I'm not complaining about the bill, after all I'm a co-sponsor. I'm
complaining about the analysis that it will necessarily raise state
revenue. I don't want to build our presentation on that notion and have it
shot down. You are right that lower revenue to the state would be a good
thing, but I doubt that most Reps would see it that way.
The wholesaler had no opinion pro or con on the bill because he didn't
think it would affect his business. He sells to the state, and the state
would remain the monopoly warehouser.
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Tim Condon <tim@...> wrote:
> Rep. Hikel has told me that he has seen estimates that say in excess of $20
> million will be raised for the state. I fail to see what you're complaining
> about, Dan. If it *doesn't* raise more money for the state, then it's all
> to the good. If it *does* generate more revenue for the state, as I said it
> would, then (1) Democrats may be swayed to support it, and (2) we have
> begun the important meme that that extra money should not be squandered.
> So what's the problem? (I wonder also if the opinion of your liquor and
> wine wholesaler may not be skewed by political and economic considerations.
> Either way, let's get the bill passed, and we will see.) ----Tim
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Dan McGuire <danmcguire@...> wrote:
> > **
> > I'm a co-sponsor of the liquor bill you are referring to. Our goal is to
> > reduce regulation and enhance private business and consumer choice. It
> > isn't our intention to make more money for the state and I am not at all
> > certain that the bill will have that outcome.
> > I've spoken about this with the head of a liquor & wine wholesaler who
> > represents about 10% of the product sold in New Hampshire. His judgment
> > that the bill will cost the state about $30M in annual revenue (out of
> > $130M it now nets from liquor). He says that in order for retailers to
> > sell liquor they will have to be offered a discount compared to the
> > price. That discount, less any savings from eliminated state liquor
> > stores, means less state revenue. The $30M estimate is based on his
> > knowledge of the NH market and industry conditions. He specifically
> > that the volume of liquor sales would increase since NH already has the
> > highest sales per capita of any state, due to the large sales to
> > Dan
> > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Tim Condon <tim@...> wrote:
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > > For all of you who doubt the breakneck speed with which New Hampshire
> > > advancing on the fronts of individual freedom, free enterprise,
> > > taxes, small government, and personal responsibility, take a look at
> > > POSTING<
> > > http://granitegrok.com/blog/2012/02/free-market-liquor-stores-coming>
> > > from
> > > GraniteGrok.com in the Free State.
> > >
> > > The thing is, this type of bill isn't unusual at all. There are
> > dozens---*
> > > scores*---of pro-liberty, pro-enterprise bills being proposed every
> > > They're being debated *and passed* every week in our state capitol.
> > > there will doubtless be a backlast. But the future belongs to those who
> > > come to New Hampshire and fight for the values listed above.
> > >
> > > You need to join us, Freestaters! ---Tim Condon
> > >
> > >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]