More on the Brunello saga…

For the past two months some producers of Brunello di Montalcino, one of the premier wines in the world, have been investigated for blending their Brunello (100% Sangiovese-based wines) with Cabernet and Merlot. Amidst these allegations, the United States Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau has stepped in to ensure that the wines that reach our dinner tables are the real thing. Decanter Magazine is reporting that imports of Brunello into the United States may be delayed beginning June 9, 2008.

From Decanter: “Francesco Marone Cinzano, president of the trade body, the Brunello Consorzio, said… ‘Starting on 9 June, the US will block all Brunello imports unless the wine is accompanied by laboratory analysis proving that the wine is pure Sangiovese.”

I understand regulations on producers to ensure that Brunello is in fact 100% Sangiovese, but is this level of control necessary? Is it really feasible to ask this of all 200 or so producers that export wines to the US? What do you think: has it gone too far, or is this an important step in preserving the tradition and integrity of one of the worlds most amazing wines?

Image: Taken in Montalcino of an Enoteca on one of the main roads into town.

Flavored Malt Beverages ARE NOT BEER! Score one for the good guys.

You may remember my reporting on the “Definition of Beer” bill that I sat in on last month in the Maryland State Senate. This topic deals with the classification of “Flavored Malt Beverages” as “Beer” versus “Spirits” or other classifications. This has implications on tax law as well as who is allowed to sell these “Alcopops” (as they are also referred to.

I, as well as state attorney general Gansler, am totally against this change in the classification of FMB’s to “beer” (again read the previous post). Unfortunately, our representatives voted in favor of the wholesalers/distributors to classify these “alcopops” as “beer” (take a look at tax records to see how much money lobbyists contributed to our representatives campaigns in the last few years…it’s sickening).

But, wait, good news!: The Baltimore Sun (and our friends at Vinotrip) reported that on Wednesday, Governor Martin O’Malley came through, delaying the signing of the bill as he considers the repercussions of such legislation. Now might be a good time to contact your local legislature or send a letter to the Governor to let him know that we citizens of Maryland won’t stand for FMB’s being classified as beer.

Maryland Wholesalers vs. Consumers - Part 4.1.08

Well, it seems like the wholesalers have done it again in this great state of Maryland. The anti-shipping lobbyist Bruce Bereano reportedly held a wine-tasting of sorts for state legislatures and wholesalers last evening at his Maryland estate. It was at this tasting that Bearano and wholesalers convinced the state legislatures that in fact, allowing Marylanders to travel to wine regions or restaurants outside of the State of Maryland could possibly cause alcohol to slip into the hands of teenagers. Also, it is reported that Maryland residents may no longer leave the state to spend money on any food or wine, without making contributions to the Bereano lobbyist foundation and sending payments to the starving Maryland wholesalers. I have acquired a list of wines that were tasted, as well as Bereano’s personal tasting notes.

2004 Zima Brut: Sources say the recent classification of these Flavored Malt Beverages as “Beer” was celebrated at the onset of the evening. It is rumored that a group of teenage girls suggested the 2004 vintage over the 2005 (current release) as it’s their preferred beverage of choice. Sadly, the only attendants on hand that enjoyed the flavor and packaging of the Zima were the teenage girls who apparently noted that “all flavored malt beverages are basically made for us- our cheerleading team loves them, hee hee hee…”

2005 Fat Bastard Chardonnay: This lightly oaked chardonnay was well received by the crowd, of whom many seemed to relate to the labeling.

1940 Nero di Preddapio: This wine which is a tribute to fascist leader Benito Mussolini was apparently a huge favorite of this crowd. As they drank the wine, Bereano was said to have led a march around his home wearing full military fatigues and carrying the US Flag.

2002 Rude Boy Chardonnay: This South African Chardonnay was on hand, but the corks were never removed. It was reported that many of the lobbyists and legislatures were seen carrying the bottles around and “taking in” the label art. One was seen licking the label, but no tasting notes provided.

2002 Riverbank Estate JAILBIRD Red: A blend of Cabernet, Pinot Noir, and Zinfandel, this was said to be Bereano’s favorite. Jammy and overconcentrated, apparently this wine has been Bereano’s favorite since the 2000 lawsuit which stated the following (all factual with support from this reference):

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Bereano,
2000.MD.0042013 (Md. 01/13/2000)

“Bruce C. Bereano (Bereano), a member of the bar of this Court since 1969, was convicted in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in November 1994 on seven counts of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1346.”

