The dawning of a new age is upon us. No longer will our neighboring states mock the juvenile ways of our state-regulated liquor sales. Unfortunately, all of this seems to be wishful thinking until the final ruling is made. However, not all hope is lost as Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett acts as the backbone to this proposal, giving it a fighting chance.
For any out of state resident, the issue at hand doesn’t appear to be nearly as exciting as I am making it seem. But the contrary outlook is supported through those native to PA, whom have been inconvenienced by such a senseless law since 1987. Fully aware that in this day and age our judicial system faces much more serious issues, I still firmly believe that the passing of this law would benefit both parties of the sale in a number of ways that the current policy couldn’t match.
Benefits for the buyer
In the event that this revision be approved, convenience of the customer would be the most evident perk of Corbett’s proposal. Rather than having to plan your social night around the beer distributor or state store’s hours of operation, the customer could simply purchase both items at the same establishment, thus eliminating the repetitive round trips those of the legal drinking age often find themselves in. Killing two birds with one stone, if you will. In addition to the convenience factor, consumers living in cities would likely experience cheaper pricing. http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=8975805. However, it is suggested that those living in less populated regions wouldn’t see any noticeable price difference.
Benefit for the Provider
Being that economics acts as the recurring theme in my blog posts, I have reason to believe that the revision of Act 14 http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/hide_-_liquor_control_enforcement/5900 would generate the biggest advantage in favor of those providing the sale. Granted approval of Corbett’s plan, beer and liquor sales would create a whole new market for local grocery and corner stores. State Senator, Bob Mensch, referred to this proposal as a “strictly economic-driven plan”, which he believes the private sector more than capable of handling. In my own opinion, the removal of state-regulated sales presents so many more pros than it does cons, guaranteed to make a positive impact the second it would (hopefully) be taken into action.
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/hide_-_liquor_control_enforcement/5900
The Downside
Realizing these posts are supposed to embrace somewhat of a neutral stance on the topic of discussion, I take into consideration what potential flaws that could possibly surface from this revision. By expanding the availability of a substance that is known to be so closely monitored, concern for Pennsylvania’s youth begins to rise. Meaning, the establishments recently permitted to sell liquor are now expected to enforce the legal drinking age the same way state stores do now. This creates conflict by way of employees learning how to distinguish a real ID from a fake one, in addition to their prior responsibilities and duties as an employee. Even though this doesn’t seem like worst thing that could go wrong, its still something those opposed to this revision are likely to factor in.
Beyond this fear of endangering Pa’s youth, the only other con likely to result is the cut in sales given to the state. Regardless, I don’t feel like either outcome presents any serious threat. While hoping for the best but expecting the worst, I’m eager to see how much of an impact Governor Tom Corbett can make through his effort.
Governor Corbett: “Liquor License, please” (Insert sassy snap of fingers)
This is a very interesting article. I can understand how this could potentially lower prices of alcohol in the city. However, my main question is how big of an impact will this have on students living in the city, like at the University of Pittsburgh? How significant will the cut in price be? Will the price differential be big enough so that those of drinking age will buy liquor rather than just going to a bar?
That’s actually one of the main questions I found myself asking when I was writing this blog. I would assume that students living in a city like Pittsburgh would see a noticeable drop in prices, but not nearly as drastic of a drop when compared to students living in a much larger urban setting like Philadelphia (Temple University, Drexel University, Penn, etc.) As far as the price cut goes, I asked my brother, who now lives in Chicago, how much prices would be affected. He suggested the range between $4-$8, depending on the product. I never really considered the bar as an alternative option to than going to liquor store, but I wouldn’t be completely surprised if a change in drinking trends resulted from the passing of this law.
I totally agree with you on this one– “that the passing of this law would benefit both parties of the sale in a number of ways that the current policy couldn’t match,” as you put it. Instead of some obscure, out-of-date, ambiguous federal policy to motivate alcohol distributors, they have their private businesses, profit, and customer satisfaction to put their buns to the fire and do things right. One question though: by virtue of alcohol (potentially) being available in grocery stores and corner stores, do you think this will start to change the societal attitude toward alcohol?
That’s actually a result I never really thought to consider, but its definitely not out of the question. There’s no arguing that with the consumption of alcohol comes the negative perceptive surrounding those who partake. Making my best effort not to generalize any group of people, I feel like this societal attitude we are familiar with roots back to those raised in generations that frowned upon casual drinking. More likely than not resulting from the days of prohibition and bootlegging. Regardless of whether or not Pennsylvania passes this law, I cannot help but think that the societal attitude towards alcohol is bettering itself the further we progress from that skeptical time period.
Couldn’t agree more. Looking forward to this week’s post!