Cold beer in liquor stores.

Normal strength beer in grocery stores will be in the event a constitutional amendment is passed to abolish 3.2 beer. Without a law like this, if 3.2 beer was abolished grocery stores would lose beer entirely until a provision like this was made.

Ah, that makes sense.

Yay, my senator (Treat) voted for it, glad to see that. I was in a liquor store yesterday afternoon, some dude came in and started talking to the owner about this bill, told him it had been changed for convenience stores, etc., and gave him contact info for the senator in his district if he wanted to contact him with his opinion. So I talked to the owner a bit, told him it was that way in other states already, he actually asked "So kids can walk in those aisles and past the beer and wine?" Um, yeah, what the hell does that matter, it's not like there are open samples of beer and wine being given out, it's all sealed, BFD if kids can actually see beer and wine, man, the way some people think.....

the guys at my liqour store of choice (The Wild Turkey) are talking like this is going to pass no problem, already chatting about plans for the coolers.

The Naifeh's and Shadid's would most certainly oppose it.

The Naifeh's and Shadid's would most certainly oppose it.

Why do you say that, and why would they? Especially the Naifeh's? Because all it will do is increase Central's business.

Yay! Hopefully I will be able to get Fat Tire in Ok instead of having to schlep to tx to get it. :)

I mean they will oppose the sale of above 3.2 beer in grocery stores.

Yay! Hopefully I will be able to get Fat Tire in Ok instead of having to schlep to tx to get it. :)

I'd hope so, but I'm not sure. I've never quite bought their refrigeration argument, considering that they sell in Utah.

I mean they will oppose the sale of above 3.2 beer in grocery stores.

Only if for some reason grocery stores got to ignore the liquor laws and buy direct from the manufacturers. Otherwise, it would be a cash bonanza for the liquor distributors in Oklahoma.

I hope it passes. I don't care for buying domestics in Arkansas. Can't stand 3.2 so when I'm out its Johnny Black for me.
Can't afford Single malt.

So if this passes the House and Fallin signs it, we can buy strong beer in grocery stores along with cold beer in liquor stores?

No, KFOR said it will have to go to the vote for the people, if it further makes it that far. Oh, oh, this could be something they won't let us vote on out of fear we will vote YES!

Lots of confusion surrounding this topic. No vote of the people is required to allow refrigeration in liquor stores. If this legislation passes, it becomes law and liquor stores will be able to sell cold beer.

What would require a vote of the people is strong beer and wine in grocery stores and C-stores. That will require a constitutional amendment, which would require a petition to get it onto a ballot, and then a vote by the people.

These are two separate issues.

Modernizing Oklahoma's liquor laws likely won't happen this session, lawmaker says - Tulsa World: News (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/modernization-of-liquor-laws-likely-won-t-happen-this-session/article_4a8d5893-f63d-5b8b-82cf-2992a2c5d9e3.html)

I think they made a mistake tacking on this amendment...

Aha. Sounds like there must be pressure from grocery and C-stores to time the two issues together so that they don't lose cold beer market share to liquor stores.

Modernizing Oklahoma's liquor laws likely won't happen this session, lawmaker says - Tulsa World: News (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/modernization-of-liquor-laws-likely-won-t-happen-this-session/article_4a8d5893-f63d-5b8b-82cf-2992a2c5d9e3.html)

I think they made a mistake tacking on this amendment...

I agree. I personally think the amendment doomed the chances of this actually passing. Hopefully I am wrong and it goes in to pass the house and signed by Fallin but I am not getting my hopes up. In a state this conservative, change has to happen little by little. Too much, even just a little, can kill the chances of any change at all. Bice should have known that before she proposed the amendment. On the bright side, even though we have to wait a bit longer we may get more than just cold beer in liquor stores.

Aha. Sounds like there must be pressure from grocery and C-stores to time the two issues together so that they don't lose cold beer market share to liquor stores.