“The federal indictment alleged that, from May 1990 until June 1991, Bereano “knowingly and willfully devise[d] and intend[ed] to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud” his lobbying clients of money by false pretenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and to deprive them of their right to his “loyal, faithful, honest, and unbiased service[s],” in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1346. *fn2″”

It’s this disloyal, lying, deceiving man who is currently the lead lobbyist for the wholesaler’s winning position against the people of Maryland and their right to a free market. All jokes aside at this point- it’s ridiculous this guy is even allowed to drive into the city of Annapolis. Hey, at least he apparently throws a great “wine” tasting.

For more great wine labels, see: www.winelabels.org
Disclaimer: In case you couldn’t tell, all information up to the discussion of the lawsuit against Bereano was fictitious. Happy April 1st!

Wednesday Wine Rant - 03/26/08 - Brunello, Brunello - say it ain’t so.

I LOVE BRUNELLO. You all are aware that Brunello di Montalcino is one of my favorite wines. The “Brunello” grape is a specific clone of the Sangiovese grape that is unique to the area surrounding Montalcino (Tuscany), having first been planted in the 1800’s by the Biondi Santi family. Today, Brunello di Montalcino is one of Italy’s most prized wines made by over 200 producers, all who have to stick to the basic formula:

• 100% Brunello clone of Sangiovese
• Normale Bottling: released 50 months after harvest (minimum 2 years aged in wood, 4 in bottle)
• Riserva bottling: released 62 months after harvest (minimum 2 years aged in wood, 4 in bottle)

The result of this process is a beautiful developed wine with concentrated, ripe fruits when young and delicate tannins with age. (Image taken this past November of downtown Montalcino, from the fortress!).

No one likes a cheat. It seems like some Montalcino vinters aren’t playing by the rules. Wine Spectator’s James Suckling blogged on the topic last week, mentioning the allegations that some winemakers are adding other grapes to their Brunello blend to make it more fashionable for todays wine consumer. He noted that this was merely allegations and no formal accusations were made towards any one vineyard.

Well today, our friends at Vinowire.com have reported that they have direct confirmation from the president of the Consorzio del Vino Brunello di Montalcino, Stefano Campatelli, stating that the allegations are in fact under investigation and it appears there is some truth to them. I have contacted the Consorzio del Vino Brunello di Montalcino for further comment and will update you when I hear anything.

From Vinowire: “Stefano Campatelli, who has confirmed that “irregularities” have been found in wines labeled as Brunello produced by at least twenty producers in Montalcino. According to outside sources who have requested anonymity because they were not permitted to speak publicly about the investigation, that number could be as high as 80 or 90.”

Please, say it ain’t so…

For more on the topic, check out the story on Vinowire.com. I’m almost afraid to follow this story to find out which of my beloved Brunello producers are guilty of this terrible crime. More reading and initial report here: Vino al vino

More Maryland Liquor Law: Define “BEER!”

Advertisement: Beer For A Year Purchase beer mixes for a year and receive seasonal shipments (4 times a year) of your favorite beer mixes & Booster.

While waiting for the hearing on SB-616, Kim and I sat in on the hearings of other bills on the docket. These ranged from SB-675 which sought to outline voting districts in Carroll county to SB837 which proposed to allow for wine sales at a new retail complex in Prince George’s County. These bills weren’t very exciting, but one other bill was actually quite interesting and I think exemplifies the difficulty of licensing and lawmaking when it comes to alcoholic beverages. (Image from wikipedia)

At face value, Senate Bill 745 seems quite straightforward. Senator Colburn proposed the bill to acknowledge that by definition, Flavored Malt Beverages (FMBs) such as Jack Daniels coolers should be classified as “beer” for wholesale licensing and retail distribution purposes. Seems easy enough, right? Beer and FMBs have similar alcohol content, are sold together on store shelves, and both are carbonated, light alcoholic beverages. In the present system, FMB’s are defined as “distilled spirits” yet taxed at the rate of beer which is $0.09 per gallon. In contrast, “distilled spirits” are taxed at $1.50 per gallon. Why FMB’s aren’t currently taxed at the rate of spirits (which they are defined as) is beyond me. Regardless, this new bill would protect FMB’s by saying they are “beer” and maintain their tax rate (and licensing) at the current “beer” level.
Read more

SB-616: Maryland Direct Shippers Bill - Update from Annapolis: No resolution today!

