LEGISLATORS KOWTOW TO TAVERN LOBBY

Like a whiskey sour on a queasy stomach, some things concocted by lawmakers
in Madison are harder to swallow than others. Take the Legislature's recent
rewriting of tavern licensing laws. Just make sure you ask for a water
chaser; otherwise, you'll have a bad taste in your mouth.

This is blatant specialinterest legislation, orchestrated by the Tavern
League of Wisconsin and financed by a $100,000 lobbying campaign. It was
designed to protect those who already have tavern licenses at the expense
of those who don't. Worse, it enables the state to usurp important local
control from municipalities even though local officials are in the best
position to regulate tavern licenses.

Among other things, the changes which were tacked onto the state budget
and went into effect this week require communities to charge $10,000 for
each new tavern license, about 20 times what a license had cost. Since the
fee to sell or transfer existing licenses remains at $500, this little
arrangement ends up protecting existing taverns from competition while
artificially driving up their value. Sweet deal, huh?

As if that weren't bad enough, municipalities will be forced to eliminate
about half of their unused tavern licenses, further adding to the value of
existing licenses.

Tavern League spokesmen claim some maandpa owners need protection to help
them compete, especially with Indian casinos. But if the state takes that
first perilous step to protect one industry from marketplace competition,
where does it stop? And why is this type of legislation acceptable to
lawmakers who otherwise preach that government should keep its nose out of
private business as much as possible?

There are other worrisome items in the licensing package that further
infringe on local control: Local officials can no longer revoke a tavern
license for only one underage drinking violation in a year. Nor can
municipalities enact restrictions on license eligibility tougher than
specified in state law.

Yes, things could have been worse; the original proposal was even more
offensive. And there are some parts of the initiative that make sense, such
as a substantial boost in the fine for using a fake ID as well as
protection from lawsuits for tavern operators who confiscate what they
believe to be fake IDs. But these are little consolation.

The legislation is the most comprehensive update of tavern licensing laws
since 1939. Lawmakers should have held extensive public hearings. Instead,
they and the governor, who should have vetoed the provisions bellied
up to the barkeepers.