2008 House Bill 6644 (Ban all retail alcoholic beverage home shipments ) (Senate Roll Call 872)
Passed in the Senate (36 to 2) on December 18, 2008, to prohibit mail-order beer, wine or liquor shipments from any retailer to a customer’s home or business. The bill is a means to avoid complying with a federal court ruling that held state restrictions on such shipments from out-of-state retailers to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s commerce clause. [History, Amendments & Comments]
The vote was 36 in favor, 2 opposed, and 0 not voting
(Senate Roll Call 872 at Senate Journal 93)
[Comment on this vote | View others' comments]
|
|
|
|
Support
Oppose
Not Voting
Undecided
The following legislators supported 2008 House Bill 6644 (Ban all retail alcoholic beverage home shipments ):
The following legislators opposed 2008 House Bill 6644 (Ban all retail alcoholic beverage home shipments ):
| Cassis (R) | Kuipers (R) |
The following legislators did not vote on 2008 House Bill 6644 (Ban all retail alcoholic beverage home shipments ):
Most Recent Comments
1) Re: bcwood [by uber-liberal on March 5, 2009]i agree, changeagent. it shouldn't matter if you live out in the hinterlands, or upstairs from the local walmart, you should be able to buy legal products from whom you choose. i believe that the amount of rules and regulations currently attached to alcohol sales and consumption, including 'blue laws', are all an attempt to control, and eventually eliminate the drinking habits of the citizens of this state.
i understand that some religions have proscriptions against alcohol consumption, and i respect their right to choose not to drink. this law disrespects every other citizen's right to choose to drink, and to choose where and how he gets that drink. i am quite concerned with what appears to be religious fanatics writing their religious views into law. what concerns me even more is the possibility that those fanatics attempting to wipe out alcohol consumption in michigan are not religious at all, but political. that makes the disrespect of citizen's rights that much more heinous.
a representative's oath of office precludes him from attempting to take citizen's rights away. it is a solemn oath, to be taken seriously by all who take it, because all the citizens it covers take it seriously. the oath to protect and defend the constitution is an oath to protect the rights enumerated therein, and the holders of those rights. to do any less is tyranny.
Reply
no, jman... that's the problem... YOU DON'T THINK.
i have been here too long. i was here too long the moment i stepped off the plane. but i'm not leaving till my work is finished.you wouldn't know anything about that, as your work is already finished. your job is kaput. your future is in shambles unless people like me come along and help you.
but you don't realize that, you just sit there with your hand out, waiting for the BIGGER government to come and bail out the BIG government.
Reply
Me thinks you have been here too long. You need to get back to your paradise, Louisiana. I'm sure they need you.
Reply
View Full Conversation
