Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alcohol Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
South Carolina subcommittee advances curbside and home alcohol-delivery bill after testimony on enforcement and safety
Summary
The House General Law Subcommittee gave Bill 38-57 a favorable report, as amended, after testimony from crime-victim advocates who warned the measure could widen access and complicate enforcement, and the sponsor offered clarifying amendments about training and age/possession rules.
The South Carolina House General Law Subcommittee on Wednesday advanced Bill 38-57, which would authorize curbside and home delivery of alcoholic beverages, after adopting a sponsor amendment and receiving mixed testimony about public safety and enforcement.
Laura Hudson, executive director of the South Carolina Crime Victims Council, testified in opposition, saying the bill’s preamble and penalty provisions understate public-safety risks and rely on outdated statistics. "The penalty section of the bill is confusing to me," Hudson said, arguing the measure gives the Department of Revenue too much discretion and lacks clear standards for when suspensions or revocations should occur.
Sponsor and committee chair Representative Britton responded that the measure includes age distinctions for service versus delivery — servers may be 18 in some contexts while possession for delivery remains tied to age 21 — and offered an amendment to remove an obsolete training reference and to fix scrivener errors. The committee voted to adopt Amendment 1.
Representative McCravey voiced broad concerns that the bill is too permissive and urged more work before final passage, saying the measure "could be the loosest bill in the United States" without tighter safeguards. The subcommittee then held a roll-call vote that, as recorded in the transcript, included four recorded 'Aye' responses and one 'No' (Representative Craigie). The committee reported the bill favorably as amended.
The bill’s changes would require the Department of Revenue to administer training previously attributed in the text to a defunct agency; the amendment adopted in committee removes the obsolete reference and assigns training responsibility to DOR. Hudson and others urged clearer, more prescriptive enforcement language, tighter age-verification rules for delivery personnel, and stronger, graduated penalties for repeated violations.
The subcommittee’s action is a favorable report to the next stage of consideration in the legislative process; no final House floor vote was recorded in the committee transcript. The sponsor said he is willing to work with members on further changes to address enforcement and age-verification concerns.
