You can read the entire bill and its amendments here on Congress’ official site. (all documents are PDFs). The amendments don’t address alcohol shipments, but they’re interesting to see from a procedural point of view. S.1789 seems to set up USPS alcohol shipments much the same way Maryland now regulates shipments: deliveries must be initiated by a licensed industry entity who work out a contract with the Post Office, and individuals taking deliveries must present photo identification.

Open Congress confirms that the bill has only been introduced; beyond proposed amendments listed on the website above, no legislative action has been taken.

What would happen if we were able to get as strong a voice behind S.1789 as we had behind Maryland’s shipping law? (In fact, if you go to Open Congress’ site above, you can send your legislator a letter for or against the bill.) While Congress is notorious for not getting anything practical done, distributors themselves would be able to ship through USPS, and increasing state approval of wine shipping sets precedents (Massachusetts and New Jersey are considering legislation similar to Maryland’s in 2012). So I’m not sure S.1789 would face the same obstacles that our Maryland law faced.

Where do you stand on this bill?

Richard Gorelick of the Baltimore Sun wrote at the beginning of August about Lot18 starting to ship to Marylanders. Save that link, because the discount website normally only allows membership through invitation, but provided direct registration through Gorelick’s article. The membership is free; I haven’t purchased anything, but the website will tell you if a wine (or cheese, or a wine map, which are also sold) is available to ship to your state. (Lot18 itself is not producing the wine, just arranging with wineries with Maryland permits to ship to you.) Most wines (of the, say, dozen on offer) appear to be from the West Coast or imported. The site is pretty informative, too, with reviews, tasting notes, and winery information. That alone is worth signing up, which is free. The article notes that Marylanders for Better Beer and Wine Laws was involved, but I gather it was more of approaching Lot18 to see f they could offer wines in our state.

The wine shipping box from our trip to Oregon

CellarBlog posted about District365 Wine, which builds on the Lot18 concept by ensuring every wine they offer is available in Virginia, Maryland, and the District. Each week, one wine from one winery is featured. Much like Lot18, the sale is only available for a limited time, so you need to either check in weekly or sign up for email notifications.  They are also planning events and to work with Maryland and Virginia wineries – I’m excited to see what District365 will come up with.

(If you get a postcard from California Wine Club, just toss it in the recycling.)

And of course, wineries themselves are applying for permits, despite the steep fee. Chateau Montelena blogged on CAWineVine that its permit has been approved. I was glad to see some larger names look at shipping. Last July’s trip to Oregon wineries was much more pleasant than other out-of-state trips, now that wine pourers didn’t have to go, “Maryland? No.” MBBWL posts on its own website about how to find out which wineries have permits for Maryland. I counted 306 active permits; some of these are Maryland wineries, and some are shipping companies operating on behalf of the wineries.

And if all that wasn’t making it easy enough, MBBWL tweeted earlier today about a U.S. Postal Service initiative to consider delivering wine and beer in standard USPS vehicles. (Dr. Vino

blogged the New York Times article saying the same thing.) Quite frankly, given the battered-up (and even opened!) state in which my mail has periodically arrived, I wouldn’t trust my Chateau Montelena to the postman.

So have you had wine shipped to you yet? Have you had Maryland wine shipped to out-of-staters? What method did you use?

Or drink some chilled white wine. Anecdotally, I can tell you it’s what many folks are drinking as this summer shatters heat records across the country. Matt and I have Keswick Vineyards Viognier (VA) in the fridge right now. Friends served Basignani’s Elena the other evening. Then again, we also have a bottle of Serpent Ridge Basilisk (a red blend) open on our shelf.

At one point, I thought weather affected wine in two ways: the whole growing-season thing, which obviously depends on the right amount of rain, soil, humidity, sun, clouds, cool temperatures, warm temperatures, and midnight voodoo; and the controversy over sticking to chilled whites versus indulging in reds every so often (with, possibly, a heretical ice cube). Many folks on the local wine blog  circuit mentioned the latter, saying the Wine Bloggers’ Conference last month in Charlottesville, Virginia was too hot to really enjoy the red wines available.

But it turns out weather affects oenophiles in other ways, too:

First, now that we have our beloved shipping law passed, it appears we’ll have to wait until fall to get wine shipped. It makes total sense to me now, and I wouldn’t have left wine in a hot trunk, and our wines are kept in the driest, coolest corner of our house. But I never thought about wine cooking on its way to me: from winery to shipping center, in planes or trucks, and from shipping center to my house. Dr. Vino has thoughtfully researched more about this, and even suggests a label addition to show temperature exposures.

Second, if you’re at all as pale as I am (my students once asked if I was a vampire), bottoms up! The Terroirist reports a study finding that “flavonoids in grapes can stop the chemical reactions that cause skin cells to die”.

Also, the Wine Curmudgeon suggests several ways to stay cool using wine.  I’m happy to report that I’ve tested all of them (someone had to do it!) and can recommend all but the first one. Ice your wine if you want to – I just don’t care for the dilution that comes as the wine melts; I don’t even ice my lemonade. If I don’t do it, I can’t really recommend it myself.

