There are ballot questions awaiting Massachusetts voters in the general election on 8 November. Ballot questions are laws submitted directly to voters for approval, or disapproval, alongside the regular slate of candidates. 

Voters will discover four different questions on their ballot:

• Question 1: Millionaire’s Tax

• Question 2: Regulation of Dental Insurance

• Question 3: Expanding Alcohol License Availability

• Question 4: Driver’s License for Undocumented Immigrants

Question 3: Expanding Alcohol License Availability

More booze. More places. More awesomeness?

The Secretary of State’s office summarizes the proposed amendment as follows:

This proposed law would increase the statewide limits on the combined number of licenses for the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption (including licenses for “all alcoholic beverages” and for “wines and malt beverages”) that any one retailer could own or control: from 9 to 12 licenses in 2023; to 15 licenses in 2027; and to 18 licenses in 2031…

The SoS also passes along the following arguments for and against from proponents and detractors of the proposed amendment.

FOR

Robert Mellion

21st Century Alcohol Retail Reform Committee

A YES vote fulfills consumer desire for expanded convenience in a reasonable and balanced manner that also protects against illegal sales.

A YES vote expands convenience by gradually increasing the total number of alcoholic beverage licenses that any person or company can own. Package stores, convenience stores, supermarkets, superstore retailers, and others will be able to apply for additional licenses for their existing locations that do not currently sell alcohol and for new locations they open.

A YES vote simultaneously enhances public safety and encourages vigilance by retailers through prohibiting self-checkout of alcohol beverages and basing the fine for selling to a minor on a store’s total sales and not just its alcohol sales.

A YES vote also supports state tourism and brings Massachusetts in line with every other state in the country by allowing for valid out of state IDs to be relied upon by alcohol beverage retailers.

HDN Comments:

Consumers want more booze buying options. Businesses want more booze selling options. Why the hell not? That’s the basic argument. The additional clause banning self-checkout of booze is a nice chaser, which allows everyone on the FOR side to pretend this bill is about public safety instead of dollah, dollah bill$ y’all!

AGAINST

Food Stores for Consumer Choice

Our alcohol licensing laws do need serious reforms, but this ballot measure is not the answer. It offers an incomplete solution to a complex problem, doing little to promote competition or expand consumer choice.

Despite some superficially popular provisions designed to entice voters, it fails to lift outdated restrictions on local decision-making, while in fact moving Massachusetts backwards in several significant ways:

• imposing unfair penalties against retailers who sell more than just alcohol, like grocers and other food stores; 

• outlawing convenient and reliable point-of-sale technologies already in widespread use by retailers across the state; 

• decreasing the number of full liquor licenses that retailers can own.

This flawed approach favors special interests in the alcohol industry, at the expense of cash-strapped consumers and their favorite local retailers.

We deserve more. Vote NO on this question, and instead ask your state lawmakers to support comprehensive legislation that will actually make a difference.

HDN Comments:

The counter argument provided by the AGAINST side is sympathetic to booze law reform, but doesn’t think this bill gets it right. Go back to the drawing board and try again, legislators!

Verdict: Pick ‘Em. 

If you’re passionate about having more outlets through which to purchase booze, vote yes. But if you’re dreaming about deeper or different reform in a state that has had a muddled history legislating on booze, then take a pass. Money-wise, there’s not much energy behind the AGAINST side: the Boston Globe list of donors does not include a single AGAINST party.

Stay tuned for more analysis on the remaining ballot questions…