If you ever thought about spending 6 hours in a senate hearing without eating anything before hand, let me tell you…DON’T! Kim and I just sat through what was actually an interesting afternoon before the Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee. We heard about some interesting bills before the senate, including a “definition of beer” bill that I’ll review at some other time. For now, we’re sitting at a wine bar on Main St. in downtown Annapolis, enjoying a glass of wine, waiting for food, and eavesdropping on a few of the opponents arguments of the bill sitting two tables over!

Read more

An underdog story? MD Direct Shipping Bill: The Final Round: 03/07/2008

I’m a big fan of the Rocky movies (well, I - IV anyways!). They are the ultimate underdog story - a local Philadelphia boxer who is mediocre at best in his amateur career is given a shot at the champ. Everyone counts him out, the champ hasn’t prepared well, and in the end, he fights a great fight to the final bell and almost pulls off the greatest upset of all time.

Our fight isn’t for glory or money, it’s for market freedom and let me tell you, we Maryland consumers are the major underdogs. The wholesalers and their lobbyists have spent a lot of money and time to make sure this bill goes down. But there’s one round left and perhaps we have some fight left in us. The date and venue? The state capital building in Annapolis next Friday at 1:00 PM. It doesn’t matter what got us to this hearing, the only thing that matters now is we give it our all.

Read more

Happy President’s Day - Now let us Marylander’s order wine online!

In just a few hours the House Economic Matters Committee will meet to discuss the fate of HB1260 (better known to us Maryland wine consumers as the bill that will make buying wine online legal) If accepted into law, the bill will benefit  Maryland wineries by allowing easier export of wines to other states, while benefiting consumers by giving them the freedom to purchase wine online from out of state retailers and wineries. If you missed my previous posts on the subject and want to learn more, check out these links:

• http://foodandwineblog.com/?p=304
• http://foodandwineblog.com/?p=320

Look for an update on today’s meeting to be posted here as soon as I hear anything.

MD Wine Shipping Bill

It looks like a hearing will be held on February 18, 2008 at 1:00 PM to discuss the MD Wine Bill. If the bill (read the bill here) is passed into law, we Marylanders will be allowed to order wine online and have it shipped to our homes. This would be great for those of us that can’t find wines we want on the shelves of our local wine shops, or for those wines that are available by mailing lists only.

The deadline less than a week away means we have little time to write our congressmen and congresswomen showing our support for the bill. As pointed out by “Irwin” on the Wine Spectator forums, you can write a letter using the following:

From the WS Forums:
If you are motivated to write a letter in support of the Md. wine bill, which is either HB-1260, or SB 616, you could write to:
Del. Tom Hucker
House of Delegates
Suite 220
6 Bladen Blvd
Annapolis, MD 21401
ATTN: Maria Topper
tom.hucker@house.state.md.us
If you email an attachment in “Word”, it will be sent to the Senate committee.
The House committee is “Economic Matters” and has scheduled a hearing on 2/18 at 1PM. Letters should be received by them prior to that.

Also, as Irwin points out: “It costs nothing to express your opinion”

Finally: Thanks to Chris from the forums for this information:

Here is the link to the senate version:
http://mlis.state.md.us/2008RS/billfile/sb0616.htm

Here is the link to the house version:
http://mlis.state.md.us/2008RS/billfile/hb1260.htm

Here is a link to contact your local legislators:
http://mdelect.net/electedofficials/

Another great link provided by Tom Wark, of the SWRA:

http://capwiz.com/freegrapes/issues/alert/?alertid=10980121

Wine Direct Shipping Bill Introduced This Week in Maryland

As you Marylanders know, it’s difficult to buy wine online in this state. Those of us who are lucky enough to have friends in D.C. can at least have it shipped to their addresses (thanks Francis), but many people do not have that luxury. Therefore many people miss out on great deals online, as well the opportunity to try wines from small producers all across the United States.

