'To-go' liquor proposal might get another shot
A key House lawmaker on state liquor policy is “cautiously optimistic” that this could be the year consumers could purchase liquor “to-go” at stores outside the state-controlled system.
It's been a goal of some governors and lawmakers going back to at least the early 1980s, but for decades proponents have come up short.
“We made some great strides forward the past few years, so I'm hoping the momentum is there to keep going,” said Rep. Adam Harris, R-Juniata County, the chairman of the House Liquor Control Committee.
Harris' committee is scheduled to take up two proposals Monday to allow private retailers to sell hard liquor. The vote is an early step in the legislative process, and the proposals could get a serious look this spring as lawmakers look for options to balance the budget.
Read more: http://triblive.com/local/westmoreland/12133320-74/to-go-liquor-proposal-might-get-another-shot
= new reply since forum marked as read
Has everything come down to the almighty dollar? And at the same time, there's a desperate need for drug and alcohol treatment which states are overwhelmed trying to meet. 
We don't have any in my neck of the woods, so even one would be an improvement. 
As for drugs and alcohol, in the eight and a half years I've been in the program, I've seen so many lives torn apart, "jails, institutions and death," as they say. And these are folks who made an effort to get help. Drugs have become much more prevalent, but it seems to always start and end with alcohol.
I have to go to another wake tomorrow. I've known quite a few people who have died. This wake is for the mother of a girl I know, but the last time I went to the same place, it was for a lady who died from only alcohol. She just couldn't stop. 
I realize most people can drink with no problem. They can have a glass of wine on New Year's and not think about it until the next year. But the rate of alcohol and drug abuse is growing so fast that treatment - because we know incarceration is no solution - needs to be a priority. 
... but I think the LCB is trying to save jobs.
A lot of people will lose their jobs if/when the State Stores close down.
The union has been fighting this tooth & nail, and it's been a slow erosion over the years.
We all know it's eventually going to happen though, don't we?
I'm hoping that enough new jobs will be created in the private retail sector (retail liquor/wine stores) so that the State Store employees will find new jobs. But there's no guarantee of that, and the union is worried.
That has to be their priority. But in rural communities, there are more useful amenities than liquor stores. Rural folks could use closer access to groceries and pharmacies. That's one reason that Wal-Mart and the Dollar stores have been so successful. There's an ongoing controversy in my neck-of-the-woods. A woman has been fighting a Dollar store going in next door to her which will dwarf the size of her home, the proposed store is so large that they're going to have to build it sideways on the lot, not to mention the traffic. But the latest story said she lost her battle and she's moving. The sad thing is that all her neighbors lined up against her.
