From the Richmond Times Dispatch:

 

Richmond, Va. —

Gov. Bob McDonnell indicated today that he will try to sell ABC privatization to the General Assembly as “a windfall for transportation.”

The proceeds from the auction sale of ABC licenses — the state expects to realize $300 million to $500 million — will go entirely for road maintenance, McDonnell said.

He appeared on Washington radio station WTOP’s “Ask the Governor” program.

Asked about a recent VCU poll which showed him with a 48 percent approval rating — low by gubernatorial standards — McDonnell said it reflects the people’s concern about jobs and the economy.

He also said there are no plans to proceed with phasing out the personal property tax on cars and trucks because of the state’s current fiscal situation. The 2002 General Assembly froze the phase out was frozen at about 65 percent of the assessed value of vehicles.

— Tyler Whitley

Apparently McDonnell believes in flash in the pan money.  What will he do to make up all the money that the sale of liquor brings in to the state annually?  This seems like a George Bush live for today, hell with tomorrow kind of scheme to me, rather than carefully planning out a course of action to guarantee certain finances we can count on. 

Some of us don’t want to look like Maryland or DC with a liquor store on every corner.  I sure hope a certain someone cornered the governor last night and gave him a piece of her mind about Virginia tradition.

59 Thoughts to “McDonnell Continues to Push for Sale of ABC Stores”

  1. George S. Harris

    Yep–a “windfall”–a one time real good deal with no guarantee of future “windfalls.” Methinks this is another case of, “Ready, Fire, Aim!” Short term gain, long term loss. If I understand correctly, the ABC stores are one of the Commonwealth’s most profitable enterprises and the “benefits” liability to the Commonwealth is limited since many employees are part time with no benefits. At one point I had posted these numbers but no long have them.

  2. Starryflights

    Don’t ask me, I didn’t vote for this guy.

  3. PWC Taxpayer

    So what. Whether or not the ABC stores are really “profitable” after the full costs to the taxpayer are considered is not the point. I am sure there are any number of other businesses that are “profitable” that the State could take overr but shouldn’t. Would you have the State run all the Walgreens stores or maybe just the things we really need like all the Bloom food stores – to ensure that nobody makes a profit on food sales. Why is the Sate of Virginia or any government in this business at all? The Government has no business displacing the private sector – much less a retail sector that in this case can be fully regulated as to times and place and then taxed. The fact that it is a remenent of the prohibition era is no excuse. No, this is only a debate because of the unions again – public emnployee union membership and through those dues contributions to the Democratic party – nothing more.

  4. marinm

    Won’t the state continue to make a tax off each sale just like every other product sold in this state?

  5. Pat.Herve

    This is not a discussion about if VA should own the business or not, I do agree that a state should not be involved in owning a business, but VA does own the ABC Stores – it is what it is. What exactly does selling the ABC Stores mean – does it mean that some conglomerate gets a monopoly on selling booze the same way that ABC currently enjoys? Do we have to create a bureaucracy to police them and make sure they are not gouging us on liquor sales? Does it mean that I can open a liquor store? If I can, what would we be selling? What about replacing the revenue stream VA currently enjoys?

    McDonnell is now the Governor, it is no longer sound bites – I have yet to hear what selling ABC actually means. I am tired of our elected officials using one offs to mark achievements on their resume, without having a way for the achievement to be self sustaining. If they cannot replace the full value of the asset, keep it.

  6. PWC Taxpayer

    @Pat.Herve

    Totally disagree Pat. The Government has no business being in this legal, retail, consumer business. The justification for the State’s monopoly control disappeared 40 or 50 years ago. Its is the principle of the thing – telling the government it has limits and not undermining those principles by the special interests of AFSCME. It is not about revenue, which has been shown – by the State’s own Privatization Office to yield net annual reveunes through cost reductions and tax income. The State’s earlier proposal was to offer the stores to the State employees who run them now – as private businesses venture, then offfer those that are not picked up to larger franchise organizations. But until we get past the subtra-fudge of reveue impact that runs cover for the unions and the Democratic Party money machine- it won’t happen. Its wrong, wrong, wrong.

