Oklahoma liquor laws

[king183]

I read somewhere that 792 on the ballot is different than what was originally proposed. It is weaker. Anyone know what the difference is, if any?

You'll need to clarify what you mean. There were about 200 different proposals and it's impossible to determine which one was "original," unless you're referring to Bice's first attempt 2 years ago. If that's what you're referring to, then it's not weaker at all--it's just much more comprehensive.

If you're simply asking if 792 is weaker or changed from what the legislature passed to put on the ballot, then, no, it isn't weaker.

Also, vote "Yes," please.

[tfvc.org]

You'll need to clarify what you mean. There were about 200 different proposals and it's impossible to determine which one was "original," unless you're referring to Bice's first attempt 2 years ago. If that's what you're referring to, then it's not weaker at all--it's just much more comprehensive.

If you're simply asking if 792 is weaker or changed from what the legislature passed to put on the ballot, then, no, it isn't weaker.

Also, vote "Yes," please.

I meant than what was proposed a few months ago. Thank you for clarifying it. Wasn't there two initiatives? Did they get merged? Coming from Denver and living in St Pete Fl for 10 years, of course I am voting yes. I want Fat Tire here.

[jerrywall]

It should be mentioned that Fat Tire has been in Utah for a while, so there's something more keeping them out of Oklahoma.

[Urbanized]

Meh. There are a number of locals in the same wheelhouse as Fat Tire that have better flavor. Off the top of my mind: COOP Native Amber, Roughtail 12th Round, Dead Armadillo Amber. And Fat Tire ain't what it used to be.

[tfvc.org]

Meh. There are a number of locals in the same wheelhouse as Fat Tire that have better flavor. Off the top of my mind: COOP Native Amber, Roughtail 12th Round, Dead Armadillo Amber. And Fat Tire ain't what it used to be.

Ya, you have said this before. It is memories of my young adulthood, being born and raised and living in Denver until my mid 20s.

[jerrywall]

And there's nothing wrong with favorites, even if other people don't like them. I grew up with PBR and while I still drank it was my go to of choice.

[bille]

I meant than what was proposed a few months ago. Thank you for clarifying it. Wasn't there two initiatives? Did they get merged? Coming from Denver and living in St Pete Fl for 10 years, of course I am voting yes. I want Fat Tire here.

There were several petitions but the only one that really mattered was 791, the petition RLAO wrote. They're still collecting signatures until the 31st in hopes of getting it on a ballot in the next year (or two), especially if they're successful getting 792 voted unconstitutional, which is really their only play left.

Meh. There are a number of locals in the same wheelhouse as Fat Tire that have better flavor. Off the top of my mind: COOP Native Amber, Roughtail 12th Round, Dead Armadillo Amber. And Fat Tire ain't what it used to be.

If you're a fan of 12th round you better stock up, they're discontinuing it.

[bille]

I meant than what was proposed a few months ago. Thank you for clarifying it. Wasn't there two initiatives? Did they get merged? Coming from Denver and living in St Pete Fl for 10 years, of course I am voting yes. I want Fat Tire here.

There were several petitions but the only one that really mattered was 791, the petition RLAO wrote. They're still collecting signatures until the 31st in hopes of getting it on a ballot in the next year (or two), especially if they're successful getting 792 voted unconstitutional, which is really their only play left.

Meh. There are a number of locals in the same wheelhouse as Fat Tire that have better flavor. Off the top of my mind: COOP Native Amber, Roughtail 12th Round, Dead Armadillo Amber. And Fat Tire ain't what it used to be.

If you're a fan of 12th round you better stock up, they're discontinuing it.

[FighttheGoodFight]

If you're a fan of 12th round you better stock up, they're discontinuing it.

No wonder I have trouble finding it.

[Urbanized]

Well that sucks.

[warreng88]

My wife asked me this and I have no idea, so I thought I would ask on here: If SQ 792 passes, will CVS and Walgreen's be able to sell wine and high point beer? I said no because I didn't think they were technically grocery stores, not then I got to thinking about it and wasn't 100% sure.

[Bunty]

FROM THE TULSA WORLD, OCT. 30:

OKLAHOMA CITY — The Retail Liquor Association of Oklahoma has abandoned efforts to get its version of a liquor modernization state question on a future ballot.

