Ohio State U Uncorks Economic Research: Wine Prices Dip When 'Net Sales Allowed

COLUMBUS (TDB) -- Economic research about online wine sales shows Ohio consumers with a taste for the grape are going to be squeezed out of some cash by a new state law. The measure took effect this month and bans large wineries from shipping directly to customers who shop on the Internet or order by mail. The data published by Ohio State University and George Mason University in Virginia says online competition lowered wine prices by up to 40 percent in a local market.

Ohio's wine industry is the beneficiary of legislative and lobbying sleight of hand that prohibits wineries bottling more than 150,000 gallons a year from shipping directly to Ohio purchasers. OSU and George Mason researchers teamed up to study what happened to prices in northern Virginia in 2004 after federal court rulings knocked down a state-imposed trade barrier against online competition. Alan Wiseman, an OSU political science prof, said prices fell 40% when local stores in Virginia confronted interstate shippers.

"Consumers are better off when local stores have to compete with online sellers. Virginia merchants reduced their prices to meet online competition, and I think the same thing would happen in other parts of the country if the laws allowed. The results suggest that brick-and-mortar stores were quite calculating in how much more they could charge customers. They knew that their prices couldn't be too far above out-of-state merchants, but that they could still charge a premium because of shipping costs."

The researchers studied the 50 most popular wines in American restaurants, which were named by Wine and Spirits magazine. They compared online versus store shelf prices.

Ohio Judge Harpoons The Moby Sentence: A 326-Word Legislative Whale

CINCINNATI (TDB) -- Ohio 1st District Court of Appeals Judge Mark Painter is building a national reputation as an advocate of clear, concise and easily decipherable legal language. The Cincinnati Republican has discovered a 326-word legislative leviathan lurking in the Ohio Revised Code. It is a brain-numbing sentence about adoption records:

"If the agency determined that the petitioner is an adopted person, if the department of health is informed the agency either that the file of releases does not contain a release or releases filed by one or both of the petitioner's biological parents that authorize the release of identifying information to him and does not contain a release or releases filed by any biological sibling that authorizes the release of specified information to him or that the file of releases contains at least one such release but a withdrawal of release has been filed that negates each such release, if the agency did not inform the court that it had determined that one or both of the petitioner's biological parents as indicated on the petitioner's original birth were deceased, and if the court did not determine that one of or both of the petitioner's biological parents as indicated on that record were deceased, the judge shall order that the petition remain pending until withdrawn by the petitioner and order the department of health to note its pendency in the file of releases according to the surname of the petitioner as set for in his original birth record; shall inform the petitioner that he is an adopted person and, if known, of the county in which the adoption proceedings occurred; shall inform the petitioner that information regarding his name by birth and the identify of his biological parents and biological siblings may not be released at that time because the file of releases at that time does not contain an effective release that authorizes the release of any such information to him; and shall inform the petitioner that, upon the subsequent filing of a release by or the death of either of his biological parents, or the subsequent filing of a release by any of his biological siblings, the petition will be acted upon within thirty days of the filing in accordance with division (E) of this section."

Painter calls the sentence unfathomable. In the August issue of the Cincinnati Bar Association Report, he said he spent an hour rewriting it twice and managed to get the Ohio General Assembly's handiwork trimmed to 155 words. He said it still could be improved. Painter scolded lawmakers for producing such turgid prose, and said they ought to invest more time in clarity.

"As we know, even sophisticated readers have trouble with any sentence of more than 35 words. This one is unfathomable. It has a readability score of 0. And it's about adoption -- something 'normal' people should be able to understand."

The judge is a legal scholar, with 350 nationally published decisions, 115 legal articles and 6 books, including The Legal Writer: 40 Rules for the Art of Legal Writing. Maybe folks in the Ohio General Assembly should buy a few copies.

Ohio Newspaper: Scrutinizing Legislators' Driving Records?

COLUMBUS (TDB) -- Nobody ran a stop sign delivering this news tip . But the Statehouse rumor mill is revved up and speeding with word that the Akron Beacon Journal may be asking questions about the driving records of Ohio lawmakers. An insider close to the top flashed this tidbit via e-mail:

"By the way, the Akron Beacon Journal had made a public records request of all official names, addresses and birth dates of all members of the Ohio House. They say they are going to search all driving records and how many tickets [they] have in the interest of public safety. I cannot understand their angle since [the House] is not doing anything in the Transportation Budget against the State Patrol or red light cameras. Maybe it is preemptive."

