FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — Some lawmakers are pressing again to overturn what they call an archaic law banning the sale of liquor during voting hours on Election Day.
Democratic state Rep. Arnold Simpson of Covington and other supports of the move are citing the economic factors.
Simpson told a legislative committee Friday that the ban is costing the state better than $600,000 a year in lost tax revenue.
Kentucky is one of the few remaining states that doesn’t allow Election Day alcohol sales. The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States lists South Carolina as the only other state to have such a ban.
Simpson, who has been pressing to lift Kentucky’s ban since 2006, said he will introduce a bill when the legislature convenes early next year that would allow communities that object to Election Day liquor sales to continue the ban. By doing that, he’s hopeful he can get more lawmakers to support changing a law that dates back to Prohibition.
“It handcuffs our businesses,” Simpson told members of the Joint Committee on Licensing and Occupations on Friday. “It forces them to close or alter their operations on Election Day, two days a year, and for no good reason in my opinion.”
Simpson said the reasons the ban was initially invoked are no longer relevant.
“In some instances, saloons were used as polling places, and because of that some mischief could occur,” he said. “That is not the case anymore.”
The proposal has support from John Schickel, R-Union, co-chairman of the Joint Licensing and Occupations Committee.
“I’m 100 percent in favor,” he said. “This regulation makes no good common sense, and it’s time to do away with it.”
Groups representing the state’s liquor industry have been urging lawmakers to lift the ban for years.
“Statutes that still exist with regard to this prohibition come from a different time and era and few states still hold on to this notion with good reason,” said Jay Hibbard, vice president of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States in a letter to lawmakers on Friday.
“With businesses facing increased operating costs and the state facing a significant biennial shortfall, retailers cannot afford to lose the revenue and the state treasury can ill afford to lose much needed tax revenue.”
