Survey Shows Americans Continue to Support State Alcohol Regulation, Want Policymakers to Put Health and Safety First

“The results of this survey speak loud and clear: Americans are happy with the current alcohol regulatory structure and believe states should continue setting their own laws. The public understands that alcohol is not like other products and should be regulated differently,” said Kelly Roberson, Executive Director of the Center for Alcohol Policy. “Americans also want policymakers to put public health and safety first and are concerned that loosening alcohol restrictions could make problems worse. As lawmakers and regulators consider any changes to alcohol laws, I encourage them to listen to the broader American public and work to support this time-tested, wildly effective system.”

Key findings of this year’s survey include:

• 83% of Americans support state regulation of alcohol, regardless of demographic
• 85% are satisfied with current alcohol regulations and local laws
• Americans want alcohol laws to prioritize health and safety above all
• 4 in 5 Americans agree the three-tier system well serves consumers and the marketplace

These results are consistent with previous surveys, demonstrating the American public’s longstanding support for the current alcohol regulatory structure.

The survey was conducted by New Bridge Strategy, completing 1,004 online interviews with adults aged 21 and older throughout the United States. Interviews were drawn from online panels; the sample was drawn proportionally throughout the country and is demographically representative of the adult population in this age group. The confidence interval associated with this sample is +/- 3.5% at the 95% confidence level; due to rounding, not all totals will sum to 100%. The Center for Alcohol Policy looks forward to continuing to be a resource to educate policymakers, regulators, and the public about alcohol’s unique role in the marketplace and its regulation.

Recently, the Center hosted an insightful webinar on how alcohol regulatory agencies can modernize their software systems to achieve greater efficiency, transparency, and accountability.

In 2018, the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission (NLCC) took a major step forward by securing funding to replace its outdated 20-year-old software. The result? Significant operational improvements that benefited both regulators and licensees, as well as the public.

Since launching its new system in May 2024, Nebraska has achieved:

• 20% reduction in staffing costs
• 75% faster license application processing
• 137% increase in completed premise inspections
• 82% more Direct-to-Consumer reports and payments logged

If you missed the live session, don’t worry! You can rewatch the full webinar and access the materials below to learn from Nebraska’s success and explore how technological innovations can streamline regulatory operations and improve business practices for licensees and regulators alike.

Thank you to everyone who joined us live, and be sure to check out the recording!

Just like every other alcohol policy enthusiast worth their wort, the Center for Alcohol Policy has December 5^th circled on its calendar: Repeal Day.

Although the month of December has a few contenders for top-dog holidays, policy wonks agree that this unassuming date is certainly cause for consideration and celebration.

Festivities and federalism, if you will.

December 5^th marks the ratification of the 21st Amendment in 1933, which ended Prohibition and restored America’s legal right to consume alcohol. But there is more to this milestone than just the clink of glasses. At its heart lies a fascinating exercise in federalism, courtesy of Section 2 of the 21st Amendment, which gave states the authority to regulate alcohol in ways that reflected the will of their citizens.

A Toast to History

The story begins, of course, with the 18th Amendment, ratified in 1919, which prohibited “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors.” While initially touted as a moral triumph, Prohibition quickly turned into a national headache. Organized crime thrived, illegal speakeasies flourished, and the public’s thirst for alcohol proved insatiable.

Fast forward to 1933, and Americans largely agreed this noble experiment of temperance must come to an end. Enter the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition, making it the only constitutional amendment in U.S. history to nullify a previous one. The repeal was not only about (legally) popping bottles so much as it was about giving local jurisdictions more control over the regulation of alcohol in their states.

This is where Section 2 comes in, adding a layer of nuance to the victory.

The Fine Print of Section 2

While the first section of the 21st Amendment typically gets all the glory for ending Prohibition, Section 2 quietly lays the groundwork for a uniquely American regulatory approach:

“The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.”

This was not just about cracking open a cold one—it was about empowering states to reflect their communities’ values. As the Supreme Court has noted, “The Twenty-first Amendment grants the States virtually complete control over whether to permit importation or sale of liquor and how to structure the liquor distribution system.”  California Retail Liquor Dealers Assn. v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc., 445 U.S. 97 (1980)

Democracy in Action

Since 1933, states have taken Section 2 and run with it, resulting in a kaleidoscope of alcohol laws across the nation.

• Utah, the state whose decision to ratify the 21^st Amendment made it official, employs a control model for their system of alcohol regulation.
• Louisiana, in contrast, utilizes a license model that also allows for drive-thru daiquiri shops in some parts of the state, while other jurisdictions have chosen to remain dry.
• Some counties in states like Texas and Kentucky remain dry, prohibiting alcohol sales entirely.
• Others have carved out nuanced exceptions. In Indiana, for instance, you cannot purchase cold beer at grocery stores, but a trip to the liquor store solves that problem.

