By Nancy

August 31, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

We tried for months to let people know what was happening in Columbus; our web site even has a “Legislative Alert” button that was constantly updated. Ohio’s amendment was stuffed into the must-pass Senate budget bill by the Senate president, despite counsel to the contrary from several important Senators, and without input from wine stores, consumers and small wineries. I feel compelled to point out that fourteen large wineries up north also had a lobbyist at work on this potentially disastrous legislation. Our A2 permit will now preclude us from selling wine direct. If the replacement permit is challenged by out-of-state wineries (which it may well be under the Commerce Clause), we could be totally precluded from selling wine direct. Many small wineries will not be able to find or afford a distributor to sell their wine. Next step: small wineries in Ohio go out of business, and all our work in southern Ohio to renaissance this historic viticultural area goes out the window. That’s the local issue. The global issue is that the consumer lost big-time, and will begin to realize that as more and more wineries refuse to ship to Ohio.

By chiefwino

August 31, 2007 8:04 AM | Link to this

Unfortunately a petition probably will not do it. The only viable alcohol lobby efforts in Ohio belong to the large distributors that have the finances and access to state lawmakers and staffers. In fact the lobby groups draft most of the legislation that is submitted to the statehouse. The one lobby group nominally representing the retail side is only interested in tavern/bar issues like smoking. Unless someone with the proper legal experience can draft the appropriate legislation and a consumer petition to get it on a state-wide ballot initiative is successful; it probably will not happen. As vocal as we local winos are and think we are important, you must remember that less than 20% of the US population even drinks wine occasionally (they also average spending less than $5 per 750ml) and the hard core “wino/cork dork/Parker-clone” is an even smaller percentage. Until someone can organize and finance a grass-roots-type campaign like the one used last year to get the smoking ban put into place, I don’t see much hope of a statewide change in alcohol control laws.

By Ed

August 31, 2007 7:44 AM | Link to this

There is a less than simple answer to the direct shipping and retail mark-up(Ohio) issue. Concerned consumers must meet, draft a petition to our state representatives, and begin to apply pressure. The Ohio Wholesalers hold the trump cards and will not let go of their precious profits. The legislative branch of government has no clue as to our concerns…they only listen to the lobbyists.

By Tony

August 30, 2007 10:29 PM | Link to this

All this is very simple: Big business is screwing the consumer! They have the money to bribe legislators to be on their side. We, the consumers, are basically helpless. I have asked multiple times, why can we not buy any wine from any place in the world? All the excuses I have heard, read, seen, is about the protectionism of $ margins of the 2/3+ layers or whatever the middle companies are there to get us inflated prices that we have to pay to get the same wine to my home. Just don’t limit my purchase opportunity. My question is very simple : what is your added value in the multiple tier “food chain”, besides adding cost to MY wine ? I have heard excuses that we have to lay off people. If the only added value is to increase my price, find another job! If that would happen to milk or appliances it would be in all papers and CNN immediately. So why do we have this for wine? Protectionism is so ingrained that you can buy some wines in Springboro but not in Oakwood, because they don’t have the same distributor, therefore may not offer the same wines. At this point I am only talking about the silly Ohio laws. Let me say this, one more time (and I know that the Ohio wine distributors/ retailers and whomever is involved in the wine industry don’t want to talk about it): Why is the identical bottle of French Champagne in California, priced at $ 19.99 and in Dayton $29.99?? I don’t know how to start this movement, but I welcome any suggestion on how to change the laws in Ohio. I still believe that wine stores, restaurants and consumers alike will benefit.

By Lillian

August 30, 2007 7:23 PM | Link to this

Grrrrrrrrrrrr. It should be unconstitutional. I just picked up my voice mail from Mumm informing me that because of the new Ohio Law I can no longer get my monthly shipment of sparkling. Who’s got the petition? Where do I sign?