In your Aug. 19 editorial [“New state motto: ‘We’ll do anything for money’ ”] you take Gov. Robert McDonnell to task for wanting to sell the state-owned liquor stores to private citizens or corporate entities for “… $300 million to $500 million one-time dollars to apply to roads.”
You note that, according to one study, the state would lose more than $200 million every year by privatizing the sale of liquor. You conclude the editorial by saying, “Apparently he thinks Virginia will do just about anything for money. What do you think?”
Here’s what I think. Let’s suppose that Virginia had no state-owned liquor stores and, like Mississippi of many years ago when I lived there, was a “dry” state that simply fined establishments for selling booze, but did not close them down. And suppose that our legislature proposed to establish state-owned stores to sell “spirits” so that we might sweeten the state coffers by $125 million to $200 million per year. I dare say that the Herald editor and most of the Virginia religious establishment would rise up in arms and charge that “Virginia will do just about anything for money” as they did when the state-run lottery was established.
I have read several emotional anecdotes in the local paper, as well as Clyde’s story that you report, citing the evils of alcoholism and fearing that the sale of the state-owned stores will lead to a huge increase in the suffering imposed by the disease. Where do you and the folks who oppose the sale of the ABC stores to private entities shop for groceries? I assume that with your opposition to “spirits” you avoid Safeway, Kroger, Costco, BJ’s Wholesale Club, 7-Eleven and the many other retail establishments that sell beer and wine by the case!
When Giant Foods bought Ukrops and replaced their stores (that sold no booze and were closed on Sundays) with Martin’s Foods, open seven days a week with large wine and beer inventories, I do not recall seeing editorials chastising the Ukrop family for selling out “for money”.
As a retired human resources professional, I am very familiar with the tragedies caused by alcoholism and have administered corporate employee assistance and intervention programs to deal with the effect on employees and their families. I hold no brief for the liquor industry.
But I believe states have no business in the liquor business, notwithstanding the rationale that the ABC system was an outgrowth of the repeal of prohibition. I think you attributed to the governor an uncaring and cavalier attitude as his motive for getting the state out of the liquor business. That’s what I think.
Daniel A. Polk, Richmond