While to some, these differences might seem chaotic, they are a testament to local democracy in action. Residents vote on what they want for their communities and the laws reflect that choice. Due to constitutional design, there are 50 different state markets for alcohol.

Why Repeal Day Still Matters

Repeal Day is not just a celebration of the return of legal consumption; it is a celebration of compromise. The 21st Amendment did not simply erase Prohibition and return to pre-18th Amendment norms (or ills!). Instead, it embraced a middle ground, acknowledging that one-size-fits-all policies rarely work in a country as diverse as the United States.

Moreover, Section 2 reminds us that federalism is more than a buzzword. It is a living, breathing principle that allows states to be laboratories of democracy. Whether you are sipping wine in Napa Valley, enjoying a bourbon in Kentucky, or savoring a craft beer in Burlington, your drink is a reflection of local values and regulations shaped by each states’ citizens.

Perhaps it is a direct result of this local authority that Americans are overwhelmingly content with their current regulatory structures in their states. Look no further than the Center’s 2023 National Alcohol Regulation Survey to shed further light on the issue:

• 84% of Americans are satisfied with the existing system of purchasing alcohol in their state
• Nearly 90% of respondents are pleased with the product mix available to them
• More than 8 in 10 Americans agree that alcohol is different from other products and as a result should be regulated differently

Remember, no other consumer good has two constitutional amendments about it – a solid indication that alcohol is not like tinfoil or toilet paper.

A Toast to Today

This December 5^th, raise your glass to Repeal Day and celebrate not just the end of Prohibition but the ingenious compromise that gave states the freedom to chart their own course.

Cheers!

Pardon? Swilling the who with what??

In the late 18^th century, and throughout the 19^th, it was common convention in U.S. elections to provide alcohol in exchange for votes, although this practice dates back much further including to ancient Greece and Rome. Even George Washington got wise to the tradition after losing his 1755 bid for the Virginia legislative assembly and coming back bigger (and boozier?) two years later. By doling out 144 gallons of beer, rum, hard cider and punch (the aforementioned bumbo), the American Fabius floated into the state house with 307 votes – enough to secure victory and equating to roughly .5 gallons of alcohol per vote.

Consider the planters effectively swilled, and the bumbo eagerly guzzled.

Stuffing bellies to stuff the ballot box grew into hosting gargantuan barbecues in the latter half of the 19^th century. And while campaign booze budgets grew, so also did the number of saloons. One estimate places Peak Saloon in 1900 at 300,000 locations, or 18 for every Starbucks location in the U.S. today.

Talk about outlet density.

While the reputation of saloons of the day is about as clean as the water was, in the very least, they served as a forum for the exchange of ideas and political Festivus. As a result, political parties regularly set up shop there as a ground game tactic to engage would-be voters.

Not only could ideas be debated, but ballots cast as saloons often served as polling places alongside fire stations, livery stables and warehouses. By the late 1800s in New York, it was estimated that nine out of ten polling places in immigrant neighborhoods were in saloons.

While levity and jolliness may have been the calling card of early colonial Election Day revelry, a more sinister atmosphere materialized in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries including voter intimidation, bribery, fraud and cooping.

With the ratification of the 18^th Amendment and the enactment of Prohibition, bar tabs covered by candidates officially fell by the wayside alongside liquor-funded ballots. An entirely different meaning of the term “wet voter.”

Following the repeal of Prohibition, many states continued a ban on the sale of alcohol on Election Day until the polls closed. In 2014, South Carolina became the last state to repeal this statewide ban. While similar laws exist in Massachusetts and Alaska, local governments are allowed to permit sales should they so choose.

Alcohol’s history with Election Days-past is a great reminder of the dynamic role it has played in the history of American policy as well. So this Election Day, if you’re so inclined, watch the results from the polls while enjoying your favorite libation. Just remember not to try to influence anyone’s vote with the promise of a swig.

Indianapolis, IN – The Center for Alcohol Policy is pleased to announce it has awarded Matthew Botting, General Counsel of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, with its 2024 Leadership in Alcohol Regulation Award.

The Center announced the award, which recognizes a specific program, agency or person who oversees the alcohol industry and promotes public health and safety, at the 17^th Annual Alcohol Law and Policy Conference.  

