Creative Loafing reports this morning that the Brick Store Pub, along with the Porter Beer Bar, are making sizable contributions this year to help the Georgia Craft Brewer’s Guild get the “Beer Jobs Bill” passed during the January Legislative session. Here’s a snippet…
Decatur’s Brick Store Pub feels the same way. In fact, Brick Store co-founder Dave Blanchard tells Creative Loafing that BSP is going to donate $3,000 to the Georgia Craft Brewers Guild. The funds come from a handful of private fundraising events held at BSP in recent years.
“We feel a responsibility to continue to push and be industry leaders in all bettering of beer,” Blanchard says. “Whether it’s trying to promote an obscure brand we are excited about or pushing for better beer laws.”
…Blanchard says the Beer Jobs Bill is the most important piece of beer legislation since that landmark ABV bill in 2004. Aside from increasing revenue for Georgia businesses, he says it will attract breweries from other states, and above all, elevate Georgia’s beer culture.
What’s the goal of the so-called “Beer Jobs Bill”? The GA Beer Jobs website explains…
The Beer Jobs Bill will allow consumers to purchase a pint at a brewery and take beer home from breweries and brewpubs – these changes will help drive jobs, tourism, and economic growth that will allow our state to be more competitive in the national craft beer marketplace. And it will do this in a way that allows our breweries, distributors, and retailers to all benefit from the economic growth it will unleash.
As the map to the right – from the beer jobs website – shows, Georgia is one of only 4 states where breweries can’t sell beer on the premises. Other states where direct brew sales are illegal? North Dakota, Mississippi and West Virginia.
Photo courtesy of the Brick Store Pub website
“These changes will help drive jobs, tourism, and economic growth that will allow our state to be more competitive in the national craft beer marketplace.”
All that is probably true, but there’s a much more fundamental reason to change the law: the government has no business banning these kinds of voluntary transactions in the first place. The burden should be with the government to show a compelling reason for each and every law, not on the people to demonstrate the benefit of repeal.
You got that right. Unfortunately, I believe we are too far gone for such a mentality.
Alcohol laws have always been a source for weird and arbitrary restrictions. But I think that on this front, at least, things are far better overall than they were before.
Weird, yes. Arbitrary? Sort of. Many of the alcohol laws make a lot more sense when you think of them in terms of protectionism, whether of distributors or some other interest group. The laws are then justified on the basis of some pretext of public safety. In that regard, alcohol laws are hardly alone.
No disagreement with that for lots of the laws, although some laws don’t fit the pattern as far as I can tell. (Like Pennsylvania’s about not being able to buy 6 packs of beer at beer distributors, or even 12 packs. At least a case for you! Maybe bars benefit a bit from that one.)
Don’t get me started on Pennsylvania liquor laws. You need to go to different stores for beer vs liquor and wine. You can’t buy beer in the grocery store but you can buy it to-go at the bar. But only 2 six-packs at a time. If you want three six-packs, you need to pay for two, take them outside and then go back inside to purchase the third. And if you buy liquor in NJ because it’s cheaper there, you need to take a detour before heading home because it’s illegal to transport the stuff into the state and PA cops will actually stake out stores close to the border and pull cars over as soon as they cross the state line. Grrrrrrrrrr.
If folks are interested in the mother of all alcohol laws, prohibition, go read Last Call by Daniel Okrent.
Interesting history of the build up to prohibition, the enforcement (or mostly the lack thereof) and what put an end to it…
When was this photo taken? TBS hasn’t been that empty since 10:58 AM, Sunday, June 16, 1998.
June 16, 1998 was a Tuesday. Duh.
-1
No Number Wang for not getting the Ulysses reference.
-94 for you then, which is how many years you were off. Also June 16, 1904 was a Thursday.
Yes. I don’t look at calendars past and I’m not a savant.
I was there one day for lunch during Snowpacalypse 2014 and it looked like that 🙂 I don’t recall which day or week.
Yes! This would eliminate the third pillar of restrictive beer laws in this state (high gravity and Sunday sales were the first two).
One and a half to be more accurate. It still irks me that I can’t buy beer or wine when I am grocery shopping on Sunday morning. There is no justification for the 12:30 requirement other than too many in our legislature (and their constituents) believe I am supposed to be in church on Sunday morning.
+1. Some of the other laws might have different rationales, but this is transparently an imposition by the government of religious belief (specifically Christian) on its citizens.
It doesn’t make sense in terms of Christian influence. Does someone really wake up on Sunday morning and say “I want a beer. Oh, whoops, I can’t buy one now so I guess I’ll go to church while I’m waiting for the 12:30 PM prohibition to end”? My guess is that one original motivation was the need for small business owners and their staff to have Sunday mornings off. If only a few businesses close, then you lose customers to the competition. If everyone is closed, it’s an even playing field. But it was billed as a law necessary for the morals of the community, similar to laws regarding contraception, sodomy, infidelity.
“My guess is that one original motivation was the need for small business owners and their staff to have Sunday mornings off. ”
Why not Saturday’s? Or Mondays?
It makes perfect sense in terms of Christian influence. Many denominations, especially in the South, condemn drinking. And since churches collectively didn’t have the ability to re-enact prohibition, they took what they could get and made sure no-one (except for those who plan ahead) could drink on the “lord’s day”.
Besides, why not Tuesday morning?
I agree with the “taking what they could get” argument. Some of the ordinances supported by religious groups are obviously illogical and would have no practical effect, but for the supporters it’s about not ceding ground to secularization.
Re why not Saturday or Tuesday mornings: because small business owners and staff wanted to go to church or be with their families Sunday mornings when everyone else was off. Being off Tuesday morning isn’t the same thing. But I agree that the “get what you can” motivation was there too. Some of it was the social climate of the time. When I saw the “Imitation Game”, I was shocked to remember that it wasn’t that long ago that one could be arrested merely for homosexuality.
When you say “small business owners”, what are we talking about here, liquor stores? I can’t buy that the purpose was to allow liquor store owners and staff to not have to compete with grocery stores and be off on Sunday mornings. Remember, we are talking about a law that was recently changed to allow Sunday sales, but delayed them till after church ( I mention this because of your reference to the “climate of the times”).
As for the point about “The Imitation Game”, the series “Masters of Sex”, set in the 50s, brings up such issues even more pointedly (for example, shock treatment was used to “cure” homosexuality). Also, it makes clear how little influence women had in the medical field, including over their own treatment.
Maybe saying “do we really want to be in the same company as Mississippi, West Virginia, and North Dakota?” might convince more legislators …
You betcha.
“Maybe saying “do we really want to be in the same company as Mississippi, West Virginia, and North Dakota?” might convince more legislators …”
I don’t know…apparently the Governor has a bigger problem with being like Colorado.
politics.blog.ajc.com/2015/01/14/here-are-nathan-deals-top-priorities-for-the-year/
There’s also a petition you can (should!) sign to support this bill: http://gabeerjobs.com/