Hoosier boozing

From Friday's C-J, an article describing a court decision to overturn an Indiana law that restricted competition in the wine industry...

A federal judge has ruled that an Indiana law requiring Hoosiers to have a face-to-face transaction with wineries before they're allowed to receive shipments at home is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge John Daniel Tinder said some provisions of the law passed last year "constitute a form of economic protectionism" because they favor in-state wineries at the expense of those in other states. The ruling means that Hoosiers can now more freely order bottles from wineries in Indiana and around the country.

This is an all-too-common aspect of politics: an interest group gets politicians to restrict competition for what they sell, increasing profits for them-- but restricting choice and increasing price for consumers. This often works because the costs are subtle and small per customer-- and thus, not worth learning about or doing anything about. The benefits to producers/suppliers are quite clear-- and often results in support for the politicians who support them.

It is rare for restrictions in competition to be ended and most of those are judicial decisions like this one. On Labor Day, kudos to Judge Tinder as we celebrate his effort to allow equitable and efficient competition between the workers who make and sell wine.