“The Center is proud to present this award to Matthew Botting for providing leadership within the alcohol industry,” said Kelly Roberson, Executive Director of the Center for Alcohol Policy. “Matthew is a true public servant who is known as a leader not only in California but nationally as well. His steadfast commitment to promoting public health and safety through thoughtful, steadfast and fair enforcement of alcohol regulation has served this industry and the people of California well throughout his tenure. He has been a sounding board and mentor to many over his years of service – helping old and new regulators alike navigate the ins and outs of alcohol policy.”

Botting has served as General Counsel of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (CA DABC) since 2008, but his state government legal experience dates back more than 30 years. He was president of the National Conference of State Liquor Administrators from 2016-2017 and has represented the CA DABC at the Conference for years. 

“Matthew never shies away from tackling hard issues. He doesn’t dodge or delay hard decisions,” added Roberson. “His professionalism and fairness are hallmarks of his tenure. And Matthew is always willing to come to the table for a rational discussion with a foundation of even-handed alcohol regulation and a respect for public health and safety.”

Your state alcohol regulators and agencies work diligently to protect public health and ensure the safety of consumers. The Center for Alcohol Policy is proud to offer an opportunity to recognize these agencies and people for the work that they do. 

Now is your time to honor this work. Nominations are now open for the 12th Annual Leadership in Alcohol Regulation Award, which will be presented at the Center’s 2024 Alcohol Law and Policy Conference in Indianapolis.

The award recognizes the work of alcohol regulators across the country who oversee the alcohol industry and promote public health and safety. Any governmental agency or its employees working to promote and enforce alcohol laws and regulations are eligible for the award. Potential nominees include programs that have achieved positive results or individuals within an agency going above and beyond the call of duty. 

The Center for Alcohol Policy recently released a whitepaper that revisits a 2013 report of the same name highlighting the importance of funding for alcohol regulatory agencies to accomplish their respective missions.

Written by former Michigan Liquor Control Commissioner and former Michigan House of Representatives Floor Leader Pat Gagliardi in collaboration with J.T. Griffin of Griffin Strategies and former Chief Government Affairs Officer of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, this updated report analyzes the publicly available funding levels of state agencies, the number of alcohol agents in states across the country, their increasing workload and scope of responsibilities as well as the record number of licensees enforcement agents must monitor.

“Our report highlights how state alcohol regulators are tasked with the complex job of managing public safety and health issues that result from alcohol sales,” said J.T. Griffin, when asked about the report.

“It is critical that these agencies are fully staffed and funded in order to protect the public,” Pat Gagliardi added. “Over the past 90 years, state regulators have kept communities reasonably safe from the potential harmful effects of alcohol. This article urges leaders to continue to recognize the value of investing in and maintaining the alcohol regulatory structure.”

A decade on from the publishing of “The Need for State Alcohol Regulatory Funding: Fighting Deregulation by Defunding,” this update highlights that many of the same issues remain and observes that a growing national population and increase in alcohol licenses has often outpaced any increases in budgets.

Center for Alcohol Policy Advisory Council member Jerry Oliver said of the report, “Regulators need adequate funding in order to properly carry out their public health, safety and competition functions. Today’s report shows there is much work yet to be done to give state agencies the tools needed to properly and effectively regulate this growing and diverse marketplace.”  

The Center for Alcohol Policy is pleased to announce that Patrick Glen has been named the winner of its 15^th annual writing competition. Glen is also an Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center.

The national writing competition is intended to foster debate, analysis, and examination of alcohol policy in the 21st Century. This past year’s topic served as a nod to the 90^th anniversary of the 21^st Amendment and asked respondents to reflect on the impact of this amendment over the course of the last century.

“90 years ago, this nation undertook a raw exercise of political power only done 26 other times in our country’s 235 year constitutional history. The 21st Amendment was passed in 1933 and it performed two critically important actions. First, it repealed National Prohibition caused by the 18th Amendment. Second, the 21st Amendment put regulation of alcohol primarily in the control of the states.

Fast forward 90 years and reflect, does the 21st Amendment work? Has it achieved what it set out to do: provide for an orderly marketplace, prevent abuse of the product, and protect public health and safety?”

Glen’s winning submission “Distilling Purpose: Revisionist History and the Supreme Court’s Shifting Interpretation of the Twenty-First Amendment” provides an in-depth analysis of the 21^st Amendment’s relationship to the Dormant Commerce Clause, delving into the history of the amendment, legal challenges and the implications for state law.

“History, context, and precedent establish the purpose of the Twenty-First Amendment: to enact a rule of constitutional authority permitting State regulation of alcohol unfettered by the dormant Commerce Clause.  This purpose, consistently recognized and applied for fifty years following the Amendment’s ratification, has been abrogated by the contemporary Supreme Court, which has instead reinjected the Commerce-Clause limitations the Amendment was meant to nullify back into the analysis of state law.  So long as the Supreme Court hews to this erroneous path, it will be impossible for the Twenty-First Amendment to fulfill its true purpose,” writes Glen.

