House OKs Bid to Curb Online Alcohol Sales

WASHINGTON —  The House approved legislation Tuesday that would grant states new power to enforce laws restricting the sale of alcoholic beverages over the Internet, overriding objections from California’s wine industry.

The Senate has approved a similar measure, which supporters said is designed to reduce “online bootlegging,” including selling alcoholic beverages to minors over the Internet.

The House vote was 310 to 112, with 12 of California’s 52 representatives supporting the measure despite opposition from one of the state’s top agricultural industries.

The bill’s proponents said that what began as a cottage industry catering to Web-surfing connoisseurs and high-end restaurants seeking hard-to-find wines has fermented into a coast-to-coast, $1-billion-a-year business. And in the process, it has become harder for states with strict local laws on alcohol distribution to enforce them, they said.

A spokesman for the San Francisco-based Wine Institute said the bill would have no effect on the 20 states--including California--that allow limited interstate shipments of wine and other alcoholic beverages to consumers.

But the measure would make it more difficult to expand direct sales to the remaining states, which include Florida, Kentucky, Georgia and Maryland.

A White House spokesman said the administration has taken no position on the measures making their way through Congress but generally opposes efforts to regulate Internet commerce. Rep. Joe Scarborough (R-Fla.), the bill’s chief sponsor, argued that the legislation would affect only the illegal shipment of alcohol and would not hurt wineries in California or elsewhere that obey state laws.

“This is a great first step in helping parents keep illegal alcohol out of their children’s hands,” Scarborough said. “The Internet will no longer be a bootlegger’s paradise.”

An aide to Scarborough cited Florida cases in which the state has had difficulty under existing law enforcing its ban on shipment of alcohol to out-of-state consumers.

Opponents, led by House members from California and other wine-producing regions, branded the measure an effort by a special-interest group--alcohol wholesalers--to preserve its monopolistic distribution system.

And they disputed the contention that there is a significant problem of minors buying alcohol in cyberspace.

“I am unmoved by the argument offered by proponents that massive numbers of underage drinkers are searching the Internet for basement bargains on bottles of Bordeaux to binge with their friend on their parents’ next night out,” said Rep. Kenny C. Hulshof (R-Mo.).

Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena), whose district includes many Napa Valley wineries, added: “Kids are not going to be purchasing premier cabernet wine from my district for $40 to $150 a bottle.”

Rep. Lynn C. Woolsey (D-Petaluma) called the bill a “wolf in sheep’s clothing,” saying: “It’s not about combating underage drinking. This bill is about wholesalers and distributors that don’t want small wineries to move in on their turf.”

Members of the California delegation voting for the measure were Reps. Xavier Becerra (D-Los Angeles), Mary Bono (R-Palm Springs), Tom Campbell (R-San Jose), Gary A. Condit (D-Ceres), Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-San Diego), Bob Filner (D-San Diego), Wally Herger (R-Marysville), Gary G. Miller (R-Diamond Bar), Doug Ose (R-Sacramento), James E. Rogan (R-Glendale), Edward R. Royce (R-Fullerton) and Loretta Sanchez (D-Garden Grove).

Rep. Brian P. Bilbray (R-San Diego) did not vote.

“I don’t believe [the bill is] going to be so bad for California,” Bono said in an interview. “All this is doing is recognizing the 21st amendment,” a reference to the constitutional provision enacted after the repeal of Prohibition granting states authority over the sale of alcoholic beverages. “If people want to purchase wine, they can, but they cannot circumvent state law.”