[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 131 (Monday, September 27, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7505-S7506]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

  The following petitions and memorials were laid before the Senate and 
were referred or ordered to lie on the table as indicated:

       POM-142. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of California urging

[[Page S7506]]

     Congress to protect and preserve the ability of California 
     wineries, as all American wineries, to ship wine directly to 
     consumers without discrimination between in-state and out-of-
     state wine producers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

                     Senate Joint Resolution No. 34

       Whereas. California is the fourth largest wine producing 
     region in the world, after France, Italy, and Spain; and
       Whereas, California has 2,972 bonded wineries; and
       Whereas, California has 4,600 winegrape growers; and
       Whereas, California has 531,000 acres of winegrapes; and
       Whereas, California winegrowers ship over 193 million 
     cases, representing some 467 million gallons of wine to the 
     United States wine market; and
       Whereas, the California wine industry creates more than 
     330,000 jobs, billions of dollars in economic impact, and 
     preserves agricultural land and family farms; and
       Whereas, the California wine industry generates higher 
     taxes than most industries because, as a regulated industry, 
     it pays excise taxes to the state and federal government on 
     every gallon of wine; and
       Whereas, the California wine industry has an annual impact 
     of $61.5 billion on the state's economy and produces the 
     number one finished agricultural product in the state; and
       Whereas, the economic impact of the United States wine 
     industry on the national economy is $121.8 billion annually; 
     and
       Whereas, California's wine industry attracts 20.7 million 
     tourists annually to all regions of California and generates 
     wine-related tourism expenditures of $2.1 billion; and
       Whereas, currently 37 states and the District of Columbia 
     allow direct shipping of wine from winegrowers to consumers; 
     and
       Whereas, the innovation and entrepreneurial spirit of small 
     California wineries drives the entire industry to improve and 
     progress; and
       Whereas, in order to reach consumers in other states, many 
     California wineries have turned to direct marketing and 
     shipping of their wines; and
       Whereas, since 1985 California has pioneered consumer 
     access to wine through reciprocal and permit shipping to 
     alleviate scarcity at the retail level of California wines; 
     and
       Whereas, over the past 10 years, consolidation trends 
     within the wholesale tier have made it difficult for 
     California wineries to achieve adequate distribution, and, as 
     a result, have limited consumer choice; and
       Whereas, California wineries have offered voluntarily to 
     have their direct marketing and shipping permitted and 
     regulated by other states to ensure that those states collect 
     the same taxes that wines sold through the three-tier system 
     must pay, that direct deliveries would be made only to 
     adults, and that direct deliveries are not made in ``dry'' 
     areas, as defined under the laws of each state; and
       Whereas, the California wine industry has developed 
     comprehensive model direct shipping legislation to address 
     all of the concerns expressed by state alcohol regulators 
     across the country; and
       Whereas, California has enacted a law to open direct 
     shipping of wine from other states to its own residents 
     without limitation through a simple permit system to comply 
     with the decision in Granholm v. Heald (2005) 544 U.S. 460; 
     and
       Whereas, States' rights to regulate wine and alcohol 
     granted by the 21st Amendment to the United States 
     Constitution have always been subject to constitutional 
     limitation and judicial review; and
       Whereas, court decisions over the last 40 years balance 
     state authority to regulate alcohol with the framer's belief 
     that the nation would only succeed if interstate commerce 
     thrived; and
       Whereas, the Commerce Clause has been applied judiciously 
     by the courts to foster national economic goals while 
     preserving nondiscriminatory state authority; and
       Whereas, the landmark 2005 United States Supreme Court 
     case, Granholm v. Heald, reaffirmed states' rights under the 
     21st Amendment to the United States Constitution to regulate 
     wine as long as they do not discriminate between in-state 
     producers and out-of-state producers, and correctly ruled 
     that these rights do not supersede other provisions of the 
     Constitution; and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would severely limit consumer choice in 
     California wine throughout the nation as direct-to-consumer 
     laws are amended or repealed; and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would imperil market access for 
     California wineries that cannot secure effective wholesale 
     distribution; and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would stunt competition among the 
     nation's 7,011 wine producers as markets are artificially 
     constrained and access is limited; and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would allow certain state alcohol laws 
     to avoid judicial scrutiny through a presumption of validity; 
     and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would reverse decades of long-
     established jurisprudence that has balanced interstate 
     commerce concerns with state regulatory authority and 
     fostered a dramatic growth in wine production, sales, and tax 
     revenue; and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would insulate and sanction 
     discriminatory state laws by reversing evidentiary rules for 
     Commerce Clause legal challenges and increasing the burden of 
     proof of plaintiffs; and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would frustrate legitimate challenges to 
     superficially neutral, but nonetheless discriminatory, state 
     laws like the landmark Massachusetts production cap case, 
     Family Winemakers of California v. Jenkins (2010) 592 F.3d 1; 
     and
       Whereas, H.R. 5034 would be an unprecedented shift in the 
     relationship between federal and state authority over wine; 
     Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate and the Assembly of the State of 
     California, jointly, That the Legislature of the State of 
     California hereby respectfully urges Congress to protect and 
     preserve the ability of California wineries, as well as all 
     American wineries, to ship wine directly to consumers without 
     discrimination between in-state and out-of-state wine 
     producers; and be it further
       Resolved, That the Legislature of the State of California 
     urges the defeat of H.R. 5034; and be it further
       Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies 
     of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the 
     United States, to the President pro tempore of the United 
     States Senate, to the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, and to each Senator and Representative from 
     California in the Congress of the United States.
                                  ____

       POM-143. A resolution from the Legislature of Rockland 
     County, New York relative to the Safe Drinking Water Act and 
     hydraulic fracturing; to the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works.
       POM-144. A resolution from the Legislature of Rockland 
     County, New York urging Congress to pass the Veteran 
     Employment Assistance Act of 2010; to the Committee on 
     Veterans' Affairs.

                          ____________________