I agree. I personally think the amendment doomed the chances of this actually passing. Hopefully I am wrong and it goes in to pass the house and signed by Fallin but I am not getting my hopes up. In a state this conservative, change has to happen little by little. Too much, even just a little, can kill the chances of any change at all. Bice should have known that before she proposed the amendment. On the bright side, even though we have to wait a bit longer we may get more than just cold beer in liquor stores.

I'm a little confused, because there's some language in the bill that suggests it would have to go to a vote by the people. Not sure why that is. Regardless, the Senate passed it with a large majority, and now we're seeing some back treading. I agree with the sentiment above, I think special interests are starting to take hold.

The best thing we can do now is call and/or email Senator Bice, and Senator Bingman and request they reconsider and push this forward for passage this session. Pressure them, people, that's how we can move things forward instead of discussing it on an Internet forum. Let's DO it, instead of just TALK about it. At the end of the day, the worst we'll be able to say is "well, we tried."
You can find their contact information by Googling their bio pages on the Senate website.

http://mccarvillereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Sooner+Survey+April+2015.pdf

http://mccarvillereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Sooner+Survey+April+2015.pdf

Encouraging. I think this is nearing the place where it could be put to a vote of the people and have a chance at passing. Question is, how does it get on the ballot other than the extremely difficult petition process?

Encouraging. I think this is nearing the place where it could be put to a vote of the people and have a chance at passing. Question is, how does it get on the ballot other than the extremely difficult petition process?

I guess the legislature could do that, but I don't know of any impending bills that would do that.

Contact your House representative if you want OK breweries to be able to sell directly to consumers.

What the Ale: Let's change the law and let breweries sell their beers - Tulsa World: What The Ale (http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/scene/whattheale/what-the-ale-let-s-change-the-law-and-let/article_3e4f4b7f-98fc-5927-bf6c-d60f6b21c884.html)

Want better alcohol laws? Call these people today. : oklahoma (http://www.reddit.com/r/oklahoma/comments/31mkc8/want_better_alcohol_laws_call_these_people_today/)

Contact the Alcohol, Tobacco & Controlled Substances House Committee about your support for modernization (http://localok.org/contact-the-alcohol-tobacco-controlled-substances-house-committee-about-your-support-for-modernization/)

Want better alcohol laws? Call these people today. : oklahoma (http://www.reddit.com/r/oklahoma/comments/31mkc8/want_better_alcohol_laws_call_these_people_today/)

Contact the Alcohol, Tobacco & Controlled Substances House Committee about your support for modernization (http://localok.org/contact-the-alcohol-tobacco-controlled-substances-house-committee-about-your-support-for-modernization/)

They really screwed the pooch with SB383. Took something that could have been a simple policy/law change and turned it into something that requires major constitutional changes and a petition/vote. Jeez louise!

They really screwed the pooch with SB383. Took something that could have been a simple policy/law change and turned it into something that requires major constitutional changes and a petition/vote. Jeez louise!

I agree. I don't know why they couldn't have just left the bill in its original form. It likely would have passed and we would see cold beer at Byron's by the end of the year. Here's to hoping though this gets the conversation started that finally leads to the end of 3.2 beer in a few years. Modern liquor laws will not only be good for the consumer in Oklahoma but will help the state's image.

I seem to recall that some liquor reform measure was once passed by A Vote of The People (after the people representing The People jumped through all of the appropriate hoops) . . . but it got overturned by some court, that probably had almost as many Lobbyists for The Liquor Distribution Cartel slithering in under their doors as do the LawMakers. (sorry . . . recently started watching "House of Cards" on Netflix and it seems to be reinforcing my pre-conceived notions about how political stuff works.)

I agree. I don't know why they couldn't have just left the bill in its original form. It likely would have passed and we would see cold beer at Byron's by the end of the year. Here's to hoping though this gets the conversation started that finally leads to the end of 3.2 beer in a few years. Modern liquor laws will not only be good for the consumer in Oklahoma but will help the state's image.

I see very little evidence that many of our state legislators care about our state's image, which leads me to wonder how many of the voters care either.....sadly.

I see very little evidence that many of our state legislators care about our state's image, which leads me to wonder how many of the voters care either.....sadly.
Probably a lot of them seldom go out of state to see how other states handle their various regulations for the more sensible and/or seldom, if ever, buy alcohol. I also think in most cases, unless legislators are suffering along with you, they're not going to do much about the issues you feel lack of attention to them is hurting you, though you might be able to over ride that, if you got thousand$ up to the limit of $5000 to donate to their reelection campaign fund.

I would like to call out Rep. Cory Williams as one of those rare legislators, who can care about the state's image. He expressed concern that the state's proposed anti-gay bills were adversely affecting the state's economic image. He used his influence to get Payne County to vote yes to legalize liquor by the drink on Sunday. As a Democrat, he isn't afraid to raise conflicts with some the bills Republicans try to pass. Yet doesn't suffer much from it from the voters. He faced no challengers for reelection last Nov. It surely reflects well upon the image of the voters in his district as well.

They really screwed the pooch with SB383. Took something that could have been a simple policy/law change and turned it into something that requires major constitutional changes and a petition/vote. Jeez louise!
Maybe that was the intent of those who proposed additions.....

Maybe that was the intent of those who proposed additions.....

I had the same thought... I'd like to hope not.

I had the same thought... I'd like to hope not.

Yeah that's the first thing I thought of when I heard that it was amended. It went from something that was assured to pass to something that is very unlikely to pass without a lot of different pieces falling into place.

SB 424 and 383 passed the house.

SB 424 and 383 passed the house.

10595

SB 424 and 383 passed the house.

If 383 passed the House with the amendment, is in now in Mary Fallin's hands? Is there any other roadblocks it could encounter before it gets to her desk?

If 383 passed the House with the amendment, is in now in Mary Fallin's hands? Is there any other roadblocks it could encounter before it gets to her desk?

It passed committee vote. Now it goes to conference.

Sorry, I mean't they passed the House Alcohol, Tobacco, and Controlled Substances Committee... Now they go to the House for a vote...

Sorry, I mean't they passed the House Alcohol, Tobacco, and Controlled Substances Committee... Now they go to the House for a vote...

I guess my praise hands pic was premature. Sorry...I've just been itching to use that on something here LOL.

http://media.giphy.com/media/GEUOs9yMw1OpO/giphy.gif

I like that 424 has been moving along with what seems to be little opposition. I hate that 383 was changed when it appeared to also have momentum and be the most likely bill to get passed with little opposition. The only rep to oppose said she spoke with "several" liquor stores and convenience stores who were afraid they'd be put out of business by not being able to compete. She was certainly referring to the un-amended bill but it still sheds light on the thought process from many of these businesses "screw the product and the consumers, I could lose money!"

At any rate we're moving on attempting to tackle something nobody had envisioned a couple months ago and perhaps with everybody at the table to discuss maybe we can iron everything (or most of it) out and be able to put it up to a vote next year. Bottle openers, refrigerated beers, and misc sold at liquor stores and "high point" beer and wine at the grocers in one swoop? Sounds impossible but awesome, at least to us okies anyway.

Bottle openers, refrigerated beers, and misc sold at liquor stores and "high point" beer and wine at the grocers in one swoop? Sounds impossible but awesome, at least to us okies anyway.

Yet reality in 45 other states.

Does anybody think allowing liquor store owners to open more than a single location would be something that would help get the liquor stores on board? What about expanded hours?

Does anybody think allowing liquor store owners to open more than a single location would be something that would help get the liquor stores on board? What about expanded hours?

Not sure about the expanded hours. On more than one location? Maybe, but it's a good way to get Oklahoma money sent out of state if corporations are allowed to own liquor stores. How much more money do we want to pump into Wal-Mart/Costco VS in state locally owned businesses? The overwhelming majority of liquor store owners put their savings, retirements, and personal assets towards creating a business with a specific set of rules. Changing those rules on them now is not going to be welcomed by them, even if necessary.

I think it's interesting that there's now a push in Colorado by local beer brewers to change the laws back so that Wal-Mart et al couldn't carry strong beer. What they found is not that shocking. Local brewers seem to think that adding in grocery beer sales means that suddenly there are thousands of new venues pushing their products. But the truth is, all it means is that there are thousands of new venues pushing their competitors' products. And by competitors I mean national and foreign brewers who have shelving and priority contracts with the grocery chains. Those national chains won't be promoting Oklahoma beers, and folks are naive to think otherwise.

She was certainly referring to the un-amended bill but it still sheds light on the thought process from many of these businesses "screw the product and the consumers, I could lose money!".

As opposed to "screw the small business owner and his kids being able to eat, I need more convenient access to alcohol"? I can understand the small business owner trying to protect their business. I'm amazed that folks seem so angry about that.

Not sure about the expanded hours. On more than one location? Maybe, but it's a good way to get Oklahoma money sent out of state if corporations are allowed to own liquor stores. How much more money do we want to pump into Wal-Mart/Costco VS in state locally owned businesses? The overwhelming majority of liquor store owners put their savings, retirements, and personal assets towards creating a business with a specific set of rules. Changing those rules on them now is not going to be welcomed by them, even if necessary.

I am not talking about allowing national chains to come in and run liquor stores. I would not be in favor of that. What I am referring to is if a store like Byron's wanted to open a second location they could do so. Right now, I believe liquor stores must be a sole proprietorship and they are only allowed a single location. I don't think liquor stores would be on board with allowing Wal-Mart to sell chilled beer and wine 7 days per week until 2AM each night without getting something in return to help them compete.

If I was in charge of this process, I would propose the following.

-Single-strength beer chilled in both liquor and grocery stores, 7 days per week between 10AM and 2AM
-Oklahoma wines in grocery stores. All other wines in liquor stores
-Accessories sold in liquor stores (bottle openers, etc)
-Allow liquor stores to have multiple locations but keep requirement for them to be locally-owned

I think this would be a fair compromise. Of course from a liberty perspective the Missouri model would be best, but I can't see everybody getting on board with that.

As opposed to "screw the small business owner and his kids being able to eat, I need more convenient access to alcohol"? I can understand the small business owner trying to protect their business. I'm amazed that folks seem so angry about that.

Honestly I could care less about convenience, at least in terms of grocery access to wine/high point beer or even chilled beer at the liquor store. As a homebrewer and beer fan I've always been after the refrigeration from a freshness angle. Additionally, as a state we're missing out on a lot of great beer distributed all around us because of our refrigeration law.

I know we've gone back and forth about this before but out of all the liquor stores I've been to in this state I find it hard to believe that installing a couple thousand dollars worth of refrigeration will bankrupt them. Besides, it won't be a requirement, merely an option. I'm sure when it's passed many won't bother with it and that's fine, I just won't be shopping there.

What I find aggravating is the argument against it is akin to finding out that refrigeration of produce will slow the rate at which it spoils but small business owners are opposed to ANYBODY being able to install refrigeration because it will cost them money to do so and for those that are willing to invest (for the grower and the consumer) in order to have a better product it will give an "unfair" advantage so it's better that everybody has the same faster spoiling products. That makes no sense!

Honestly I could care less about convenience, at least in terms of grocery access to wine/high point beer or even chilled beer at the liquor store. As a homebrewer and beer fan I've always been after the refrigeration from a freshness angle. Additionally, as a state we're missing out on a lot of great beer distributed all around us because of our refrigeration law.

I know we've gone back and forth about this before but out of all the liquor stores I've been to in this state I find it hard to believe that installing a couple thousand dollars worth of refrigeration will bankrupt them. Besides, it won't be a requirement, merely an option. I'm sure when it's passed many won't bother with it and that's fine, I just won't be shopping there.

What I find aggravating is the argument against it is akin to finding out that refrigeration of produce will slow the rate at which it spoils but small business owners are opposed to ANYBODY being able to install refrigeration because it will cost them money to do so and for those that are willing to invest (for the grower and the consumer) in order to have a better product it will give an "unfair" advantage so it's better that everybody has the same faster spoiling products. That makes no sense!

