Jim Puff is a Kansas entrepreneur. He has been in the grocery store business for 43 years, and owns a convenience store, a cafe, a catering company and a grocery store in Alma, Kansas.

Unfortunately, in order to invest in his businesses and provide jobs for his employees, Jim must battle Kansas liquor laws. While some of Kansas’ neighboring states permit grocery stores to sell full-strength beer, his stores must make do with reduced alcohol content beer, or 3.2% beer.

How would modernizing Kansas liquor laws help Jim Puff and others like him? Right now, Kansas grocery stores may not sell full-strength beer. Consumers wishing to buy full-strength beer must go to a different store that is only able to sell strong beer, wine and spirits – no food items. This is a lose-lose situation. For consumers, it adds unnecessary time, effort, and money. For retailers, these regulations reduce profit potential. Current laws that prohibit what grocery stores and convenience stores can sell place a huge burden on Kansas retailers, especially when faced with escalating rent, and energy costs for lights and refrigeration. In effect, the state of Kansas is regulating businesses into oblivion.

Allowing grocery stores to sell full-strength beer, wine and spirits, and allowing liquor stores to sell grocery items will result in increased competition, benefiting both retailers and consumers in the form of increased economic activity and lower prices. Senate Bill 54 would do just that. Allowing retailers to sell additional items, such as beer, wine and spirits, would add an entirely new department to retailers; growing their product availability, increasing the need to hire new employees, and incentivizing customers to shop locally rather than drive to larger cities or bordering states where they can purchase products in one stop. SB 54 would provide sustainable economic growth for years to come.

(more…)

Today the Institute for Justice filed opening briefs in our fourth case to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court.

IJ’s first trip to the high court came in 2002 and resulted in a landmark victory for school choice.  We also won our second U.S. Supreme Court case, defending the American ideals of economic liberty and unfettered interstate commerce by striking down a ban on the direct shipment of wine.

Our third case changed America forever.  A local government in Connecticut decided to bulldoze an entire neighborhood and hand the land over to a politically connected private developer.  The law was stacked against the property owners in favor of the powerful special interests.  IJ, defending the property owners, lost in a controversial 5-4 ruling.

This was the infamous Kelo case, and it resulted in an explosion of outrage and grassroots activism all across the country.  Ed Morrissey recently wrote at Hot Air that it arguably set “the stage for the all-out eruption of Tea Party activism a few years later.” This epic battle to protect private property rights, ultimately vindicated by grassroots activists just like you, is one that will never be forgotten:

And now, as children nationwide get ready to begin a new school year, the Institute for Justice is defending Arizona’s innovative scholarship tax-credit program before the highest court in the land.

(more…)

From wine elves to classy pitchmen, American winemakers have tried just about everything to challenge the dominance of French vintners. And yet, with infamous labels like Ripple and Thunderbird, Yankee wines had long endured the reputation of being good for just one one thing—getting blitzed.

So it must have seemed like a cruel joke in 1976 when a British wine merchant arranged The Paris Tasting, a one-of-its-kind competition that pitted mighty France versus lowly America in a blind taste test judged entirely by Gallic wine experts.

But as viewers of the movie Bottle Shock and the documentary Mondovino can tell you, the unthinkable happened: America took home top honors for both red and white wine.

(more…)