Video & Transcript Research : 'wine'

Page 1 of 37
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Licensing & Administrative Procedures May 6th, 2025

Licensing & Administrative Procedures

Transcript Highlights:
  • SB1184 amends current statute relating to the age of wine authorized to be sold by wine sellers.
  • Under current law, a wine collection seller may only sell wine that is 25 years old to a permitted restaurant
  • Different wines age at different rates.
  • If you look at a lot of the statistics, many very popular wines, wine enthusiasts' top wines hit their
  • It's what the wine experts say, and it's not Colin; it's what the wine experts suggest regarding these
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • wine collectors to sell. wine to an appropriately permitted restaurant if the wine is manufactured not
  • There are individual wine collectors in Texas that possess these older wines, but they are opting. to
  • 20-year-old wines to restaurants.
  • that is sold is current-release wine.
  • And these wines need to be in an in which they can be drank.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • wine collectors to sell. wine to an appropriately permitted restaurant if the wine is manufactured not
  • There are individual wine collectors in Texas that possess these older wines, but they are opting. to
  • 20-year-old wines to restaurants.
  • They have to not only build these wine lists, which are rated for not only the breadth of the wines that
  • And these wines need to be in an in which they can be drank.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

State Affairs (Part II) Apr 3rd, 2025

State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • wine collectors to sell wine to an appropriately permitted restaurant if the wine is manufactured not
  • wine collectors to sell wine to an appropriately permitted restaurant if the wine is manufactured not
  • There are individual wine collectors in Texas that possess these older wines, but they are opting...
  • ...individual wine collectors in Texas that possess these older wines, but they are opting to sell their
  • wines to restaurants.
Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 1183, by Senator Creighton, which would require Lone Star Cards used for SNAP and TANF benefits to display the recipient’s name and photo, add fraud-reporting information, and require HHSC to track replacement-card requests. Creighton argued the bill would reduce fraud and protect taxpayer dollars, citing Texas SNAP theft and overpayment data. HHSC testified that photo IDs on the card are technically possible and explained how authorized secondary users are added. Dr. Amber O’Connor of Every Texan testified against the bill, saying SNAP fraud is a small share of expenditures, that the proposal would be costly and ineffective, and that federal rules limit mandatory photo requirements. Public testimony closed and SB 1183 was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1184, also by Senator Creighton, which would lower from 20 years to 10 years the minimum age of collectible wine that Texas collectors may sell to permitted restaurants. Supporters said the change would help Texas restaurants access desirable vintages, keep collectible wine in-state, and align with market demand; invited witnesses from the wine industry testified in favor. No opposition was heard, public testimony closed, and SB 1184 was left pending. Next, Senator Birdwell laid out Senate Bill 2051 and Senate Joint Resolution 68, both aimed at revising Texas impeachment procedures in response to issues identified during the 2023 impeachment process. The measures would clarify constitutional and statutory impeachment authority, require sworn testimony, extend review periods for House members, address conflicts of interest and presiding officers, require cost reporting, and modify rules for impeaching the governor or lieutenant governor. A committee substitute added protections for the accused, longer review periods, and a fallback presiding-officer option. Witnesses generally supported stronger accountability but raised questions about whether the language should also cover retired or visiting judges. Both measures were left pending after testimony. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1577, which would expand Texas Motor Speedway’s alcohol sales authority to include distilled spirits and remove certain event and concession limits; the Speedway’s representative supported the bill and it was left pending. Later, the committee heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 42 and Senate Bill 240, which would recognize only two sexes and restrict access to sex-designated private spaces in public facilities based on biological sex. Supporters argued the measures were needed to protect women’s privacy and safety, including in schools and shelters, while opponents warned about enforcement problems, privacy concerns, and impacts on transgender Texans and others who do not fit stereotypical sex traits. After extensive testimony, both measures were left pending. The committee then took up multiple pending bills and reported several favorably, including SB 511, SB 33, SB 510, SB 871, SB 2024, SB 2166, SJR 27, SJR 40, SB 1313, SB 1314, SB 1316, SB 1541, SB 2420, SB 1999, SB 2309, SB 1860, and SB 2429, with some also certified for the local and uncontested calendar.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Licensing & Administrative Procedures Apr 1st, 2025

Licensing & Administrative Procedures

Transcript Highlights:
  • We don't produce wine in Texas.
  • It's a tough wine market, and this bill makes it easier for me as a wine grower to get my wine in the
  • Ability to market North Texas wine.
  • In Texas, we're the third largest wine-consuming state in the country, yet only 3% of that wine is Texas
  • On y'all's place, you've got acres and acres of actually growing wine and you make wine, right?
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/13/25

