No Cheers For Corbett In Alcohol Sting

No Cheers For Corbett In Alcohol Sting

The season has finally arrived!

Memorial Day weekend ushered in the unofficial start of summer when people relax with family and friends, enjoying what little leisure time is left in America.

But Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett made it abundantly clear he wasn’t interested in that season.

For him, it was all about making it Open Season — on Pennsylvanians.

In a move that defies every ounce of common sense for a governor touting the lowest popularity in the nation, Corbett had his state police slip across the border over the weekend to engage in sting operations, targeting Pennsylvanians for the capital crime of buying liquor in Delaware and crossing back into the Keystone State.

And what was the mammoth haul of Tommy’s troopers?

The equivalent of 17 cases of beer, 10 cases of wine, and 15 bottles of liquor.

At least Pennsylvania has no other pressing problems to which its increasingly limited resources should be allocated. Oh, wait. It does. A lot, actually.

That was made readily apparent watching the local news when, immediately after the liquor confiscation story, it was reported that Pennsylvania had the worst, most dangerous bridges in the nation (while Delaware’s were second best).

How can the governor reconcile those things? Despite having historic Republican majorities in both legislative chambers, Corbett has made zero headway fixing our crumbling infrastructure, yet prioritizes undercover operations (which nab three people) buying alcohol in another state. Going out on a limb here, but wouldn’t the substantial resources spent on operations in Delaware be better utilized elsewhere? Like in Pennsylvania?

How much taxpayer money was wasted on logistics, fuel costs, and troopers’ salaries, compared to the miniscule tax Pennsylvania “lost?” The numbers aren’t even in the same ballpark, so what were they doing? Squandering resources just to make a point — whatever that point is?

Try explaining that to the family who loses a loved one to a drunk driver who maybe, just maybe, could have been stopped had the state police been patrolling in-state. Or to those victimized by burglary, assault and numerous other crimes while their police were busy making out-of-state, small-time liquor busts.

On a holiday weekend where there is always an upswing in driving while intoxicated (there were five fatal DUI crashes, according to state police), the governor unleashed his dogs on those simply trying to avoid the whopping 18 percent Johnstown Flood Tax of 1936 (plus the additional sales tax) that Pennsylvania levies on wine and liquor.

Is this his way of strong-arming his liquor privatization plan? A kind of “pass my bill or it’ll be like this until you do” message?

Great, except that his bill wouldn’t keep people from flocking to other states to buy liquor, as Freindly Fire explained in a prior column. No one is a bigger privatization proponent than I, but do it right or not at all. But since neither Corbett’s nor the Legislature’s plan eliminate the Johnstown tax, prices will remain high or, quite likely, further increase, if either proposal passes.

And if Delaware stings aren’t about liquor privatization, then what are they about? And why?

Give Tom Corbett credit for one thing: If he’s trying to attain a single-digit approval rating, he is succeeding better than the Democrats ever dreamed.

Aside from the sheer stupidity of engaging in such an operation, several questions are worth asking:

1. Are Pennsylvania State Police legally permitted to operate in other states? If so, why? A call to the Delaware State Police yielded no information, as two individuals had no knowledge of Pennsylvania’s actions. Which makes sense, since it is not in Delaware’s interest to put a damper on legal Delaware commerce.

2. How is this not a violation on the Interstate Commerce Clause? It should be, but the 21st Amendment has a provision allowing states to regulate alcohol almost any way they want. It should be changed.

3. Since random, empty liquor boxes are used to package alcoholic and non-alcoholic bottles at the checkout counter, do the police have probable cause to search one’s trunk after the border crossing is made? How do the police know that the Grey Goose box doesn’t contain soda and non-alcoholic beer? As long as we’re talking about amendments, the governor and police should read the Fourth one. It’s kind of important.

4. When Corbett’s liquor privatization plan doesn’t pass this month — and it probably won’t — will the number of search and seizures escalate? Bet you a case of Delaware liquor they will.

Corbett continues to rationalize why his Jerry Sandusky investigation took so long. One excuse was that he didn’t have the necessary resources, since as attorney general, he didn’t control the state police — the governor did. Under that rationale, Tom Corbett as governor is, and must be, responsible for all operations of the state police under his command, so the buck stops with him on these heavy-handed liquor stings.

As the backlash grows, it has become yet another reason why next year’s re-election chances looks very sobering for Tom Corbett.


No Cheers For Corbett In Alcohol Sting

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.