  7. George S. Harris

    @PWC Taxpayer
    First of all–what is “subtra-fudge”. Some kind of sweet that you eat underground?

    As to government in business–let’s see–they sell license plates, they sell operators’ licenses, they sell business licenses, they sell, they sell, they sell…

    Sure would like to see some proof of this statement: “No, this is only a debate because of the unions again – public emnployee union membership and through those dues contributions to the Democratic party – nothing more.”

    As far as I am concerned you continue to whistle a one note song–anti-anything to do with Democrats. Don’t you get tired of it? The rest of us do I suspect. Poor Johnny One Note!

  8. Big Dog

    Part of ABC profits have been shared with local jurisdictions for decades to
    help support public safety, schools, etc. . Under Gov. McD’s plan that would
    be eliminated. Consequently, the Commonwealth will continue the shell game
    of cutting funding and increasing mandates for cities and counties and
    then patting themselves on the back. They aren’t solving problems, they
    are kicking them down to another level of government.

    The only thing Gov. McD and the GA are giving local governments is the finger.

  9. PWC Taxpayer

    I don’t think Subtra-fudge is sweet – don’t know, but you can sure eat it. 🙂

    Come into the light George and join in honoring the nation of individualis, restricted regulatory burdens, constitutional freedom and limited government as compared to the Party of income redistribution, big centralized federalism and dependency.

    Johnny one note ?? Yeh, right — like you have room to talk.

  10. Pat.Herve

    pwc – can you tell me what ABC privatization actually means?

  11. PWC Taxpayer

    @Pat.Herve

    You mean like selling off the space and stock, creating competition, creating small businesses and actually more jobs – that do not have to go through the VA civil service system ($$$), eliminating State appropriations for direct salaries, logistics, property manangement, legal and other overhead costs to include long term retirement and health care liabilities – not to mention the political garbage that comes from distributor influence over State legislators when the State directly controls their sales and market share in the state? Or do you mean the conversion of a state enterprise into a private sector business, with full reponsibility for the marketing, sale, and paying of taxes to both State and now local entities at the corporate and individual income level – and this includes local enforcement vice the indemnification affforded a State enterprise?.

  12. Pat.Herve

    pwc, you are putting the cart before the horse, in my mind. What does ABC privatization mean – does it mean to spin the business off, fire the current staff (to get savings), how do you think it is going to limit the distributor influence, it will actually Increase the distributor lobbyist influence.. ABC currently does pay taxes to state and local entities.

    How do you think VA should privatize the ABC stores – should it sell it off to a single conglomerate? Should WalMart pick it up?

  13. State run liquor stores date back to the 30’s when prohibition was lifted. It is a Virginia tradition. I have not heard any people with a Virginia heritage agree to seeing the stores.

    TP, it really has nothing to do with the Unions or with Democrats. Just what unions do you think are profitting from the ABC stores? Let’s hear it now.

    You are forgetting that Virginia is a right to work state, apparently and that unions have very little power in Virginia. But it sounds good….conservative sound-bite bs is what it really is.

    Big Dog is right. There is going to be no replacement for the ABC profits. All of the localities ought to be raising hell. I hope the GA smacks McDonnell down.

    Maybe Walmart can start selling license plates and drivers licenses.

    Pat, don’t count on answers. They don’t exist.

  14. PWC Taxpayer

    @Moon-howler

    First it is naive in the extreme to suggest that the public employees unions do not have a dog in this fight or that their influence is not being felt. Second, what is this crazy talk about direct State retail liquor sales being a part of the Virginian tradition – at best it is a vestige of the bible belt that long ago gave up Sunday blue laws. “I have not heard any people with a Virginia heritage agree to seeing the stores.” So what are you saying here — that old time Virginians with slavery and a proud tradition of moonshine in their heritage and who fought to restrict the reach of government – and who were absolutely willing then to accept the ABC in return for the State not going dry after Federal prohibition was repealed still want their liquor sales controlled by the ABC Horse pucky.

