When Amendments Collide



Sun rise on seventh street



                                                                        

Prohibition was repealed in 1933. More than allowing the sale and consumption of alcohol to become legal once more, The Twenty First Amendment which repealed the exclusion of alcohol in The United States unwittingly set basic constitutional rights on a collision course with one another. In striking down the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution and not allowing for a national policy of alcohol control the Roosevelt administration inadvertently placed at odds the time honored doctrine of Federalism and the right to free speech as represented by the First Amendment.

 There are currently 21 monopoly states in the U.S. The term "control state" is popular but ambiguous, since each state controls and standardizes the sale of alcohol to some degree. Only 21 states are monopoly states, and the term "control state" frequently refers to these 21 states in particular. The extent to which this monopoly extends differs from state to state. The Commonwealth of Virginia is one such control territory. Among its many duties, the Virginia ABC enforces conformity over a legally licensed establishment’s ability to advertise any special related to alcohol regardless if it would pertain to draught beer or first growth Bordeaux. Until recently, a licensee could only publicize a feature involving alcohol within its four walls not visible to a potential traffic outside the business. This “four walls” approach has recently been amended to allow an operator to affix to their structure in lettering no larger than four inches any alcohol special that they wish as long as these specials conform to Commonwealth standards having an undesirable result of changing the exterior look of the building. Interestingly enough, this “four walls” approach extends to cyber space. A business which is a legal license holder in Virginia may not advertise any happy hour special on a company web site or social media page as operated by the organization. Not only does this regulation prohibit a restaurant in a resort area from reaching potential out of state visitors where this type of interaction is legal, but it allows the Commonwealth a dangerous precedent to determine over what a resident may view, purchase, sell, or participate in over the internet. A May 31, 2008 article in The Virginian Pilot, states that,” State Alcoholic Beverage Control Department officials say the happy hour regulations, like others the agency enforces, discourage overconsumption and bridle bad behavior, such as drunken driving. Curtis Coleburn, ABC's chief operating officer, said that spreading the news on selling beverages at lower than the customary prices entices customers to drink more. "It remains in society's interest to curb the abuse of alcohol, and ABC is the primary state agency assigned to the task," Coleburn said.” Oddly enough in March of the same year, a Federal Judge in Richmond overturned the states pronouncement banning advertisements of happy hours in college newspapers and online citing that a violation of free speech had occurred and that a ban on this discourse did little in the way of promoting temperance. Strangely enough, Coleburn still emphasizes that provisions in the law still allow the Commonwealth such regulation. In America, it has long been held that free speech is an absolute right of the people. It is also implicit that the citizenry has a responsibility commensurate with that right; the old axiom states that, “one cannot yell fire in a crowded movie theatre”. Fairness dictates that I state that my working relationship with the Virginia ABC has been one of partnership as opposed to divergence. At every turn our agent has been available to answer questions, hold employee training seminars if need be, or to council on matters. It is with great earnest that the ABC makes each licensee aware of their underage buying program, a schedule by where each business is tested by underage agents attempting to purchase alcoholic beverages.

With truly the interest of the public at heart, the ABC has a sincerely daunting task. It is with faulty logic nonetheless that this bastion of regulation proceeds to go about its vocation. By restricting the right of free speech, the Commonwealth of Virginia assumes that it will stop binge drinking, prevent drunk driving, and prohibit those who are underage from consuming alcohol. This assumption is at best erroneous. This tactic will do no more to stop these phenomena than banning for example a magazine to anyone under the age of 21 in Virginia because it has an advertisement for wine or Captain Morgan; or forcing stores that sell beer to place all beer behind an enclosure available for view only by those who are old enough to purchase it. The time has come for Virginia to realize the that  misguided policy of forbidding legally approved liquor license holders the ability to advertise legal specials to the public will not change social behavior one iota. Those who abuse such a right will eventually lose their license due to greed and abuse of their responsibilities. The commonwealth cannot be allowed to legislate temperance through the denial of Constitutional rights.