Interstate shipping: Can the President + Congress fix it?

In a quote from Jim Trezise (indirect source here):

The 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which created Prohibition in 1919 was repealed by the 21st Amendment in 1933—the only time a truly stupid law has ever been overturned in this way, requiring two Constitutional Amendments (whoops!). But the problem was, and still is, that wine was included in the definition of “intoxicating liquors” (objected to by the President, but overruled by Congress).

Now, not fully knowing the workings of the U.S. political system, I must ask: If a President is in government who would be sympathetic to such a repeal, and Congress just happened to be similarly inclined - could the prohibitionist hangover finally be lifted?

[David M. Bueker]

Would take yet another amendment to the constitution. That's about as likely as pigs flying.

[Robin Garr]

wine was included in the definition of “intoxicating liquors”

Isn't it similar in Canada, Paul? Frankly, between the LCBO and laws forbidding direct sales to consumers, you guys seem to be under regulation as draconian as the U.S., or really - at least compared with our more enlightened states - more so. Is this something you think your new coalition government might address? Is there room for citizen action? Have you looked into efforts that citizens like yourself might join?

I just don't see it happening. This would be way down the list of things that Congress is looking at, and that most citizens care about at the moment, because it is regulated within the individual state. Which is unfortunate since I now live in a very restrictive shipping state. Ironic. In almost every other way, Montana is a pretty wide-open state, but we'd need to get a special license to receive any wine shipments here.

wine was included in the definition of “intoxicating liquors”

Isn't it similar in Canada, Paul? Frankly, between the LCBO and laws forbidding direct sales to consumers, you guys seem to be under regulation as draconian as the U.S., or really - at least compared with our more enlightened states - more so. Is this something you think your new coalition government might address? Is there room for citizen action? Have you looked into efforts that citizens like yourself might join?

It's similar to the States in that laws vary province-by-province. I've had no problem shipping wine to Alberta from B.C., but I don't know how it is for other provinces. I'm not an expert on interprovincial trade, but I don't think the federal government would have any jurisdiction, even if wine shipping was on its radar.

We don't quite have a coalition government yet. The Governor General suspended Parliament for several weeks, preventing the fall of the current Conservative minority government. They'll be back in the House of Commons in late January, though, so we'll see what happens.

Paul,

The problem is that section 2 of the 21st amendment to the US Constitution explicitly prohibits transport into any state of intoxicating beverages in violation of that state's laws. In other words, the states are explicitly allowed to set up barriers to the free transport of booze across state lines. There is very little Congress or the President can do about this until the 21st amendment is itself changed via a further constitutional amendment. Proposing an amendment requires either a 2/3 majority vote in both houses of Congress, or a petition ratified by 2/3 of the states to convene a constitutional convention for the purpose of proposing amendments. Once proposed, 3/4 of the states must ratify the amendment before it becomes part of the Constitution. This would all be next to impossible politically since (1) most US voters don't care about the issue, and (2) any change would be fought tooth and nail by the wholesale liquor distributors. The ratification would have to be fought for state by state. It's probably easier to let the 21st amendment be and to fight state by state for change to the restrictive liquor laws. Costco and some other large interstate retailers seem to be taking up this cause a bit.

-Paul W.

Thanks Paul - that was most informative and concise!