I 
111TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 5034 
To support State based alcohol regulation, to clarify evidentiary rules for 
alcohol matters, to ensure the collection of all alcohol taxes, and for 
other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
APRIL 15, 2010 
Mr. DELAHUNT (for himself, Mr. COBLE, Mr. CHAFFETZ, and Mr. QUIGLEY) 
introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the 
Judiciary 
A BILL 
To support State based alcohol regulation, to clarify evi-
dentiary rules for alcohol matters, to ensure the collec-
tion of all alcohol taxes, and for other purposes. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Comprehensive Alcohol 
Regulatory Effectiveness (CARE) Act of 2010’’. 
SEC. 2. PURPOSE. 
It is the purpose of this Act to— 
(1) recognize that alcohol is different from 
other consumer products and that it should be regu-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
22:56 Apr 16, 2010
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5034.IH
H5034
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
lated effectively by the States according to the laws 
thereof; and 
(2) reaffirm and protect the primary authority 
of States to regulate alcoholic beverages. 
SEC. 3. SUPPORT FOR STATE ALCOHOL REGULATION. 
The Act entitled ‘‘An Act divesting intoxicating liq-
uors of their interstate character in certain cases’’, ap-
proved March 1, 1913 (27 U.S.C. 122 et seq.), commonly 
known as the ‘‘Webb-Kenyon Act’’, is amended by adding 
at the end the following: 
‘‘SEC. 3. SUPPORT FOR STATE ALCOHOL REGULATION. 
‘‘(a) DECLARATION OF POLICY.—It is the policy of 
Congress that each State or territory shall continue to 
have the primary authority to regulate alcoholic beverages. 
‘‘(b) 
CONSTRUCTION
OF
CONGRESSIONAL
SI-
LENCE.—Silence on the part of Congress shall not be con-
strued to impose any barrier under clause 3 of section 8 
of article I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as 
the ‘Commerce Clause’) to the regulation by a State or 
territory of alcoholic beverages. However, State or terri-
torial regulations may not facially discriminate, without 
justification, against out-of-state producers of alcoholic 
beverages in favor of in-state producers. 
‘‘(c) PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY AND BURDEN OF 
PROOF.—The following shall apply in any legal action 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
22:56 Apr 16, 2010
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5034.IH
H5034
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
challenging, under the Commerce Clause or an Act of Con-
gress, a State or territory law regarding the regulation 
of alcoholic beverages: 
‘‘(1) The State or territorial law shall be ac-
corded a strong presumption of validity. 
‘‘(2) The party challenging the State or terri-
torial law shall in all phases of any such legal action 
bear the burden of proving its invalidity by clear and 
convincing evidence. 
‘‘(3) Notwithstanding that the State or terri-
torial law may burden interstate commerce or may 
be inconsistent with an Act of the Congress, the 
State law shall be upheld unless the party chal-
lenging the State or territorial law establishes by 
clear and convincing evidence that the law has no ef-
fect on the promotion of temperance, the establish-
ment or maintenance of orderly alcoholic beverage 
markets, the collection of alcoholic beverage taxes, 
the structure of the state alcoholic beverage distribu-
tion system, or the restriction of access to alcoholic 
beverages by those under the legal drinking age.’’. 
SEC. 4. AMENDMENT TO WILSON ACT. 
The Act entitled ‘‘An Act to limit the effect of the 
regulations of commerce between the several States and 
with foreign countries in certain cases’’, approved August 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
22:56 Apr 16, 2010
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5034.IH
H5034
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS