Oklahoma liquor laws

[jerrywall]

So is there any chance at all we'll get a decent SQ to vote on or a decent bill passed? By decent, I mean "in the best interests of the people and state, and not a massive damn corporate bill that would f*** up things, just in a different way they are now" with our current crop of (almost) completely horrible, bought-and-paid-for-by-corporations/pandering legislators?

As far as I know the Sec of State has yet to let the RLAO know when their 90 day window is for collecting signatures, so their petition drive for a state question is up in the air. The wal-mart group has another petition they're trying to put together for their own state question. And then this bill, if it does somehow pass, is the third option. It's a real cluster-youknowwhat.

[Bunty]

Pft. Find me someone in the liquor industry besides AmBev who was part of that coalition. This bill was kept very secret, and even the committee didn't get a chance to see it until minutes before the vote. It was essentially written by Wal-Mart, and then modified to keep AmBev happy. The roots of this bill was a simpler, streamlined bill which could have easily passed. Instead, we got this bloated bill, half truths, and corporate handouts. It does nothing at all to help the wine and beer industry in Oklahoma, or to help Oklahoma businesses. It does move money out of state real well though.

How could it be possible NOT to keep Wal-Mart from benefiting mightily from any meaningful reform? IF the bill doesn't make it through the legislature, then I'll sign the liquor association petition or the other one. Both should be somewhat better than nothing.

[trousers]

How could it be possible NOT to keep Wal-Mart from benefiting mightily from any meaningful reform? IF the bill doesn't make it through the legislature, then I'll sign the liquor association petition or the other one. Both should be somewhat better than nothing.

Just because something is different doesn't mean its better.

[jerrywall]

How could it be possible NOT to keep Wal-Mart from benefiting mightily from any meaningful reform?

By limiting the number of licenses a corporation could hold (as some other states do).

[TheTravellers]

As far as I know the Sec of State has yet to let the RLAO know when their 90 day window is for collecting signatures, so their petition drive for a state question is up in the air. The wal-mart group has another petition they're trying to put together for their own state question. And then this bill, if it does somehow pass, is the third option. It's a real cluster-youknowwhat.

So this third bill is SJR 68, it appears. SQ 785 is from the RLAO or Wal-Mart? And SB 383 still sounds like a good option (if it ever happens) or has it turned into a Mongolian cluster too? BTW, thanks for the summary earlier, helped clarify...

[Bunty]

As far as I know the Sec of State has yet to let the RLAO know when their 90 day window is for collecting signatures, so their petition drive for a state question is up in the air. The wal-mart group has another petition they're trying to put together for their own state question. And then this bill, if it does somehow pass, is the third option. It's a real cluster-youknowwhat.

Both petitions are being delayed for approval, due to filings with the State Supreme Court. https://www.sos.ok.gov/gov/questions.aspx

[Bunty]

Just because something is different doesn't mean its better.

Well, one way it wouldn't be better is getting rid of 3.2% beer means sales of all beer is subject to the much higher state liquor tax.

[jerrywall]

So this third bill is SJR 68, it appears. SQ 785 is from the RLAO or Wal-Mart? And SB 383 still sounds like a good option (if it ever happens) or has it turned into a Mongolian cluster too? BTW, thanks for the summary earlier, helped clarify...

SQ 785 is from the RLAO. SQ 786 is from the Wal-Mart backed group.

[jerrywall]

Well, one way it wouldn't be better is getting rid of 3.2% beer means sales of all beer is subject to the much higher state liquor tax.

Additionally, one benefit to having what they call "non-intoxicating" beer defined is that there are different rules than full liquor, and it allows sales at venues and events that would not be able to sale 3.2+ beer under current laws. And since none of the proposals address this, there will be some complications. Also, there are beer bars and such which operate around the state who suddenly will be out of business unless they get a liquor license (which may not be possible for some of them).

[jerrywall]

Oh, and I've brought this up before, but if they don't address and create exemptions for hours of sale, this could result in no off premise beer sales on Sundays or past 9pm. It's not ideal, but at least right now I can pick up a case of beer on a Sunday.

[bradh]

My prediction is going to come true. There is so much muddy water on this issue nothing is going to get done. Book it.

[SouthsideSooner]

I have very little doubt that SJR 68 will be passed out of committee tomorrow, will be passed by the full house, signed by the Governor and be on the ballot in Nov.

You have Walmart and QT both lobbying very hard for it and only the RLAO and the smaller wholesalers opposing it and they have very little political clout.

