The Sun-Gazette ran a thorough examination of the liquor store privatization issue in Pennsylvania on Sunday.
It included lots of theories about who would win and lose should the state-controlled liquor stores be privatized and beer, wine and liquor made available at multiple businesses.
As for the legislation itself, it is so delicate with so many interests dominating that there are 200 amendments attached to this.
Frankly, this is getting old.
How out of touch is Pennsylvania on this issue?
It is one of only two states with a state-controlled liquor store system.
It is literally forfeiting business and tax revenues to other states.
A 2011 Commonwealth Foundation study found 45 percent of residents in Philadelphia and surrounding counties purchased some or all of their alcohol outside the state.
And it doesn't have to be that way.
Wegmans in Williamsport has a license to sell beer and the process has gone well, according to Mike Ruby, Wegmans manager. He said the focus of privatization should be to benefit the consumer.
And it's really that simple.
The current system discourages selection and accessibility for consumers.
While it's true there will be bumps in the road for many entities should beer, wine and liquor become available on multiple platforms, those kinds of challenges are true of almost any other business.
We don't worry about it in all those other cases, only where liquor is concerned.
It takes enterprise to succeed in any business. That's why it's called the free enterprise system.
The move to privatize the liquor store system is woefully overdue.
Lawmakers need to stop being cowed by unions we suspect the faces of the clerks in many private liquor stores would stay the same and make a move that makes sense to businesses and consumers this fall.