I agree with most of this. And I've found that the overwhelming majority of the liquor store owners support refrigeration. I know we did when we had a shop.

I am not talking about allowing national chains to come in and run liquor stores. I would not be in favor of that. What I am referring to is if a store like Byron's wanted to open a second location they could do so. Right now, I believe liquor stores must be a sole proprietorship and they are only allowed a single location. I don't think liquor stores would be on board with allowing Wal-Mart to sell chilled beer and wine 7 days per week until 2AM each night without getting something in return to help them compete.

If I was in charge of this process, I would propose the following.

-Single-strength beer chilled in both liquor and grocery stores, 7 days per week between 10AM and 2AM
-Oklahoma wines in grocery stores. All other wines in liquor stores
-Accessories sold in liquor stores (bottle openers, etc)
-Allow liquor stores to have multiple locations but keep requirement for them to be locally-owned

I think this would be a fair compromise. Of course from a liberty perspective the Missouri model would be best, but I can't see everybody getting on board with that.

Yeah, I just threw in that qualifier. I'm not sure the legality of allowing multiple locations with liquor licenses yet limiting it to locally owned. No idea if that would hold up. So my If was a big IF.

I think Oklahoma legislators on the House side just want to kick the problem with Oklahoma alcohol laws down the road for yet another year as we all become old, or older and older waiting for major changes. The liquor store owner's excuse for not wanting chilled beer legalized is the height of ridiculousness.

Lawmakers who wrote cold beer bill do ?not? want it to pass | KFOR.com (http://kfor.com/2015/04/09/lawmakers-who-wrote-cold-beer-bill-do-not-want-it-to-pass/)

“If somebody wants a beer, they should take time, take it home and chill it, and drink it at home not take it chilled already and drink it out of their car on their way home,” Eid said.

Why isn't this a problem in 49 other states? I want to say that I miss living in a state that treats it's citizens like responsible adults.

^^

Eid doesn't realize that many beer companies wont distribute here because their beers have to be refrigerated AT ALL TIMES.

^^
Eid knows more about the liquor business than you, me, or anyone who posts here (no offense to JerryWall or anyone else who owns/owned a liquor store). Sam has run a couple of the largest, most successful liquor stores in the metro for decades.

Regardless of what he said in that interview, I'm sure he opposes this for purely business reasons. He probably doesn't want to have to buy coolers, and/or probably doesn't want to compete with grocery and C-stores if the whole bundle of changes take place. I'm sure he's just rationalizing in that story to protect the status quo.

“If somebody wants a beer, they should take time, take it home and chill it, and drink it at home not take it chilled already and drink it out of their car on their way home,” Eid said.

Why isn't this a problem in 49 other states? I want to say that I miss living in a state that treats it's citizens like responsible adults.
Oklahoma's problem with alcohol is long ingrained in its history almost from the very beginning. One of first things Oklahoma wanted to do when it became a state in 1907 was to ban alcohol. For some reason, in its early settlement, Oklahoma attracted a lot of Christian conservatives from neighboring states as well as the South. Anyway, it can probably be said people from the middle part of the country were conservative years before the Oklahoma Land Runs started.

^^
Eid knows more about the liquor business than you, me, or anyone who posts here (no offense to JerryWall or anyone else who owns/owned a liquor store). Sam has run a couple of the largest, most successful liquor stores in the metro for decades.

Regardless of what he said in that interview, I'm sure he opposes this for purely business reasons. He probably doesn't want to have to buy coolers, and/or probably doesn't want to compete with grocery and C-stores if the whole bundle of changes take place. I'm sure he's just rationalizing in that story to protect the status quo.

Of course, he's just trying to protect his business. I totally understand that, but he makes it sound like people are going to buy a refrigerated six-pack and chug it in the parking lot. I'm sure there are some sad people that do this, but the majority wouldn't and don't.

