Yes on Three, the Free Market Should Benefit Everyone

118

Letter to the Editor logoWatching only one corporation from Maryland, owned by a Congressman, pump over $3 Million Dollars into vote no ads in my state has raised my eyebrows. 

Politics is not the cleanest of arenas; that is why I left it almost ten years ago.  But watching and talking to friends and family about the ballot questions made me realize very little has changed. So I did some research. 

The Yes on Question Three movement has true bipartisan support. Yes on Three also is endorsed by the Massachusetts Package Store Association in Massachusetts. They represent every license holder. 

The only store against it is Total Wine and More, from Maryland, owned by a Maryland Congressman and his brother.  Their opposition to this is based on wanting more than 9 liquor licenses in Massachusetts.  Most readers, like myself, probably are unaware that 9 is the most of any state currently.  Total Wine and More is also pumping millions of dollars into a similar effort in Colorado. 

Voting Yes on Question Three would protect the smaller mom and pop stores from being gobbled up by all the corporate giants. 

But a yes vote also does so much more; it ensures “No self check out on Alcohol” at Supermarkets and other stores. I was shocked to see this had not already been banned. 

The ballot question would also increase fines and penalties if stores sell alcohol to minors. and allow out of state IDs to be used when purchasing alcohol, helping our tourism industry. Our Commonwealth is the only one where this is not allowed. 

Buying legislation that literally only helps one corporation, should be opposed at every turn. 

Vincent A.J. Errichetti 

Former Political Director of the Massachusetts Republican Party, Retired Political Consultant, and current owner of Errichetti Media, a Digital Marketing Company managing Taste Of Massachusetts Brands