    Why is any government enterprise in a business for profit? No, that is not the rationale for public intervention and displacement of a good or service that is or could be provided by the private sector. Under your definition there is no limit to what a Federal or State government could involve itself in – of course I do understand you’re Chavez/Obama vision of our future is different from mine. I ask you, under your approach why shouldn’t the State take over the Walmarts and Bloom Foods stores to make sure that drugs and foods are provided at a more reasonable (subsidized) price – and to make a profit – that can then be redistributed to locals through the politburo – er, I mean political process? Why not? Because we as a people have constitution that – I know you hate this idea — limits what governments can do and why.

    And stop with the stupid comparison to license plates. The State does have an obligation to regulate drivers licenses and vehicle registrations – for a host of good public policy reasons. That they are made by convicts is a debatable issue – justified to keep prisoners at work, improve safety for the guards (federal justification not mine) the reduce price of such tags by paying 30 cents and hour for labor. Same at the Federal level with office furniture.

  15. TP is doing that Republican thing which is to insult those with whom he disagrees. Let’s see, I am descended from slave-holding, moonshining bible belt folks and I make stupid comparisons, all while supporting Chavez. Ok.

    None of my ancestors held slaves in 1934 nor did they make moonshine.

    You might want to read up on the history of VA ABC. Are you denying the liquor and revenue violations made up a great deal of our violent crime in the 20s and 30s? Think maybe Virginia wanted to get a handle on that problem before those with nefarious designs on the liquor business got their foot in the door? As for the Bible belt, that might have been part of it but it certainly wasn’t the entire issue.

    What has served Virginia and generated revenue for localites for education and public safety has been in effect for over 70 years. Why should the Johnny Come Latelies have to mess with things when they don’t have a better plan.

    There is no annual plan to replace these funds. This is a bad plan and a loss of revenue.

    Look at any Maryland or DC liquor district. Do we want to look like that? Do we want people running into the state to buy up cheaper liquor? No.

  16. TP, you haven’t named those unions you keep talking about. Exactly how many ABC employees are union members? Some facts please.

    Do you really think that unions have kept ABC Stores in operation? Please tell me no.

  17. PWC Taxpayer

    Oh, Oh my – yes – I never thought of that – you win. 🙂

  18. Union names please, TP. Sarcasm doesn’t become you.

    There are no unions propping up the state stores. Tradition and a couple million a year in profits keep the ABC stores going. Over half the employees are part time and therefore ineligible for for VRS (either that or they work other state jobs and are already in the system.)

  19. PWC Taxpayer

    So none of the ABC store employees are officially represented at the national level by AFSCME – is that what you are saying. Do you really know this? And it is also your argument that non of the supposed “profits” go into other state budgets that have been used to prop up state or local agencies or salaries, actions that might influence the unions to want to hold on to those members of revenues? Non of those profits go to the schools right — that would be interesting — if the Schools or teachers had a vested interest in selling booze through the ABC stores.

  20. I have no idea. How do I know who is a member of what? I asked you to provide me the names of Unions who have been supporting and propping up the VA ABC stores.

    You are obsessed with unions. I don’t care if ABC employees are union members or not. If they are, they pay their own dues and frankly it isn’t any of our business.

    Profits from ABC sales do go into schools and to safety. See Big Dog’s comment #8.

    What is your point? You want cheap booze and you want VA to have no part of booze sales? You want to blast unions? Find a different victim.

  21. PWC Taxpayer

    And you support this “do as I say not as I do” view of telling children not to drink but taking the “profits” from such sales to support the schools and other public needs like — healthcare. No, the goverment has no business being in this business for a lot of reasons and non of them have to do with good government, the proper role of government, the cost of government, our heritage or our traditions. That the public employee unions have a conflict of interest in this is only one more concern. I have no idea how many states have ABC stores, but it cannot be many. Va needs to exit this business line ASAP and then pick a successful model for oversight.

  22. Children aren’t adults. Drinking alcohol is legal for adults.

    That is the most absurd argument I have ever heard. Who are you? Mr. Carrie Nation?

