MILWAUKEE -- Gov. Jim Doyle was able to find at least one way to put his "Frankenstein veto" pen to good use in finalizing the 2007-'09 Wisconsin budget. The governor did so when he vetoed a liquor sampling provision snuck into the bill at the last minute by unknown members of the Legislature.

In the budget, passed more than 115 days after its due date -- the second latest in Wisconsin history -- unnecessary earmarks, pork barrel projects, fee increases and provisions were included. Alongside a provision giving the Cheese Castle a pass on a sign law, was another allowing grocery and liquor stores to serve customers samples of up to 1.5 ounces of hard liquor between 11 a.m. and 7 p.m.

The $57.2 billion budget is jam packed with unnecessary spending and it is completely unacceptable that members of the Legislature, who are too cowardly to own up to their actions, would find this liquor provision to be a priority. Elected officials should have been completely focused on reaching a compromise on fiscal issues raised in the budget, not on pulling a fast one by adding on a provision that should be discussed by the Legislature at length through the passage of a separate bill.

While Doyle was correct in his decision to remove the provision from the budget bill, his reasoning to do so was insufficient. In fact, I actually support the provision's premise.

"To me, it's absurd that you walk into a grocery store and start taking shots," the governor said to The Associated Press when interviewed about vetoing the provision.

This is quite a humorous statement given Doyle signed a bill into law a few months earlier allowing beer samples to be distributed to consumers by grocery and liquor stores. In fact, 6-ounce wine samples are also currently, legally distributed in stores. What's the difference, governor?

Guy Rehorst, founder of Great Lakes Distillery, told a local media outlet that a 1.5-ounce sampling of spirits "typically amounts to 0.6 ounces of alcohol. This is the same amount of alcohol as found in 12 ounces of beer or five ounces of wine."

As noted above, both beer and wine are already legally distributed in stores. Rehorst went even further in explaining that the 6-ounce wine samples currently allowed contain an even higher amount of alcohol than the shots of liquor proposed in the budget would. Doyle’s statement, in comparison to his past actions, is purely hypocritical.

Sampling benefits both the consumer and distributor. Customers get a taste test before spending their hard earned money on a $30 bottle of alcohol and distributors gain more business through the process. Why not level the playing field for spirits?

Mothers Against Drunk Driving argue that such a law will encourage getting behind the wheel after drinking. While the concern is understandable, one fails see the dire consequences expected. There hasn't been an issue with beer and wine samples so far. Since the amount of alcohol included in liquor samples would be equal, if not less, it is not reasonable to conclude that problems would suddenly arise.

It's not like customers will be walking around taking shot after shot either. Distribution of the samples will be regulated and limited to the 1.5 ounces. Opponents may also be worried about underage drinking. This is a valid concern. However, Wisconsinites can rest at ease. Liquor stores do require photo identification to prove legal drinking age. Grocery stores usually have an area set off for selling alcohol as well and are also required by law to card customers.

Members of the Legislature had the right idea when it came to the provision, however they need to go through the correct process of passing a separate bill in order to make sure the specifics of such a provision are understood and representative of their constituents' desires. It was wrong to try and slip the provision in during a hotly contested budget battle.

Doyle was right to veto the provision, but I would not oppose a separate bill passed by the Legislature allowing spirits samples to be distributed by grocery and liquor stores.