I know the Assembly is prone to baby steps, and as far as I can tell, by now we have measured one full baby step for a child born in 1973.
It's been that slow.

As a Maryland consumer of wine, beer, and spirits, I suggest a grand compromise to the full slate of beholden interests down south in Annapolis and the people you represent/tax:

Let me have direct shipping for breweries, wineries, and distilleries across the country.

I will give you that dime a drink.

This will have these sought after beverages being shipped into the state, which will post the paychecks of local, trained delivery personnel.

This will result in larger checks, which you will enjoy the benefit from in payroll, sales, and other various taxes.

It will also allow our burgeoning vinters and brewers to expand their reach and increase operations within the borders of our state.

This will increase revenue from shipping, tolls, alcohol production tax increase, and an increase in Maryland tourism.

There are more than a few people that will come to visit the many brewpubs, breweries, and wineries in the area.

If only one person spends the weekend at a hotel in Frederick, downtown Baltimore, in Prince Frederick, or in the other production regions in Maryland due to increased access to our state's bounty, how is this bad?

I will gladly pay more for the beverages I enjoy as a fair trade to you, our legislature, if you let me order the ones I want.

Legalize corkage, legalize direct shipping from producers AND retailers within the United States to ship directly to Maryland consumers.

I will personally put a nickel into both Gov. O'Malley and Sen. Miller's hand - on the city dock - when I can have a bottle of "Hair of The Dog" from Portland, OR delivered to my home.

It's about time that Maryland's legislators realized that we are in the 21st century and has found the backbone to stand up to the liquor lobby. Could a bottle bill be next?

Well, the podunk Maryland legislature has sloooofootingly taken a giant one inch leap into the future, er, past, to catch up with every other state in the nation. Congrats you bunch of hillbillies. Better late than never.

Does this bill allow wine to be shipped across state lines? Can I get a case of cherry wine from Michigan? Can my parents get a case of their favorite Maryland wine shipped to their home in Michigan?

Imagine the wine tourism... Sadly, I avoid too many wine tastings when I travel, since I can't bring any of the wine back home with me. Think of all the carefree tourists coming to Maryland, able to go out wine tasting and able to buy a case of their favorite - hassle free!

How is it that Balto. County Delegate Emmett Burns abstains from voting on the wine delivery bill because he is a minister but quite loudly blathers and votes against a gay marriage bill?

AmyLynn, yes, shipping across state lines will now be legal.

I am co-signing with J. Chwi on this one. Makes no sense for the state to tax me more on alcohol if I cannot purchase it how I want to so I can finally get what I want.

Sadly what J.Chwi is proposing is why we are in such a bad way with our states current liquor laws and political parking lot dealings. Giving in to the bulls*it '10 cents and drink' tax for beer we can get in neighboring states or DC or NY is no deal. Why can't we have the wine shipping and not the tax. No deals.

Baby with the bathwater there, Milhouse.

It's the distributors who regulate what can come into Maryland by what they are willing to carry. It's not as simple as what DC, NY, or neighboring states can get.

They have had this system as an antiquated compromise at the end of prohibition.

It will take another compromise to break it.

They are the same distributors who have rigged the three tier system to their favor and only their favor.

They let in what they want; despite consumer requests, demands, objections and common sense.

I have heard from brewers who have had to drive their beers TO the distributors to have they send it around the state since the distros refused to pick it up. But since they are the only game in town, they have to play that way.

Shady? Yes.

You know what's also shady?

The fact that they pretty much own the state house - find me one rep who hasn't received some money from these robber barons and I'll put a shiny new unicorn in your driveway tonight.

That leads to the hard problem.

The State House will protect the distributors' interest tooth and nail. After all, distro contributions are the lifeblood of reelection campaigns.

How do you break that unholy alliance? By the only kryptonite our lawmakers know - taxes.

The ability to let them spend is more powerful to them than being funded to run again.

Look, our alcohol taxes haven't risen in years - the early 1950's for spirits, 1973 or so for wine and beer if memory serves - so in that respect, I'm willing to set a compromise.

I know I don't have the money and power to get anyone's ear in our legislature, but I'm willing to compromise to them and say, yes, take my money, but let me order and receive what I want to drink.

They would get plenty of dimes from me, and I would be happier with the selection of my choosing.

To Chwi,
You pretty much nailed it. I can't remember where I heard this but it fits: "The liquor lobby has the liquor laws exactly the way they want them."

Don't celebrate yet. These bills still need floor votes. I expect crippling amendments to be added by the liquor lobby's minions in the legislature.

It is nice to see Maryland join 38 other states in allowing producer to consumer shipments. All the arguments against this have been bul---t, just as the controllers study shows. Congrats to the legislature for (finally) joining the United States of America.

@Chwi you keep referring to dimes...we are not dealing with dimes. That is propaganda to get this moved ahead and pull on heart strings about Healthcare. Ask those same brewers you talked to about the additional money that they will be taxed on their product that they are already underpaid for making. Right now a Tax for a Baltimore brewery, I have worked with, is about $28 a batch with this tax it will be $251...then it goes to the distributor then to retailer each making their mark up. Why not a more reasonable increase if you want to raise it so badly. You better be saving your dimes because it will be about 20 more of them per six pack and 6-7 per drink. As Bob said this far from over, we will more than likely get hit with the tax, not get the wine shipping plus their additional 3% sales tax increase.

Hey, I understand that it's all a shell game, and you know what?

That's okay with me.

If I have to spend more to get drunk and it really affects my bottom line, then it is reasonable to infer that there's a problem and maybe I shouldn't be drinking.

I understand what this will mean in the very short term to the brewers that you have worked with - Oliver, correct? - but really that will work itself out.

I know that brewers operate on margins unless you are Sam, InBev, or MolsonCoors.

But let's face facts.

People will not stop drinking.
There may be a slight behavior modification in the very short term, but it will be accepted and forgotten within six months.

Breweries will not relocate or close down suddenly.
There's too much capital to dismantle it and leave the state.

Hugh's not gonna leave.

Flying Dog relocated nearly all operations to Frederick for CO. Do you think they want to do that again?

DuClaw's pot committed to all of their locations in the region.
Just to name a few.

To say anything about Boordy, Linganore, Black Ankle, etc. uprooting and transplanting their vines out of state?
Not gonna happen.

It's not that I want the tax raised.
I do not.

But I do want to increase my choice of beverages and get anything I want shipped to me, to my door.

I understand how Annapolis works, and I am willing to trade.
Compromise is the name of the game here.