    Would you prefer to pay taxes to increase the money going for public education and public safety? (I believe that means schools and cops)

    The ABC stores are a successful model. They have been successful for 70 plus years. I suppose you now want to do away with the lottery which also puts money back in to communities. The public employee unions have no conflict of interest. We haven’t even determined that anyone belongs to them. You truly have put on the tin foil hat today.

    Most states in the south have state ABC stores.

  23. From Wikipedia:

    The Twenty-First Amendment to the United States Constitution allows states to regulate the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages.[2] State regulations vary widely. The majority of the U.S. states have laws specifying which alcoholic beverages must be sold in specialty liquor stores, and which may be sold in other venues. In five states (Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Utah), only low-point beer may be sold in supermarkets or gas stations. In eighteen alcoholic beverage control states, the specialty liquor stores are run exclusively by the state government. In some states such as Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, California, and Wisconsin however, all alcoholic beverages can be sold practically anywhere, including drug stores and gas stations

  24. marinm

    If restraunts that serve alcohol can be licensed to sell beer, spirits and wine I don’t see an issue with a state license to operate a store that sells ONLY beer, spirits and wine. The only thing your removing is the 50% food sales requirement and on-site consumption.

    Heck, I’m even somewhat OK with a transition period where private retail locations can be operated while ABC continues to operate state retail locations while the private retail locations become situated. Would be amusing if the private locations beat the state on prices. Then again the State may use there monopoly to crush the private sector.

    ABC will still exist to enforce the liquor laws and act as revenuers. So, we’re only really talking a few thousand PT employees being terminated from state employment and possibly being transferred to the private market.

  25. Virginia seems to think that 50% is pretty important. Jurisdictions seem to think that the several million dollar profits annually is pretty important.

    I like the control. Liquor stores often are problematic. I like the money that is generated going to schools and public safety. I think libraries might get a piece of that pie also.

  26. About $220 million is brought in to the state between taxes and profit revenue per year. That is some major money. Yes, the tax would still be there but the profit part wouldn’t.

  27. Joe

    Thus subject piked my interest.

    It seems that even the Washington Post published support for the effort. It does seem to be an outdated approach and I agree it is beyond the scope of the Government to displace this kind of retail business.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/06/AR2009110601355.html

    http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-politics/2010/jul/25/abcc25-ar-349407/

  28. @Moon-howler
    The fact that TP doesn’t know any of this information is another demonstration of how he operates his mouth without engaging his brain.

    The ABC system has 2,682 employees and 332 stores. Some 1,700 are part-time employees who receive no benefits whatsoever other than a periodic paycheck. I suspect most of the balance are involved in licensing and enforcement plus 300+ store managers. The sale price for the stores is expected to be around $500 million or 5 years worth of profit. While it is true there could be more stores, depending on how many the state is willing to license but there may well be more than 1,700 people who won’t be drawing a paycheck unless the new liquor stores hire them. If it goes like it did when Maine privatized their Greenfront Stores, already established businesses simply expanded their beer and wine departments to include “hard” liquor. So I say the governor is looking at short term gain and long term loss–penny wise, pound foolish. If there is a need for more stores and more variety, the perhaps the state should expand the number of stores. It is perhaps one of the few profittable enterprises the state owns.

    Further, he doesn’t have a clue what, if any union is involved, he has no proof that any of the employees who lose their jobs will be rehired (that’s probably most of the 1,700 part time folks who get NO BENEFITS and thus are not a long term obligation to the state), although I have no proof I would think big box stores could absorb the addition of a liquor buisness without hiring anyone. BTW, 18 other states are in the liquor store business.

    Further, TP throws out insults, like most ultra conservatives plus he throws out a bunch of crap hoping that some of it will stick to the wall. I wonder if he sups at the public trough; i.e., a federal, state or county employee or some one drawing a pension from one of these entities plus Social Security. What a hoot that would be!!! I am not ashamed to admit I draw a federal (military) pension and Social Security but am still a tax payer. Maybe he is a carpet bagger like Corey Stewart! Sure sounds like it.

  29. Rez

    Not sure that personal attacks are called for, George. Why not just stick to your “facts” as you see them?

