Gov. Dannel P. Malloy is not giving up on his long-running attempt to overhaul Connecticut's liquor laws.

Despite opposition during previous legislative sessions, the Democrat this year has again proposed a bill that would eliminate so-called minimum bottle pricing. Current state law generally prohibits retailers, such as package stores, from selling alcoholic liquor other than beer below a minimum price.

Malloy contends that's unfair to the consumer and ultimately hurts Connecticut tax revenue collections.

"When in doubt, stand up for the consumer," Malloy said in an interview with The Associated Press, estimating prices in Connecticut are $4 to $12 more per bottle than other states.

"And the idea that Connecticut consumers are paying so much more money for wine and spirts than are paid by the surrounding states is quite indefensible."

As in past years, the state package store owners association is opposing the move. The group argues the price difference between states, which it estimates is $2 or $3 per bottle, has more to do with taxes than the minimum pricing law, and warns Malloy's latest bill could lead to a 10 percent drop in revenues and force 600 of the state's approximate 1,150 liquor stores out of business, resulting in an estimated 2,100 job losses.

"If we had a 2,100-employee company going belly up in Connecticut, we'd be falling all over ourselves trying to help them survive," said Carroll Hughes, chief lobbyist for the Connecticut Package Store Association.

But not everyone in the industry agrees with Hughes' dire predictions.



"I think that's a fiction," said Edward Cooper, vice president and public affairs and community relations for Maryland-based Total Wine More, which has 30 stores in 18 states, including three stores in Connecticut. Cooper said retail is always evolving and he's confident the liquor store owners will figure out a way to provide customers what they want.

"Having a system in place, a government-mandated system in place in which the retailers are told what it is they should sell a product for and thus guarantee them a profit at a certain level, that's really not the free market," he said. "Really the losers are the residents of Connecticut."

The General Assembly's General Law Committee has scheduled a public hearing for Feb. 23, when the proposal is expected to be discussed. It's unclear whether lawmakers will finally pass it in this year's short three-month legislation session. It could be appealing as legislators try to balance the state's budget. Malloy's administration has estimated the change could boost state revenues by $1.6 million to $2.1 million, a figure Hughes strongly disputes.

Malloy began his efforts to overhaul the state's liquor laws in 2012. That year, he only managed to pass legislation that allowed retail sales of alcohol on Sundays and certain holidays. Undeterred, he renewed his push last year to extend hours for purchases and change the fixed-pricing system. While legislation passed in 2015 allowing the stores to stay open later, the price proposal faced strong opposition.

Hughes said it would only benefit "big box" retailers who he argues are trying to take over the market. Lawmakers already agreed to expand the number of liquor licenses one person can hold from three to four, beginning July 2015, and from four to five, beginning July 2016.

"The whole purpose here, the whole result would be to give business to the box store who is trying to take over everybody's business in Connecticut," said Hughes, who warns liquor prices will ultimately be higher if chains take over the market.

Cooper, whose company is planning to open fourth store in Connecticut, called Hughes' argument a "tried and true red herring" that says bigger is worse and smaller is better.

"I say, better businesspeople, better retailers are better, regardless of size," he said.