And another reason to detest the season’s stink bugs: they don’t just feed on grapes, but they… um… flavor the wine. The Washington Post’s Darryl Fears writes about this in the context of a search for a predator for the little… ahem… buggers (farmers and grape growers are mentioned on the second page). To do my journalistic best and present the other side of the debate, WMAZ’s Cody Rhodes paraphrases University of Maryland‘s Joe Fiola as saying stink bugs “don’t [a]ffect the taste or smell of wine”.

Have you noticed a stinky odor to wine – or had your shipped wine cooked? How are you enjoying your wine this summer?

Although early discussions on the tax rate proposed a gradual increase by 1% a year through 2012 – from the current 6% up to 9% – last-minute amendments this weekend scrapped that plan in favor of an all-at-once increase this year. The 50% bump puts Maryland well above neighboring Virginia (5%), Pennsylvania (6%), West Virginia (6%), D.C. (6%) and Delaware (an amazing 0%).

While the increase goes to a respectable cause full of political brownie points – school construction – I have to wonder what the effect might be on those delicate liquor stores we worked so hard to protect by barring wine shipments from out-of-state retailers when lower prices await consumers just across the borders of our (geographically) small state (can you feel the sarcasm?). Granted, consumers in the middle of the state like yours truly (Howard County) aren’t likely to drive 60+ minutes to avoid the 3% tax difference. But for residents in the DC suburbs, Frederick, or even the northern Baltimore suburbs might run across state lines to stock up for a big event. Technically that’s illegal – but I never saw that prevent those fireworks stands from hawking their business along I-70 north of Hagerstown or I-83 north of Baltimore. Consumers will follow the best deals.

Are you planning any interstate alcohol smuggling come July 1? If you do, you might want to consider hiring a vessel that can make the run in less than twelve parsecs.

Marylnd Senate Bill 248 passed last Friday (now on the way to The Gov’s desk) and it is a major step towards allowing Marylanders to have wine shipped to them from out of state.

Now, I’m going to whine a bit in this post but I want to preface it by restating what I said last week. The good people fighting the good fight fought a good fight and did a good job: Marylanders for Better Beer and Wine Laws, the Maryland Wine Association, even the ever stoic Tom Wark at Fermentation for testifying on our behalf in front of our wayward legislators. I know that the final outcome this year is not the final outcome that they were fighting for. They will continue to press forward and right the wrongs that Im’ going to fuss about below.

That said, let’s break down the coming law into bite-sized talking point chunks.

The bill allows for up to 18 cases shipped to a Maryland address per year.

Cool. 18 cases per year is a token provision to make sure you aren’t running a Pinot Noir smuggling operation out of your townhouse in Elkridge.

The permit to ship wine to Maryland costs $200

$200 is pretty high. The permit to ship into California is $10, a token amount that fails to cover the administrative costs of entering the name into an Excel spreadsheet. I haven’t talked to any wineries, so I’m talking out of the air here, but $200 is prohibitively high for many wineries. The big ones that are owned by Continental Brands will probably pony up but the small family run joints will pass.

Also, the permit creates another layer of complexity that will continue to confound the poor people on the shipping end. Once on a tasting trip through Napa, I asked each winery if I could get wine shipped back to Virginia (it was legal at the time). Every single winery gave me different answer ranging from “yes” to “no we won’t pay for the permit” to “up to one case” to “no.”

You can only get wine shipped from other wineries not retailers

This is a huge let down. The wine and rare wines that collectors go after are sold by retailers. Maryland collectors will continue to get their wines shipped to a friendly place in DC and drive them over the line.

The end game

This is a quote from a Baltimore Sun article on the senate bill.

“For our business, it’s great,” said Sarah O’Herron, who co-owns Frederick County’s Black Ankle Vineyard with her husband. “We have a high-end product, which means we have to draw from audience of fairly wide geography.”

What O’Herron is referring to is Federal the law that wineries can ship wine out only if they allow wine to be shipped in. Now, Maryland allows wine in, so it is game time for Maryland wineries who can open up their doors.

So what the opposition did was give up just enough so that Maryland can see an economic benefit. Again, it isn’t about you, the Maryland citizen. It is about Mr. Distributor, the taxpaying (we hope) corporation.

But that isn’t all bad

Maryland consumers can finally have Maryland wine shipped to them in Maryland like normal people. So, go celebrate by calling them up and getting in on a wine club.

But enough of that mopey-ness! There will time for that on Monday when I sit down and break down just how much of a screw-job this was. Until then, big tip of the cap to the team at Marylanders for Better Beer and Wine Laws, the Maryland Wine Association as well as everyone else who has put in time on this (including intrepid Vinotrip writer Matt Kircher). The work done by all you guys made this possible and wine drinkers of Maryland pledge their thanks and appreciation.

EDIT: Kevin Atticks commented (see below) that my headline was at best misleading and at worst outright false. The senate bill has passed and must now be rectified with the House version, then it can get signed be the governor and then wine shipping can be legal.

Really, I do.

Looks like tomorrow is the big day.