Later, another e-mail:

"Every GOP member has been notified by the Speaker's office about the Beacon Journal's public records request of all members. . . the ABJ asked for three things: Correct spelling of names, address, date of birth. They then said the purpose was to check ALL members driving records for a potential story."

The buzz is raising quite a few eyebrows. Does somebody have a lead foot? A drinking problem? No insurance, or too many points? [Full Disclosure: I once worked for the Beacon Journal as a reporter. I don't know many people there these days. And, assuming the rumor is accurate, I wonder what is up, if anything.]

Ohio General Assembly: Saves $$$$ With VOIP Phones

COLUMBUS (TDB) -- A recent development in telephone technology, besides the cellphone explosion, is VOIP, which allows you to make voice calls using a broadband Internet connection instead of a traditional phone line. Now we are learning the Ohio House and Senate have switched the legislative phone system to VOIP in a cost-cutting move and expect to spend about $30,000 on calls for the rest of the state's fiscal year. We also learn the phone bills "often contain errors" that state workers have to straighten out.

The Legislative Services Commission plans to ask the controlling board for money tomorrow to improve financial accountability for House and Senate telephone use. Right now, it says there is no clear record of legislative calls.

"For reasons of economy, House and Senate telephone calls are made over Internet protocol (VOIP). LISO (legislative information systems office) purchased the servers, switches, and telephones for making VOIP calls, and currently pays the telephone bills it receives for such calls from AT&T (for local calls) and Quest Communications (for long-distance calls)," the budget request says, adding that the bills are confusing and often contain errors.

"The House and Senate would like LISO to continue to monitor and pay their monthly telephone bills because the bills are complex and often contain errors that LISO has the expertise to understand and correct. But the House and Senate also want to reimburse LISO for calls made from House and Senate phones, in the past as well as in the future, but in a way that keeps payments and reimbursements for their calls separate from other LISO revenues and expenditures and demonstrates the accountability of the House and Senate for such amounts."

VOIP is growing in popularity. Some services are closed, meaning you can call only those people who use the same company, and others allow calls to any telephone number. Some allow computers and laptops to be used as phones. Others work in wireless areas.

The entire controlling board agenda is HERE. It shows a long list of agency financial requests ranging from special counsel appointments by the attorney general's office to education spending contracts.

Ohio: Term-Limit Easing Move May Come

COLUMBUS (TDB) -- A move to ease the term-limits placed on Ohio lawmakers in 1992 by a statewide constitutional vote appears to be in the wind again this year. Many incumbents in the Ohio General Assembly detest being churned out of office. But efforts to stretch the years that legislators can hold power could generate a hurricane of anti-incumbent sentiment.

Check out what happened in Florida last year when lawmakers tried to ease the restrictions on how long they could hold office.

In the early 1990s, social conservatives and Republicans were allied when the term-limit movement caught fire as a way to push entrenched Statehouse Democrats out of power. Now the GOP holds the Statehouse and the party's ardor has cooled. Democrats were never enthusiastic. But many social conservatives are still committed to term limits, and some Democrats could join them in a movement to battle repeal. Why? There is a chance the Statehouse could turn blue in 2008 -- a presidential year with an unpopular President term-limited out of the White House. The Democrats could run strong in Ohio General Assembly contests and pick up seats that term-limited Republicans such as State Rep. Tom Brinkman of Cincinnati must vacate.

Today's Columbus Dispatch reports on the latest repeal move in Ohio.

Here's information about term limits across the nation from the National Conference of State Legislatures. And here's Ohio's law as it stands now:

"Ohio Constitution, Article 2, § 2
Election and term of legislators.

"Representatives shall be elected biennially by the electors of the respective house of representatives districts; their term of office shall commence on the first day of January next thereafter and continue two years.

"Senators shall be elected by the electors of the respective senate districts; their terms of office shall commence on the first day of January next after their election. All terms of senators which commence on the first day of January, 1969 shall be four years, and all terms which commence on the first day of January, 1971 shall be four years. Thereafter, except for the filling of vacancies for unexpired terms, senators shall be elected to and hold office for terms of four years.

"No person shall hold the office of State Senator for a period of longer than two successive terms of four years. No person shall hold the office of State Representative for a period longer than four successive terms of two years. Terms shall be considered successive unless separated by a period of four or more years. Only terms beginning on or after January 1, 1993 shall be considered in determining an individual's eligibility to hold office.

"(Adopted November 3, 1992.)
(As enacted Nov. 7, 1967. Former § 2 repealed, see SJR 24, 107th General Assembly.)"