What a day in the Senate.
First, I heard through the grapevine that we had a very high position on the special order calendar, which was very good news, and that turned out to be true. We were 6th on a calendar of 61 bills. Very good.
But the first unpleasant moment was when I heard SB132 listed in that 6th slot, when I was fully expecting to hear HB373. The prospect of getting a Senate vote on any FTH bill was good news, but we really, really wanted HB373 to be the one so we wouldn’t have to repeat the entire process in the House. So I was very concerned about that.
Substituting a House bill for a Senate bill in that situation is possible, but it requires unanimous consent which I assumed Hank Erwin would not grant. I then got very excited when I heard Erwin had privately indicated he would not object to the substitution, meaning hope was renewed that we would pass our House bill today and go on to the Governor.
After a relatively short but still agonizing wait for the first 5 bills to be disposed of, our bill came up and we were promptly greeted with a promise from Erwin that he would talk “all afternoon” in opposition to it. A filibuster.
From there it got very confusing, even to someone like me who has listened to countless hours of legislature audio. After some debate between our sponsor, Bobby Singleton, and Erwin, they had the vote on the BIR, which we passed. Then Senator Ben Brooks came forward to offer an amendment that would prohibit convenience stores from selling the new over 6% beers that would be legalized by our bill. We really don’t want any amendments on our bill, and believe it’s wrong to prohibit certain businesses from selling products that other nearby businesses can sell. That unfairly discriminates against a certain class of small businesses.
However, some amendments would be deal breakers while others are not, and this particular amendment is not a deal breaker, even though it’s unfair. Restaurants, bars, package stores, and grocery stores would all be unaffected and only a tiny fraction of convenience stores would have carried these beers anyway. So our sponsor accepted the amendment.
The amendment was offered and passed. Then, because of the threat of an all-day filibuster by Erwin, Singleton moved to carry our bill over to the call of the chair, which was allowed.
What that means is that now our bill can be brought up at any time the Senate leadership believes it’s ready to pass. We no longer need to be on a special order calendar. And we’ve already passed the BIR, which requires a higher threshold of 3/5 for approval. That’s the tough vote. Final passage only requires a simple majority.
All that is to say we passed some important procedural hurdles today that make it easier for us to pass if Erwin decides not to filibuster, or if there is a moment when he is not in the chamber and Senate leadership decides to bring up our bill. Either is possible.
It is very important that supporters of FTH do not shower Erwin with angry phone calls or emails. While we are certainly angry about what he did today, it is crucial that we take the high road. People will be discussing this issue with him, rest assured. As always, people who live in his district ought to contact him in a spirit of great civility to express their support for HB373; certainly he needs to be aware of how many of his constituents support the Gourmet Beer Bill. But no one should try to address the issue of filibustering as it would only be counterproductive.
There is also the chance that our bill can be brought for a vote when he is not in the chamber. We have options.
In summary, it was a frustrating but still productive day. At this point we have to wait for the right moment to bring our bill back up, which depends on a couple different factors. As soon as we know any more we’ll pass it along.
19 Comments
Assuming we get past the Senate, how certain are we that Riley will sign it? I see that he has now vetoed the bill allowing status quo Sunday alcohol sales by restaurants in Shelby County …….
We are not certain Riley will sign it. However, overriding vetoes is a daily event in the AL legislature, and most vetoes are in fact overridden. Look for the veto on the Shelby Co Sunday sales bill to be overridden; it only requires a simple majority, the same threshold originally required to pass the bill.
As long as we pass on any day prior to the 30th day, a veto is nothing more than a political statement by Riley, it won’t affect the law.
and when is the 30th day, assuming you don’t mean of April?
“30th day” refers to the 30th meeting day of the session. Today was the 24th meeting day. The 30th day will be May 18th.
Well, speak of the devil:
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2009/04/riley_vetoes_bill_allowing_she.html
I realize that all these procedures and calls are in place so that the process is as fair as possible, but I just think it’s funny how it’s that same process that allows a final act to be so focused and diced-up that it can be loaded with unfairness and even discriminatory.
I’ve had several folks who followed the drama today ask what the BIR vote is all about. Correct me where I am wrong, but it is the Budget Isolation provision that requires a supermajority of 3/5 in order to bring up a measure that is not one of the two budgets (either the General Fund or the Special Education Trust Fund).
Correct.
I live in Erwin’s district and have emailed him expressing my support for the bill, noting that I know others in my area in support of the bill as well. FWIW.
While I am not 100% certain that Riley will sign the bill if it comes to him, I am pretty sure of it. A close friend of mine met with him last year (on a topic unrelated to FTH). Before leaving the meeting, my friend–an avid beer enthusiast–asked Riley if he would sign the Gourmet Beer Bill if it came to his desk. Riley said yes, he would sign it.
This is promising to me; however, a lot of things change in a year, and there’s a lot of b.s.ing in politics. I hope that Riley keeps his word.
I was so happy when the HB373 substitution offer was excepted. I didn’t think there was a chance in the world after Senator Erwin took such a strong stand at the introduction of the bill.
That amendment was really stupid. I mean I can see why it was excepted but it was just dumb to bring it up. Almost like it was a ring kiss or something to bow to prohibitionist psychos.
This is good news though, lets get this done this year and work towards other things next.
Go team Liberty!
i don’t know that that’s the case. i think it’s totally reasonable that there should be limits on what is sold cold and 24 hours a day by roadside. blue laws in other states are much more strict in regards to the how and where beer can be sold.
but i understand the no-compromise goals of FTH–shoot for the stars and hope for the stratosphere.
The amendment actually doesn’t really bother me. As was stated in the blog, very few convenience stores would have carried these beers anyway. I wasn’t ever expecting to stroll into a Shell station to buy fine Belgian ale anyway.
Actually, most grocery stores in Alabama hold the same licence to sell beer that convenience stores do – an “off premises” license. It seems that the likely result of the amendment is that you can only buy high ABV beer draft in restaurants or bottled from the ABC store.
What do the letters “BIR” stand for? It’s been driving me crazy all day…
Stephen: budget isolation resolution.
The amendment seems like a really bad one. How many grocery stores have 28-3A-16 licenses? banjolawyers’s comment (http://blog.al.com/live/2009/04/filibuster_halts_free_the_hops.html#3492182) on the Press-Register article suggests that the amendment would ban 6%+ beer at most grocery stores. Not to mention that the BP in 5 Points is one of the best beer stores here in Huntsville.
1) Every grocery store I know of that has a decent selection of beer has a license that covers on-premise in addition to off-premise so they can conduct tastings. The amendment applies only to retailers with off-premise only licenses. So no, it does not affect the sort of grocery store that is going to carry a large selection of craft beer.
2) Regardless of my interpretation, our lobbyist is meeting with ABC lawyers today to discuss these matters. Sen. Brooks’ intention was to only limit sales in c-stores. If ABC lawayers determine that the amendment has a broader effect, he is willing to let the amendment be stripped. He has no desire to prevent Whole Foods and Piggly Wiggly from carrying Belgian beers.