After years of “almost theres” and “maybe soons”, the full Maryland House of Delegates and Senate are set to vote on a piece of legislation that would allow direct shipments of wine to consumers on Friday, March 25.

Some wines, that is.

The house and senate bills cleared important committee votes earlier this week, but not in their original forms. Instead, we see the dreaded compromise versions pushed hard by the powerful liquor lobby. That’s right: winery shipping only. Retailers would be barred from shipping to Maryland residents.

Not all hope is lost, however. Senator Jamie Raskin of Montgomery County, a long-time direct shipping proponent and a co-sponsor of this year’s original bill, declared his intentions to introduce floor amendments restoring retailer shipping as quoted in this article from the  Daily Record. Failing that, he’ll push for a study examining the economic impact of retailer shipping to raise the issue during next year’s legislative session.

I see a couple of potential pitfalls here, though. First, given the nonsensical logic of the 2010 Comptroller’s report recommending that retail shipping not be allowed, I find it hard to see all that liquor money failing to produce a similar conclusion in 2011. But perhaps more importantly, should the Senate or House amend the bill and produce different versions, the two versions will kick back to a reconciliation committee – possibly derailing the whole effort yet another year, given that we only have a few short weeks left in the 2011 legislative calendar.

Don’t get me wrong. I hate the compromise that limits me, as a Maryland consumer, from spending my money on legal products as I see fit to do so. I want to believe that reason could win the day and amendments will correct the bills to the benefit of consumers. But I also want to believe that we’ll come away with something, anything, in 2011 rather than wait another long year for action. Which is why I’m ready to accept the compromise and move on to the next battle after the dust clears.

What’s your take? Is winery-only shipping good enough for now? Or would you stand by your principles, demanding full shipping rights at the possible cost of none at all? Or: are you really just sick and tired of reading about this issue on Vinotrip?

Click here to look up and contact your elected officials about this issue now >

While you’ve heard in the media that some form of direct shipping is likely to pass this year, the respective house and senate bills still need your help. Particularly when it comes to the issue of retailer shipping. While the current bills contain provisions for both retailer shipping and winery shipping, and those provisions are supported by a majority of both the house and senate, last year showed how the convoluted committee process can upend the will of the larger groups.

A number of factors are working against retailer shipping, including a recommendation from the Comptroller’s report on direct shipping and the influence of powerful distributors. Tom Wark does a great job covering legal issues surrounding the wine industry on his Fermentation Blog if you want more background. If you have any interest in buying wine from online stores, such as those fine sponsors of this website Grays Online and Wine Chateau, I encourage you to contact your representatives and urge them to support the legislation in it’s current form.

Without voices from the public demanding consumer-friendly legislation, we’ll be drowned out by all that liquor lobby money and end up with special interest-friendly legislation.

In case you missed the link at the top, here it is again:

Click here to look up and contact your elected officials about this issue now >

You can also call your reps and send them snail mail (look up MD state legislator contact info here). For the greatest effect, I recommend using all three of those channels, and maybe even buying billboard space outside the state capitol!

BROAD COALITION SUPPORTS HB234 / SB248 TO ALLOW DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER SHIPMENT OF WINE

Yeah! Bolded! Take that!

As I told Matt Kircher, I’m tired of hearing myself talk about this. Matt will post about it, and you, dear readers, are more than welcome to sound off in the comments. But me, I’m tired of myself on this subject. Instead, here are some links:

My manifesto from last year. The issues haven’t changed.

The distributors like things the way they are because it is profitable. Can’t blame them. If I were one of the few people entitled to buy alcohol at a discount then resell it to consumers at a significant markup, then I’d probably pull the “it ain’t broke don’t fix it card” too.

Matt’s commentary on this year’s bills.

The draft legislation would allow direct shipments from wineries, in-state retailers, and out-of-state retailers – defying the winery-only recommendation of the direct shipping study in a clear triumph of logic over fear and speculation.

Tom Wark’s post on Maryland’s Direct Wine Shipping Circus of Doom Report. Check the stoic header image of Wark. You know he means business.

The claims of economic disruption, drunk children and destruction of the three tier system that have been claimed by opponents of direct shipping have not come to pass where direct shipping is allowed and will not come to pass if direct shipping is allowed in Maryland. Recommendation: Pass direct shipping law that bans Marylanders from buying wine from out of state retailers, but let wineries ship into the state.

Best of luck to the good people fighting the good fight this year.

The best part? The draft legislation would allow direct shipments from wineries, in-state retailers, and out-of-state retailers – defying the winery-only recommendation of the direct shipping study in a clear triumph of logic over fear and speculation. The only limit is the number of cases you’ll be able to buy in a year (24 cases from the same shipper). Purchasing a direct shipper’s permit is not free, but the $100 price tag should allow most wineries and retailers to take advantage of the opportunity to enter Maryland’s large and (more importantly) affluent market.

Of course, as we know from previous years, introducing legislation – even when supported by a majority of lawmakers – is no guarantee for success. At this point all we can do is wait and hope that it remains in tact through the various committees responsible for reviewing this legislation and bringing it to the full body for a vote.