  30. Rez

    Sorry, Wolfie, want to let that pass?

  31. marinm

    Moon-howler :Virginia seems to think that 50% is pretty important. Jurisdictions seem to think that the several million dollar profits annually is pretty important.
    I like the control. Liquor stores often are problematic. I like the money that is generated going to schools and public safety. I think libraries might get a piece of that pie also.

    MH, your talking about the states share. The county doesn’t really get anything out of that except in the round about way that the state contributes to each county it’s share of state revenues.

    Or, if the county had the ability to zone and license liquor establishments they could realize taxable revenue off the property in addition to county taxes levied.

    But, WRT school funding I’d rather have it handled outside of the County Board and taxing authority moved to the school board. But, I’d then put the caveat that the tax levied could only be charged against any (family) unit that uses those (school) services. If you don’t have kids or your kids go to religious, private, military or homeschooled then you don’t pay into the system. The School Board could determine by it’s own authority to double, triple, etc tax those residents with multiple children.

  32. It is an civilized society’s duty to pay to educate its citizens. That is just one of the traditions in this country. No one should be able to escape.

    The state gives money to locality. For instance, not every county allows liquor by the drink. It is local option. However, those counties still get the funding from the rest of us. My husband has groused about that for years.

    Regardless of who owns the liquor stores, the state will still get the tax. If the sell the stores, the state won’t get the profit year after year.

  33. Rez, TP needs to acquire better manners to me if he wants me to defend him. Since day 1 he has come in with a chip on his shoulder.

    I would jump in and protect you because you are always a gentleman here.

  34. marinm

    MH, in response to 31. Society is not removing itself from funding education. Rather, the funding of it is being moved to those most utilizing those services. Virginia is the only state that I know of that funds education the way that we do. My understanding is – Texas being an example – that the County levies a tax and then the School Board levies one that escalates with the number of children that attend school. It’s a more fair system as those utilizing other means of education are not penalized for doing so. If the education the school district provides is greater than what options the free market (military, religious or home education) offers than they have nothing to fear — parents will see the value and use it.

    The state still collects revenue off any state license, state taxes, and state fines for violations. The county will now newly collect property taxes, special usage permit fees, zoning fees, and county taxes levied. There is actually a good chance that the state will collect more taxes as availability increases (liquor stores on every corner, for example).

    I think the idea has merit to be explored and we should walk the dog on it.

  35. Rez

    Sorry, Wolfie, so does George. it does work both ways.

  36. Rez

    I am not defending him BTW. I am defending proper discourse. there is a huge difference.

  37. George doesn’t direct it at me. There’s the difference.

    I figure both George and TP are quite capable of defending themselves.

    Very few people get booted from here. I can only think of less than 5 since the blog was anti. It is easier to just not let people on in the first place.

  38. Pat.Herve

    marin – can you explain more about the Texas tax thing. My understanding, in most areas, is that school taxes come out of property taxes, and you pay based on worth, not usage.

  39. George S. Harris

    @Rez
    May I suggest you take a good look at TPs comments–not exactly kindergarten stuff. Moon will let me know if I get out of line. TP has made a lot of allegations, none of which he has proveneven though Moon has repeatedly ask him to do so.

  40. George S. Harris

    http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/010rankings.pdf This is a lengthy report by the NEA about school rankings and monies, but does not exactly say how funds are generated state by state.

  41. George S. Harris

    @Pat.Herve
    Pat–Here is a lengthy report about Texas education funding published in 2001–may not be completely up to date.

    http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/Public_Education/Finance_PublicEd_3dEd_1001.pdf

  42. PWC Taxpayer

    Too funny – as if facts or principles mean anything to either of you. And the rules regarding courtesy, as noted again and again, are clearly different for conservatives. Stick to the talking points girls, we will continue to challenge them.

    1. Taxpayer, I see you are also sexist in addition to being rude. We are not ‘girls’ to you. Again, another example of your intentional insults.

      Actually, our rules for courtesy work along the lines of ‘do unto others.’

  43. Lafayette

    “Girls” Wow!! What a dated way of thinking. I guess PWC TP wouldn’t mind be called “boy”.