I'll be shocked if it doesn't pass but even if it doesn't, it's not going away. The reason Walmart filed SQ786 is it's their back up plan. They already have a plan in place to have the petitions in all Walmarts and convenience stores to gather signatures and I have little doubt they'll be able to collect the necessary numbered required.

Will the RLAO be able to collect the necessary number of signatures for SQ785? I would consider that a much tougher task.

[jerrywall]

What? But I keep hearing about the great all powerful liquor lobby...

[bchris02]

What? But I keep hearing about the great all powerful liquor lobby...

Any time somebody talks about a "liquor lobby" they are way oversimplifying it.

Bottom line is when the current system was put into place in 1959, the entire liquor industry in Oklahoma developed around it so there isn't any way to change it without somebody losing out, be it the liquor stores, the distributors, Anheuser-Busch, craft-brewers, convenience stores, grocery stores, or the consumer (if nothing gets done). The important thing is passing a bill that offers the most for all of the competing interests, which will be difficult since each interest groups wants a bill that will give them an advantage.

[Bunty]

I'll be shocked if it doesn't pass but even if it doesn't, it's not going away. The reason Walmart filed SQ786 is it's their back up plan. They already have a plan in place to have the petitions in all Walmarts and convenience stores to gather signatures and I have little doubt they'll be able to collect the necessary numbered required.

Will the RLAO be able to collect the necessary number of signatures for SQ785? I would consider that a much tougher task.

If it get down to that resort, then better hope the petition route doesn't get delayed so much that it won't get on the Nov. ballot. Maybe it's possible the State Supreme Court could throw out both petitions.

[Bunty]

By limiting the number of licenses a corporation could hold (as some other states do).

That's not fair, unless you think state law that forbids Wal-Mart from selling caskets is fair.

[jerrywall]

That's not fair, unless you think state law that forbids Wal-Mart from selling caskets is fair.

So it's fair that Walmart can have unlimited licenses and liquor stores can't? Or that liquor stores can't be corporations therefore the owners assume personal liability for the consequences of their actions, but it's not true for Walmart or 7-11?

[jerrywall]

Any time somebody talks about a "liquor lobby" they are way oversimplifying it.

Bottom line is when the current system was put into place in 1959, the entire liquor industry in Oklahoma developed around it so there isn't any way to change it without somebody losing out, be it the liquor stores, the distributors, Anheuser-Busch, craft-brewers, convenience stores, grocery stores, or the consumer (if nothing gets done). The important thing is passing a bill that offers the most for all of the competing interests, which will be difficult since each interest groups wants a bill that will give them an advantage.

I actually agree. I was being a little tongue in cheek. A good compromise means no one is completely happy. The bill up for consideraRion? Walmart and Ambev are very happy with it. That should be the biggest sign.

[barrettd]

By limiting the number of licenses a corporation could hold (as some other states do).

Seems fair to limit the licenses for corporations since the liquor licenses are limited already for private owners.

[jerrywall]

Seems fair to limit the licenses for corporations since the liquor licenses are limited already for private owners.

Yes, but there's another factor. There's a serious issue of responsibility and control under the current system. A license holder, under our current system, is personally liable (since they're not a corporation) for failure to enforce liquor laws. If they sell to someone who's drunk, they could get sued. If they sell to a minor, they could get sued, and they could lose their license. If Wal-Mart sells to a minor, will the Waltons be personally liable? Will all of Wal-Mart's licenses be pulled? Is there even a situation where all the Wal-Mart's in the state could lose their license, or will they just be given all the leeway in the world?

[barrettd]

I hear you. I was just agreeing with the part about the licensing. I'm not nearly as familiar with the liquor license rules as you and some others are. I would agree the liability needs to be equal for all licensees.

[David]

https://twitter.com/RickRmgreen/stat...43230062690304

OK House panel clears bill for strong beer, wine sales in supermarkets.

[TheTravellers]

Yes, but there's another factor. There's a serious issue of responsibility and control under the current system. A license holder, under our current system, is personally liable (since they're not a corporation) for failure to enforce liquor laws. If they sell to someone who's drunk, they could get sued. If they sell to a minor, they could get sued, and they could lose their license. ...

Just curious, how often does this happen, is it a big problem?

[jerrywall]

Just curious, how often does this happen, is it a big problem?

Which part?

[David]

Listening to the audio recording of the house rules committee meeting, the vote was 6 ayes, 3 nays, no abstentions.

From the discussion that was had, there is an accompanying bill that is currently being written that will handle various details that are missing from the SJR, such as reestablishing the ABLE commission outside of the constitution and stuff like restrictions for seller age minimums.