Tom, Lew and the Senator have all generously agreed to once again sit on the panel, and this time will be joined by Bill Covaleski, of Victory Brewing Co who will be representing the Brewers of Pennsylvania, and Mike Gretz Sr. of Gretz Beer Distributors, who will be representing things from the wholesalers point of view. The forum is open to the public and we will do our best to answer everyone's questions.
The event will be held at the Yards Brewing Co. tasting room and the bar will be open for the event. 

You should come, because this is a chance to find out what's really going on with liquor law in the Keystone State. We are in an activist phase in the legislature with regards to the Liquor Code; things ARE changing...but not the case law, and not its even more ridiculous corollary, the "only 2 sixpacks law" that says if you want to buy more than 192 oz. of beer to go at a bar...you have to buy two sixers, step outside, then come back in and buy more. 

I want at least one of you to ask the Senator what the chances are of killing or even significantly changing the case law by this time next year. He'll say it's not going to happen this year...then I'll do my bit and ask him "Why not?" Then, most importantly, I'll ask Tom, Bill, and Mike what their position is on the case law. 

We all want sixpack sales. We'd really like beer sales of any volume at grocery stores (and convenience stores and gas stations and drugstores; you know, like they do in other states?), although we know that's not likely. But why can't we get sixpack sales? You need to ask the Senator, then go home and ask your legislator the same question. And don't settle for "No." Ask why. 

And while you're at Yards, do what I do: drink plenty of Brawler. It's my debating beer of choice.

Next year - why we need to get this right

Privatization is over for 2012. The unions shouted and chanted and wore their matching t-shirts while their president for life, Wendell W. Young, fourth of his line, told scary tales of "the possibility of liquor stores on every corner" if privatization went through, deliberately ignoring the ridiculously inadequate license caps legislators carefully included in every proposal. The social conservatives quietly pressed for more regulation on alcohol. And the fearful legislators, mindful of the campaign contributions of these two groups -- especially those of organized labor -- gutted the privatization proposal that was before them. Then majority leader Turzai's hamhanded politicking ruined any chance that it would go anywhere. So once again, the clear will of the majority of the Commonwealth's citizens was thwarted by a gutless government.

Well, maybe not so bad. After all, the voters of Washington went for a privatization scheme that raised their already high liquor taxes, which should be a caution to all Pennsylvanians who want privatization. That caution, of course, is to be very, very careful about the privatization you get. Because all we've been offered recently is a bill -- HB11 -- that obviously was written with large corporate interests very much in mind, and an amendment to it that was clearly designed to be impossible to pass, in a nod to the power of organized labor. These were not the privatization we wanted, and I'm glad they didn't pass.

I've already made some suggestions in that direction, and you can see them here. To sum up briefly:



1. Let supermarkets sell beer, wine and liquor, purchased from private wholesalers. This competition will likely kill the State Stores anyway.

2. Charge a flat fee to any business that wants to sell booze – no cap on licenses. This will actually make more money for the State, and make it easier for non-nuisance bars to thrive.

3. Tax volume, not value. The Johnstown Flood Emergency Tax makes cheap booze even cheaper, while making better booze even more expensive. Go to a gallonage tax, like almost every other state.

4. Allow Pennsylvanians to buy wine, spirits, or beer in other states, or through the mail/Internet from anywhere, without penalty. -- End the police-enforced monopoly.

5. Allow any authorized retailer to sell beer in any volume they desire, without fake restrictions. -- End the case law. Now. The Legislature has fiddled around for years over this simple change. Shut up and do it.

6. Open up the wholesale market to more competition. -- More wholesalers means more competition, which means better prices and service.

Start planning for next year. Ask your legislator now where they stand on privatization. Tell them that you're in favor of privatization, that you're in favor of doing away with all vestiges of the case law, and that you need to know if they're in favor of those two things...and if not, you want real good reasons why not. We need to be clear with the Legislature that this is an important issue for us, and that it will affect how we vote next month.

The PLCB has shown abundantly how riddled with incompetence it is, and now their corruption is coming to the surface as well. Their ludicrous "modernization, not privatization" campaign is pathetically self-serving. Here's a thought: how about someone in Harrisburg thinks about all of us and what we want instead of making another damn skeezy deal to get some other small group what they want?

This is far from over, though PJ Stapleton's early resignation is a welcome gift. The day after the election, remind Governor Corbett that he owes us privatization.

Inquirer poll on privatization today

The poll connected to this editorial on the lazy PLCB judges is completely unscientific...and at 11:35 AM, it's running 87% in favor of privatization, which leads me to believe that the State Store workers either haven't haven't woken up yet, or are still hungover from celebrating the delay of the State's first ever vote on a privatization bill. So why dontcha go vote! I urge you to vote for the first option, rather than divide our efforts and vote for the third. Let's nail this.