The group was unable to obtain the 123,725 signatures needed by the deadline to get State Question 791 on a ballot, Bryan Kerr, president, said Friday.

“We were not going to get the required signatures in time,” Kerr said. “We had thousands and thousands that signed that wanted the alcohol laws changed in a different way than what State Question 792 provides.”

Kerr said he didn’t know specifically how many signatures the organization lacked.

“We decided to suspend the campaign and try to defeat State Question 792 and come back with a bigger and better plan afterwards,” he said.

In a message to members, Kerr said it was a good trial run for any initiatives that they may put forth in the future to get consumers what they want and to create a more equitable marketplace for retail package stores.

The measure would not have been placed on the Nov. 8 ballot, but could have been on a future ballot had circulators been successful and any challenges been unsuccessful.

State Question 792 will be the only liquor modernization measure on the Nov. 8 ballot. It is among seven state questions voters will decide.

State Question 792, if approved by voters, would allow grocery and convenience stores to sell cold, strong beer and wine. State Question 791 would have done the same thing, but had different limitations.

State Question 792, which lawmakers put on the ballot, would also allow package stores to sell items that are currently prohibited, such as mixers and ice.

Kerr and his organization have vowed to pursue a legal challenge should State Question 792 pass.

Alex Weintz, a spokesman for the campaign supporting State Question 792, said he is confident it would withstand a legal challenge.

Many if not all of the changes have already been adopted across the rest of the nation, Weintz said.

“I am confident all of these proposals are constitutional and the courts will see it that way,” he said.

He said State Question 792 has been polling well, but the group is continuing to get its message out.“State Question 792 is the only wine and beer modernization effort on the ballot,” Weintz said. “It is the only chance we have to update the state’s prohibition-era laws. But I also think State Question 792 was always the better plan. It was a more comprehensive modernization proposal. And I think voters realized that and that is why State Question 791 never got off the ground.”

[stile99]

Kerr and his organization have vowed to pursue a legal challenge should State Question 792 pass.

We REALLY need 'loser pays' to put an end to these nuisance suits.

[onthestrip]

We REALLY need 'loser pays' to put an end to these nuisance suits.

Why not let a judge and jury decide if these are nuisance suits?

And winning party usually can go after money from the losing side anyways.

[jerrywall]

My wife asked me this and I have no idea, so I thought I would ask on here: If SQ 792 passes, will CVS and Walgreen's be able to sell wine and high point beer? I said no because I didn't think they were technically grocery stores, not then I got to thinking about it and wasn't 100% sure.

Probably. I would assume any retailer of any type can apply and get an unlimited number of beer and wine licenses. Yay. More money flowing out of state to low wage employers.

[stile99]

Why not let a judge and jury decide if these are nuisance suits?

And winning party usually can go after money from the losing side anyways.

Better idea, why not let the voters?

[baralheia]

Probably. I would assume any retailer of any type can apply and get an unlimited number of beer and wine licenses. Yay. More money flowing out of state to low wage employers.

I am not a lawyer; that said, to the best of my knowledge any place that is currently allowed to sell low-point beer would be eligible for the new licenses for regular beer and wine. I'm not certain on that, however, and my Google-fu is not strong enough today to find that text in SB383/SJR68... and every Google result I've found so far emphasizes "Grocery and Convenience Stores" as the target for the new beer and wine expansion.

[onthestrip]

Better idea, why not let the voters?

They are. But it doesnt mean us voters get to pass unconstitutional things. Very similar to the whole Sharia Law ban state question from a few years back.

Im beginning to like 792 less and less. Partly based on these potential unconstitutional aspects of treating two groups differently. I also believe we are going to see increased prices on many items if this passes.

[king183]

They are. But it doesnt mean us voters get to pass unconstitutional things. Very similar to the whole Sharia Law ban state question from a few years back.

Im beginning to like 792 less and less. Partly based on these potential unconstitutional aspects of treating two groups differently. I also believe we are going to see increased prices on many items if this passes.