I think I said this a few pages back but the whole refrigerated beer get drunk in the parking lot excuse is bs. If I were really wanting to get drunk in a parking lot, I could buy a 5th of rum and get drunk faster and not have to pee 20 minutes later. Heck if I was that desperate for a buzz I would just snort a bit and get that instant buzz of the alcohol going directly in the bloodstream.

I think I said this a few pages back but the whole refrigerated beer get drunk in the parking lot excuse is bs. If I were really wanting to get drunk in a parking lot, I could buy a 5th of rum and get drunk faster and not have to pee 20 minutes later. Heck if I was that desperate for a buzz I would just snort a bit and get that instant buzz of the alcohol going directly in the bloodstream.

This forum has caused me to hoark Ketel One through my snoot a few times and it's not real buzzy, more like stingy. I would like to be able to buy chilled wine or beer especially when I already have what I am going to grill or cook in the car heading home.

This forum has caused me to hoark Ketel One through my snoot a few times and it's not real buzzy, more like stingy. I would like to be able to buy chilled wine or beer especially when I already have what I am going to grill or cook in the car heading home.

Start at 9:06
http://video.pbs.org/video/2365458296/
Video: Ask This Old House | Shelf, Rough Electric | Watch Ask This Old House Online | PBS Video (http://video.pbs.org/video/2365458296/)

Of course, he's just trying to protect his business. I totally understand that, but he makes it sound like people are going to buy a refrigerated six-pack and chug it in the parking lot. I'm sure there are some sad people that do this, but the majority wouldn't and don't.

Then I'll never understand how selling chilled beer in grocery and convenience stores was ever allowed, unless 3.2% beer was classified as a non-intoxicating beverage at the time. If true, another indication how crazy Oklahoma alcohol laws can be.

There were pro/con op-ed pieces in today's Denver Post about changes in the 3.2 laws here for grocery stores. So changes are not just being discussed or moronically challenged in Oklahoma. Just like in Oklahoma, the establishment makes wild claims that are just ridiculous and neglect the fact that many other states have found ways to coexist.

Denver Post - Yes, allow Colorado grocery stores to sell full-strength beer and wine (http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_27888516/yes-allow-colorado-grocery-stores-sell-full-strength)

Denver Post - No, don't allow Colorado grocery stores to sell full-strength beer and wine (http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_27888526/no-dont-allow-colorado-grocery-stores-sell-full)

I think I said this a few pages back but the whole refrigerated beer get drunk in the parking lot excuse is bs. If I were really wanting to get drunk in a parking lot, I could buy a 5th of rum and get drunk faster and not have to pee 20 minutes later. Heck if I was that desperate for a buzz I would just snort a bit and get that instant buzz of the alcohol going directly in the bloodstream.

Thing is, how do you convince Oklahoma lawmakers of that fact? This isn't that difficult. This country has 48 other states with more sensible liquor laws than Oklahoma.

Thing is, how do you convince Oklahoma lawmakers of that fact? This isn't that difficult. This country has 48 other states with more sensible liquor laws than Oklahoma.

Eh.. I'm not sure I agree. We have 48 states with DIFFERENT liquor laws, is about all you can say. Should we only have state owned liquor stores? What about not allowing liquor stores to sell cases of beer (only individual bottles). How about county by country laws and rules? No confusion there, of course.

The only thing you can say is that 48 states allow cold beer. But there are worse states out there in regard to liquor laws. People get myopic sometimes when obsessed about being anti-Oklahoma.

^^

Eid doesn't realize that many beer companies wont distribute here because their beers have to be refrigerated AT ALL TIMES.

No, Good beer doesn't have to be refrigerated at ALL TIMES and there isn't a beer that is done so. Selling cold beer doesn't mean the beer is transported, warehoused, distributed, and stored cold. It's just sold cold. I've been to too many places in Colorado where New Belgium beers are sitting in piles on display at room temperature. It's a myth that does the battle for cold beer no good. Considering the company that CLAIMS they won't distribute to Oklahoma because of refrigeration DOES distribute to Utah proves it's a lie. They just don't want to be honest about their business decisions, and the fact they don't want to invest in a distribution channel in Oklahoma.