  44. He probably wouldn’t be offended at all. Let’s just see how far he will go, Lafayette.

  45. Rez

    @Moon-howler
    I don’t recall asking that anybody be banned. I merely pointed out that George was crossing the line. It is one thing to criticize people in government, they put themselves out there to win elections. it is another to direct things like “another of how he operates his mouth without engaging his brain” to another commenter.

    As I said, I am not defending TP, don’t know him, and I find his posts to be caustic at best. I was speaking of George’s comments and from his reply to me, it appears that the best answer was “but he did it first”. Well, in my older age, I may not catch everything but it seems that George went into personal mode because TP did not come through with citations that you asked for.

    George probably does not know that I hold him up in respect for what he has done for our country and by extension me and my family. I still think about his Memorial Day post. But I also expected that an officer and a gentleman would like to know when people think he has crossed the line.

    Civil debate implodes when people start hurling personal insults at each other and I thought George went over the line and pointed it out. I don’t have the same, “if it wasn’t directed at me, it didn’t happen” attitude (statement of fact not criticism).

    And by the way, I have never understood the aversion to “girls”, I would long for the day to be called boy or young man again. it would be kinda like being carded.

    1. You didn’t ask. I just addressed the issue. @ Rez

      And I think it is more than fair to tell any of the contributors on here when you feel they are out of line.

      You know, as far as girls go, it is all in who says it and the degree of familiarity. To strangers, it is generally acceptable to use the term ‘women.’

      I guess you have to be one to understand it…or something like that.

      I agree about being carded.

      I am insulted on here daily. 🙄
      Most days I either fight back or it rolls off. Some days I go for time out.

  46. Rez

    Time out is a wonderful, mind cleansing thing for me.

    I don’t think anyone has the right to insult others as you know. I would say something when they do it to you but you wield a lot more power so it is more effective when you do it. I would be most happy to join in your defense if you want me to–I just didn’t think it was my place.

    We don’t agree as often as we may (especially if you start going to my point of view 🙂 ) but I think we have found that we can disagree agreeably.

  47. George S. Harris

    @Rez
    Rez–Thanks for comments about my service–just tried to do my part. As to TP–sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. It seems to me that he has crossed the line several times and nobody is taking him to task. I have chosen to do so. I realize that in doing so I probably have had to lower myself to a different standard, but TP constantly puts down anyone who is not ultraconservative and does not agree that all liberals are communists or whatever other nasty term he can come up with. I intend to keep on takinghim on as long as he wants to be denigrate everyone who does not agree with him. If it means I have to wrestle with a pig, I guess I will despite the fact that the pig will enjoy it.

  48. Formerly Anonymous

    Mr. Harris,

    Sorry, I can’t let your last post go without comment. How about when you attacked me for daring to state my opinion on an issue in a thread dedicated to the topic? Who did I consistently put down or denigrate? You were the third and final person to attack me here and were a major factor in my deciding to leave.

    I could say far more on the subject, but I am confident you would only use it as a justification for your previous attack on me.

  49. Rez

    Captain, I am done believe it or not. I am certainly not perfect — just ask my wife–I would just like to offer some friendly advice (which you probably don’t need from me). My suggestion is that I get very wary of reading something that has a personal insult attached no matter what the opinion on the subject may be. I have personally found that telling someone that they are crossing the line is more effective for the majority of readers. Following that with the opinion or fact you want to get across will enhance and not diminish.

    Or to put in marine terms, don’t fall for the bait. Baiting is all too common on blogs. One thing I try to do is write a reply I would LIKE to send, get it out of my system, then post something that is less insulting. (Or I go into Timeout like Wolfie said–:) )

    In other words–

    Illegitimi non carborundum 🙂

    As far as the ABC stores go, I lived for awhile in Florida which at least used to have state stores. I have to admit I hated to go to them as I found them ill kept and had dumpy “bars attached”. I know VA ABC is not the same. But I also don’t know the real economics of the situation. Part would depend on the amount of taxes and the fees like licensing fees in the future to offset the loss in profits.

Comments are closed.