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • for sale and completely prohibits wine for sale and completely prohibits wine sales<01:05:02.000
  • Paul, and I represent the Minnesota Wine and Spirits wholesalers.
  • address this issue of shipping uh wine address this issue of shipping uh wine into<01:24:11.960>
  • for non-state um um shippers of wine for non-state um um shippers of wine into<01:25:22.679>
  • should be selling and serving beer wine should be selling and serving beer wine and<01:37:55.000
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Licensing & Administrative Procedures Apr 22nd, 2025

Licensing & Administrative Procedures

MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Commerce Committee Meeting - 2025-03-27

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • provision from a member that's been, like the minor provision liquor that I just mentioned, regarding wine
  • I want to highlight the section on the wine transfer for shipping, and I'm glad to see that's in here
  • But members, we have a bill, House File 901, the wine transfer bill that we've talked about for many
  • That transferring wine is acceptable and that it can be done safely.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/27/25

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • I want to highlight the section on the wine transfer for the shipping, and I'm glad to see that's in
  • It's a wine transfer bill that we've talked about for many, many members.
  • <00:40:42.760> uh<00:40:43.000> the<00:40:43.119> wine<00:40:43.359> transfer
  • <00:40:43.800> for<00:40:43.960> the wine uh the wine transfer for the wine uh the
  • wine transfer for the shipping<00:40:44.640> and<00:40:44.839> glad<00:40:45.040> to
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/17/26

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • to shop for wine. to shop for wine.
  • It comes down to this: white wine has a shelf life, as well as red wine, but white wine much more so
  • but white wine life as well as red wine but white wine much<00:12:31.280> more<00:12:31.520><
  • You're not transferring wine. You're not transferring wine.
  • Like, why are they buying so much wine that so much of this wine is expiring?
AL
Transcript Highlights:
  • This is not a beer or wine discussion. This is an RTD discussion made with liquor.
  • As the grocery store associate said, beer goes to 139, wine goes to 24. The max on this is 7.
Bills: HB521
AL
Transcript Highlights:
  • It would also allow for the sale of beer, wine,... and allow for the sale of beer, wine, and liquor produced
  • and sell liquor, beer, and wine.
  • It... sell liquor, beer, and wine.
  • a single wine grape.
  • So we're not burdened with creating beer, wine, and spirits. with creating beer, wine, and spirits.
Bills: SB312, SB316, SB90
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Alcohol, Tobacco and Controlled Substances REVISED: SB1501 - Added Apr 8th, 2026 at 10:30 am

Alcohol, Tobacco and Controlled Substances

Transcript Highlights:
  • ounces of up to six separate and up to a half ounce of liquor and up to let's see 1 ounce each of wine
  • You're gonna have one kind and you're gonna get one ounce of the wine so they weren't asking to be able
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

03/17/2026 - House Commerce

Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • we decided to go ahead and define it and make congruent all the definitions with regards to beer, wine
Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 1566, which would prohibit municipalities and counties from maliciously delaying licensing, permits, or approvals, authorize the Attorney General to enforce the prohibition, and provide expedited judicial review. The sponsor said the bill is intended to address affordability by preventing intentional government delays in housing and business approvals. County representatives supported the goal but opposed the bill as drafted, arguing the county language differed from the city/town language and could sweep in ordinary processing delays or incomplete applications; the sponsor said a floor amendment would fix the county language. Testimony from supporters described long permit and parcel-number delays and argued the bill would give applicants a remedy against intentional obstruction. The committee recommended the bill do pass by a 7-3 vote, with one present and one absent. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1787, which would require written notice for exactions imposed on development projects, allow individualized determinations, and create an appeal path including judicial review. The sponsor framed it as a takings and affordability measure to stop unrelated or excessive exactions from being imposed on housing projects. Cities and counties opposed the bill, saying existing law already requires nexus and proportionality, already provides an appeal process, and that the bill would create a duplicative Attorney General review and confusion, especially for mixed-use projects. Supporters, including Pacific Legal Foundation, the Home Builders Association, and a homeowner who described a costly infrastructure demand on her property, argued the bill would curb extortionate demands and make the process fairer. The committee passed the bill 7-2 with one present and one absent. Senate Bill 1478, a liquor-regulation cleanup bill, was also heard and received broad support. The measure makes technical changes to liquor statutes, including clarifying interim permits, repealing a federal food-safety preemption provision, and updating definitions such as cider and production terminology. Industry stakeholders said the bill was the product of months of consensus work and mostly technical corrections. It passed unanimously, 10-0. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 1431, which would limit municipal control over home design features and prohibit certain required shared amenities that would necessitate HOA maintenance. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill would reduce housing costs by preventing subjective aesthetic mandates and unnecessary HOA-driven requirements, while opponents from cities and neighborhood groups warned it would undermine local control, crime-prevention design standards, neighborhood character, and quality. Home builders and property-rights advocates said the bill would expand consumer choice and reduce costs, while critics argued it could lead to lower-quality housing and remove local recourse. The bill was not reported out in the portion provided, and testimony continued with no final vote shown.