With the passing of a new bill that is going to be announced this week, known as the Raskin/Hucker Bill, Marylanders would be permitted to have wine shipped direclty to their residence. This bill is long overdue and I urge everyone to contact their local congressmen and congresswomen to make sure they are aware of how importnat this bill to their constituents. With a strong grassroots effort, led by betterbeerandwinelaws.org, we can make a difference and get this bill through the house and have a new law enacted to defend our rights as wine consumers. You can find out who your elected officials are and how to contact them here as well as donate money to the cause here: Donations

Thanks to HWT (a new friend from the MD - Cru Offlines) to pointing this out to us!

Hey Wine.Com - Didn’t anyone ever tell you that no one likes a snitch?

I have lived in Baltimore for 4 years now and in that time I had managed to never have seen an episode of HBO’s highly acclaimed series The Wire. In its fifth season, The Wire is set in Baltimore and is based on the struggles of the Baltimore Police Department with drug dealers and murderers. It is shot on location throughout the city of Baltimore and the surrounding areas. Well last week Kim and I borrowed the first season DVD’s from our friend David Battani and spent the next few days working our way through each episode. Without getting too much into it, the show is quite entertaining and highly recommended. We’re going to start watching season 2 this week as our Direct TV is out (AGAIN!) and it’s been fun to actually watch movies, something we rarely do.

So I bet your wondering what any of this has to do with food and wine, or Wine.Com? Well there is a common code among the drug dealers and gangsters in The Wire that is in fact very real in the city of Baltimore, if you snitch (turn someone in, tell on someone for committing a crime) you get what’s coming to you (two years ago there was a real life video released about this topic among those involved in illegal activity that made the point, here’s an article on it - the no-snitch campaign).

Apparently Wine.Com CEO Richard Bergsund doesn’t watch The Wire.

Over the last week it has been reported by many news sources and confirmed by Mr. Bergsund that Wine.Com was involved in their own little sting operation (Great investigative reporting by Adler at www.vinography.com for breaking this story). Wine.Com had been ordering wines from competitor online retailers (29 to be exact) and having them delivered to the Wine.Com warehouses which were in states that prohibited online wine purchases. Those retailers that did ship wine illegally (including retailers from nine different states) were then reported. Basically, they were setting up the little guy and turning them in for illegal activity. Classy.

Wine.Com contends that it was merely looking out for it’s consumers and the other law-abiding online retailers. Known for significantly higher prices than most other retailers, Wine.Com is trying to rid itself of its competition, forcing consumers to pay premium prices for wine. This hasn’t gone over very well with the general wine public (see Wine Spectator Forums, Vinography, or Fermentation).

I am strongly in agreenence with the masses that wine shipping laws are ridiculous. Here in Maryland, we can’t order wines online. Heck, we can’t go to the grocery store and buy a bottle of wine to have with our dinner (this is a whole other topic!). All this because of the greed and political contributions of the wine wholesalers.

A few other interesting facts:

• Wine.Com is not a member of the Specialty Wine Retailers Association (SWRA) which is the only organized effort directly supporting retailers’ right to ship to consumers nationwide.
• A report has recently been published by the SWRA that shows that wine and spirits wholesalers have given more than $50 million to politicians in the last 7 years (2000-2006). This is an absurd amount of money - all to reduce the availability and increase the prices of wine on the consumer-end.

I’d like to make the point that I am in no way advocating the breaking of the law to ship wine illegally into states where it is forbidden. My position is that Wine.Com should not have taken it into their own hands to act as police on this matter. If they were genuinely concerned for the well being of other reatailers and most importantly, the consumer, they could have taken many different approaches including donating money to the SWRA to help lobby for new wine shipping laws. I would never order wine from Wine.Com because of their ridiculous pricing but if I did, I wouldn’t any more! Mind your own business Wine.Com and quit trying to ruin it for everyone else. In the end, you’re only hurting the consumer.

In the end, the negative PR that this is causing for Wine.Com will end up hurting them as far as consumers are concerned. Why support a retailer who is making it more difficult and more expensive for us consumers to get the products we seek? I guess a snitch deserves what they get!

Finally, what can you, the wine consumer do to help out? Well “Tom Cole”, a member of the Vinography and MarkSquires discussion on the topic has suggested that we consumers work together to raise money to help the SWRA and get these laws changed? What a concept! People taking laws into their own hands and working to get their politicians to recognize what’s best for the people, not the corporations! I commend you on this idea, Mr. Cole and join you (just made a small donation) and ask our visitors to join you as well:

http://www.specialtywineretailers.org/donate.html