The groups blocking Hoover\u2019s proposal have spent more than $1 million lobbying the Legislature and state government this year. They have donated at least 11 times that much to California politicians and their campaigns over the years.<\/p>\n
The craft distillers, who have spent a fraction as much on state politics, say all that spending from the opposition, particularly from corporate liquor distributors, appears to have paid off.<\/p>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/1786272490_835_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
Cris Steller, owner of Dry Diggings Distillery, talks about the various products that are made in his distillery.<\/p>\n
(Fred Greaves \/ For CalMatters)<\/p>\n
\u201cThey went directly to legislators\u2019 offices and basically torpedoed any effort we came up with,\u201d said Cris Steller, acting executive director of the California Distillers Assn. and the owner of Amador and Dry Diggings Distillery in El Dorado Hills, a family-run business that makes whiskey, brandy, vodka and gin.<\/p>\n
The fight is about more than whether Californians can have a bottle of whiskey or gin delivered. It illustrates how decisions are made in Sacramento, where wealthy and powerful interests can shape or kill policy in secret negotiations<\/a> with lawmakers. Politicians, in turn, benefit when proposals die quietly because they don\u2019t have to explain their decisions to voters. <\/p>\n Opponents insist they aren\u2019t using the political system to crush competitors as national alcohol sales slump<\/a>.<\/p>\n Instead, representatives of the major alcohol wholesalers and distributors that stock shelves at liquor retailers say they oppose the proposal because it primarily benefits out-of-state companies and weakens safeguards that include preventing alcohol deliveries to minors.<\/p>\n Teamsters lobbyist Matt Broad said the labor group\u2019s truck drivers aren\u2019t opposed to allowing craft distillers to ship their product. They just want them to use established shipping companies that have actual employees, including those that employ Teamsters, such as UPS. Those companies, Broad said, have standards to ensure liquor is delivered legally.<\/p>\n Those companies have standards to ensure legal delivery, Broad said. When they employ drivers rather than use contractors, the companies \u2014 not the drivers \u2014 bear legal liability.<\/p>\n Federal law preempts California from mandating hiring unionized truck drivers, Broad said.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are absolutely not opposed to the little guys being able to ship directly to consumers, and in fact, we have a track record of supporting the proposal but with meaningful guardrails that protect our members and protect the public,\u201d he told CalMatters.<\/p>\n The California wine industry, which has been allowed to ship bottles directly to customers in California for decades, isn\u2019t necessarily opposed either. But its representative says wine sellers are leery of giving little alcohol sellers delivery rights when big liquor companies deserve the same. Wineries of any size can ship to their customers in California.<\/p>\n Big Booze, Big Labor spend big<\/p>\n The U.S. Postal Service prohibits most alcohol shipments to homes, but California allows certain types of alcohol sellers to use private shipping companies. Breweries are prohibited from shipping directly to California customers.<\/p>\n Hoover hoped his Assembly Bill 2211<\/a>, a proposal to give craft distillers the ability to offer tastings and sell spirits at locations other than their distilleries, could be amended to give craft distillers a permanent direct-to-consumer provision.<\/p>\n It has advanced through the Legislature without formal opposition or any lawmaker voting against it, according to CalMatters\u2019 Digital Democracy database<\/a>. The measure is pending before the full Senate. <\/p>\n There may be no formal opposition, but reports filed with the California secretary of state show an extensive behind-the-scenes lobbying effort aimed at preventing any changes.<\/p>\n At least six groups, including some of the biggest national alcohol distributors, have reported lobbying on Hoover\u2019s bill.<\/p>\n The reports show those groups spent more than $1 million on lobbying this year. State ethics laws only require entities to report the total amount they spent lobbying the government in a year. They\u2019re not required to report how much they spent on specific legislation, so it\u2019s unclear how much they spent trying to influence lawmakers as they considered AB 2211 and its never-published direct-shipping amendment. <\/p>\n Those groups, along with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the Wine Institute, have given at least $11 million to both Democrats and Republicans in California since 2000, according to Digital Democracy<\/a>, including at least $738,000 since 2025<\/a>, the start of the current two-year legislative session. <\/p>\n By comparison, California\u2019s craft distillers reported spending $54,000 on lobbying this year. <\/p>\n They reported just three donations<\/a> to lawmakers in the past decade, according to Digital Democracy. One was a $42 bottle of whiskey in 2022 to former Napa Democratic Sen. Bill Dodd, who now lobbies on behalf of the craft distillery industry. In 2023, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas<\/a> received $215 in tequila. Democratic Assemblymember-turned U.S. Rep. Adam Gray received a $1,300 campaign donation in 2016. \u201cI\u2019m always open to figuring this out, if there\u2019s a way that we can make this work. \u2026 but I don\u2019t have a lot of hope that this bill is going to preserve those provisions this year,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n With less than a month left before the Legislature finishes for the year on Aug. 31, Democratic leaders would probably need to sign off on changes to Hoover\u2019s tasting room measure. They\u2019ve offered little indication they intend to intervene for craft distillers.<\/p>\n Rivas, who\u2019s received at least $108,000<\/a> in donations over the years from opponents of Hoover\u2019s unpublished proposal, declined CalMatters\u2019 request for an interview. Senate President Pro Tem Monique Lim\u00f3n<\/a>, who\u2019s received at least $33,000<\/a>, responded to an interview request with an emailed statement saying she is aware of the pending deadline.<\/p>\n \u201cThis bill will continue to work its way through the legislative process as intended,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n Bottles of spirits produced by Dry Diggings Distillery in El Dorado Hills on Aug. 4.<\/p>\n (Fred Greaves \/ For CalMatters)<\/p>\n Democratic Sen. Susan Rubio<\/a> and her sister, Democratic Assemblymember Blanca Rubio<\/a>, oversee the committees that regulate California\u2019s alcohol industry. When Hoover\u2019s measure passed through their committees, the chairs could have allowed Hoover to add the direct-to-consumer amendment. They did not.<\/p>\n Susan Rubio has received at least $65,000<\/a> in donations from the groups blocking the direct-shipping proposal, according to Digital Democracy. Blanca Rubio has received at least $129,000<\/a>.<\/p>\n Sen. Rubio\u2019s spokesperson, Giovanni Ruiz Reyes, responded to interview requests with emailed statements. The first said \u201cconversations between stakeholders are ongoing\u201d and that she \u201clooks forward\u201d to reviewing potential legislation.<\/p>\n Ruiz Reyes said in a second statement Thursday that she\u2019s supported four previous extensions of the craft distiller shipping policy.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is currently no bill or amendment before the committee seeking another extension,\u201d Ruiz Reyes said. \u201cAccordingly, it would be inaccurate to suggest that Senator Rubio or the committee has blocked or refused to hear an extension when no such proposal is currently before the committee.\u201d <\/p>\n Assemblymember Rubio didn\u2019t return interview requests.<\/p>\n Fewer Americans are drinking<\/p>\n
Hoover said he has been trying since last year to add language to his bill that would allow craft distillers to permanently keep shipping. He succeeded last year in getting the extension that expires Dec. 31, but this year he\u2019s been unable to overcome the opposition to expanding the tasting room measure.<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/1786272490_405_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n