Easy way to get your representative's attention

The Commonwealth Foundation (which has been solidly behind liquor store privatization for several years now) has put up a form letter generator so you can easily contact your reps and the Governor to ask for their support on privatization. We have to show them we're in support of this!

Please use it, and remember to put a new opening sentence on your letter so it doesn't get tossed immediately as a form letter. Make it simple and personal: "I need your support on liquor privatization," or "I hope you're in favor of privatizing the state liquor stores," something like that. Let's do this: it's very close!

Crunch Time -- A Bill is in Debate

I don't have time to explain why I've been silent here for over six months -- a lot of it was work, and some of it was that I did a lot of talking on Facebook, which I now realize was wasted -- but that's not important right now. What is important is that HB 11, a privatization bill, is being debated in the Pennsylvania House today. Debate began last night, and continues this morning. That's exciting, but...the bill needs a LOT of work.

I've got some suggestions. Oddly enough, I got into an email discussion with Jon Geeting, who's involved with the Keystone Politics blog, "Pennsylvania's source for liberal political news and commentary." Jon's an example of why this is not your typical privatization battle, which usually lines up as liberal vs. conservative, free marketer vs. union supporter. Jon recognizes that the system we have is not as it should be, and while we don't see eye-to-eye on the taxes -- though we're not 180 degrees opposed -- we agree on a lot about the state's dysfunctional liquor code.

As I said, we got into a discussion recently, and came to six points that we agreed on, and think should be in any Pennsylvania booze privatization bill. Note that there is nothing in here about the actual end of the State Stores -- except that point 1 covers that effectively; they won't survive the competition -- or the union, because that's up to the legislators. Jon posted them yesterday at Keystone Politics, and I realized that it was time to blow off the cobwebs here and get back in the game. Here are the six points. They're somewhat controversial...in Pennsylvania. In other states, they're ho-hum standard.

1. Let supermarkets sell beer, wine and liquor, effective immediately. -- In Portugal, they sell bottles of whiskey in coffee shops; you can buy beer in supermarkets in most of the states that border PA, you can buy champagne at convenience stores in Virginia...and yet, no one's rioting in the streets. What's the big deal?

2. Charge a flat fee to any business that wants to sell booze – no cap on licenses. -- Pennsylvania's licensing system is broken, it makes no sense for the state, and the artificial limits on licenses penalize areas that are experiencing growth. Liquor licenses sell for upward of $300,000 in some counties...and the State sees only a puny annual fee from that. Get smarter: charge what a license is worth, and charge it every year.

3. Tax volume, not value. -- Pennsylvania's hated Johnstown Flood Emergency Tax is not going away; the State gets revenue from that tax, and booze taxes are an unfortunate reality. But most other states have a gallonage tax, that is placed equally on wine and spirits by the "proof gallon," a measure of volume of alcohol, rather than the way Pennsylvania does it, which is by a percentage of the price. What Pennsylvania's tax does -- unintended consequences -- is make blotto booze (cheap wine, cheap vodka) even cheaper, while making better booze even more expensive. If we're taxing alcohol for some health or moral reason, the gallonage tax is more honest; if it's just about raising revenue...well, why not put an excise tax on everything and share the pain?

4. Allow Pennsylvanians to buy wine, spirits, or beer in other states, or through the mail/Internet from anywhere, without penalty. -- End the police-enforced monopoly. This is pretty simple. The only reason this unAmerican, anti-federal "stop you at the borders" law is even allowed is because of an overactive interpretation of the 21st Amendment. After all, I'm allowed to buy gas, food, books, clothing, whatever I want in New Jersey or Ohio; why not booze? We're American adults; we deserve to be treated that way.

5. Allow any authorized retailer to sell beer in any volume they desire, without fake restrictions. -- End the case law. Now. End all artificial restrictions on how little beer someone can buy in a single purchase, as well as how much. The case law and its tavern corollary, the "two sixpack" law, make no sense. They are there as a favor to business, not for any kind of health reason, and certainly not for the Pennsylvania consumer. Or the Pennsylvania voter. The Legislature has fiddled around for years over this simple change. Shut up and do it.

6. Open up the wholesale market to more competition. -- More wholesalers means more competition, which means better prices and service. Charging $100 million for a wholesaler license is not a way to get more wholesalers. End state-required exclusivity contracts for products; if a wholesaler and producer/importer want to enter into an exclusivity contract, that's up to them and their lawyers, but the State has no interest in mandating it. Another law that was written by the industry...and it's about time we got laws written for the consumers.

These six points will make me no friends in the industry. They completely upset the apple cart, and may ruin long-established family businesses. But they will create new businesses, and the solid family businesses will thrive and succeed...as long as big businesses, chain retailers, aren't allowed to write this privatization bill.

We get one shot at this. Get in touch with your Representative now, today! Tell them you want a better privatization bill. You want a fair privatization bill. You want them to work for you.