Treating two groups differently? What do you think the current system has always done? It's hilarious to hear--all of sudden--some are concerned with treating all sides equally, while arguing to preserve the status quo or supporting an alternative (791) that also creates different rules for the relevant groups. Particularly hilarious is the objection raised by liquor stores about the license limitations when they are the ones who demanded the limitations in the first place to keep out of state liquor stores from coming into Oklahoma! Now, they've changed their tune because it makes a useful anti-792 talking point.

792 creates a fairer system. In fact, it will be the most fair this state has ever had.

Also, it is highly unlikely we will see increased prices. Point to one other state that went from the system we have to a system that allows more entrants into the market and saw prices increase as a result of that action. You won't be able to do it because it hasn't happened--and it won't in Oklahoma.

It really is mind-boggling to see some of these arguments as if 792 is some revolutionary path being forged by Oklahoma with unknown and unpredictable consequences, when this has already been done in 35 states (with more this year and next). We can see reasonably predict what will happen based on the experience out there, and many of the scare tactics thrown out by 792 opponents are directly contradicted by those experiences.

[king183]

My wife asked me this and I have no idea, so I thought I would ask on here: If SQ 792 passes, will CVS and Walgreen's be able to sell wine and high point beer? I said no because I didn't think they were technically grocery stores, not then I got to thinking about it and wasn't 100% sure.

Yes, 792--through SB383-- allows convenience stores to sell wine and high point beer.

[jerrywall]

Treating two groups differently? What do you think the current system has always done? It's hilarious to hear--all of sudden--some are concerned with treating all sides equally, while arguing to preserve the status quo or supporting an alternative (791) that also creates different rules for the relevant groups. Particularly hilarious is the objection raised by liquor stores about the license limitations when they are the ones who demanded the limitations in the first place to keep out of state liquor stores from coming into Oklahoma! Now, they've changed their tune because it makes a useful anti-792 talking point.

792 creates a fairer system. In fact, it will be the most fair this state has ever had.

Also, it is highly unlikely we will see increased prices. Point to one other state that went from the system we have to a system that allows more entrants into the market and saw prices increase as a result of that action. You won't be able to do it because it hasn't happened--and it won't in Oklahoma.

It really is mind-boggling to see some of these arguments as if 792 is some revolutionary path being forged by Oklahoma with unknown and unpredictable consequences, when this has already been done in 35 states (with more this year and next). We can see reasonably predict what will happen based on the experience out there, and many of the scare tactics thrown out by 792 opponents are directly contradicted by those experiences.

I don't know of a state that switched, but Texas is about 10% or more higher on liquor. Distributors don't have to compete there and under this law it's the same. Sorry, but I don't see lack of competition helping prices. Plus, you move the highest margin items out of the liquor stores, what do you expect them to adjust?

[Mott]

I don't know of a state that switched, but Texas is about 10% or more higher on liquor. Distributors don't have to compete there and under this law it's the same. Sorry, but I don't see lack of competition helping prices. Plus, you move the highest margin items out of the liquor stores, what do you expect them to adjust?

As a wine buff there is more selection at cheaper prices in Texas, New Mexico, and Missouri. Part of that is history, but part of that are the liquor laws. Liquor stores will have to a better job with more wine selections and cold wine and beer to go. State controlled capitalism....I agree with king183 100%

[Bunty]

792 creates a fairer system. In fact, it will be the most fair this state has ever had.

Also, it is highly unlikely we will see increased prices. Point to one other state that went from the system we have to a system that allows more entrants into the market and saw prices increase as a result of that action. You won't be able to do it because it hasn't happened--and it won't in Oklahoma.

But I thought if 792 passes and makes 3.2% beer go away, then the remaining beer is higher point, subject to the higher alcohol tax in which 3.2% beer was not subject to. Why do you think beer in bars costs more in Dallas than in Oklahoma City? If 792 passes, then how can there be any more 95 cent draws for happy hour? Or a dollar for a can of beer?

[bradh]

Plus, you move the highest margin items out of the liquor stores, what do you expect them to adjust?

I was unaware that all liqour stores would stop stocking wine and high point beer.

[jerrywall]

I was unaware that all liqour stores would stop stocking wine and high point beer.

OK, the sales of the highest profit items, if we need to be pedantic about it. The milk eggs and bread of liquor stores. They subsidise the slim margins on liquor.