Second Place: Joseph Ojih

Joseph Ojih, Adjunct Professor at Baltimore City Community College and Morgan State University, placed second with their essay “The 21^st Amendment: Reflections 90 Years Later.” Ojih’s submission explores the positive impacts on public health and safety offered by the 21^st Amendment as well as the creation of orderly marketplaces for alcohol.

In reflecting on the legacy of the 21^st Amendment, Ojih writes, “[a] critical aspect of the end of Prohibition was the empowerment of individual states with autonomy in alcohol regulation… Thus, the post-Prohibition era in the United States saw the establishment of a system where alcohol could be consumed in a manner that was both safe and responsible, reflecting a balance between individual freedoms and public welfare.”

Dr. Ojih holds a Ph.D. in Finance and has taught business statistics and finance for more than a decade.

Third Place: Ben Sheppard

Receiving third place for their essay, “The Ghosts of Prohibition: Considering whether the 21^st Amendment has fulfilled critical policy objectives,” Ben Sheppard, an associate attorney with Norris McLaughlin in Allentown, PA takes a contrary view from Ojih and Glen positing that while the 21^st Amendment, in collaboration with the Federal Tax and Trade Bureau, has created safer products, a fragmented marketplace makes it challenging to do business in the alcohol sector.

Sheppard highlights the important role the TTB plays “in regulating alcoholic beverages is not just about maintaining legal and safety standards; it is also about fostering trust and transparency in an industry that directly impacts public health.”

Sheppard is a graduate from George Washington University Law School and the University of Pittsburgh.

Registration for the Center for Alcohol Policy’s 17th Annual Alcohol Law and Policy Conference is officially open! The 2024 ALPC will be held Monday, August 26 – Wednesday, August 28, 2024 in Indianapolis, IN at the Hyatt Regency Indianapolis.

As one of the most valuable conferences on the calendar – and one of the very few with open registration – the Center is proud to offer everyone a seat at the table. From public health and safety advocates to regulators, industry members to legislators – all are welcome, and all are invited to attend our annual flagship conference!

The Center for Alcohol policy was pleased to host this webinar where our panelists led a fascinating conversation about the global history of Prohibition and the 21st Amendment!

90 years ago on December 5, 1933, the 21st Amendment was ratified by the states repealing the 18th Amendment and giving way to the creation of our current state-based alcohol regulatory scheme.

This succinct amendment ended the nationwide prohibition of alcohol and gave states the authority to regulate alcohol how their citizens best see fit.

We marked the anniversary of passage of the 21st Amendment with a conversation between Mark Lawrence Schrad Ph.D., author of Smashing the Liquor Machine and Professor of Political Science at Villanova University and Brannon Denning, Center for Alcohol Policy Advisor and Associate Dean and Professor of Law at Samford University’s Cumberland School of Law.

This webinar explored the unique nature of alcohol regulation in the United States and beyond, Prohibition, the 21st Amendment and as well as some of the issues and debates surrounding its consideration and ratification.

These professors discussed Professor Schrad’s fascinating book as well as another book that, like the 21st Amendment, is celebrating its 90th Anniversary, Toward Liquor Control.

We are now accepting entries for the 2023 National Writing Competition!

This national academic event is intended to foster debate, analysis, and examination of state alcohol regulation in the 21st Century. Each year, students and professionals are encouraged to participate in this significant effort to bring attention to state alcohol regulation, its complexities and many successes. Up to three winners will be selected, and 1st – 3rd place recipients have a chance to win $5,000, $2,500, or $1,000 respectively.

Philadelphia, PA – The Center for Alcohol Policy is pleased to announce it is awarding Frederick “Ted” Mahony, Chief Investigator of the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, with its 2023 Leadership in Alcohol Regulation Award.

The Center announced the award, which recognizes a specific program, agency or person who oversees the alcohol industry and promotes public health and safety, at the 16^th Annual Alcohol Law and Policy Conference.  

“The Center is proud to present this award to Ted Mahony for providing leadership within the alcohol industry,” said Kelly Roberson, Executive Director of the Center for Alcohol Policy. “Ted is a true public servant who is known as a leader not only in Massachusetts but nationally as well. His development of special enforcement programs continue to be a primer for the industry on methodology to protect public safety and maintain an orderly marketplace.”

Chief Mahony has served as Chief of Investigations and Enforcement with the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission since 2001. He was named the National Liquor Law Enforcement Association (NLLEA) Agent of the Year for his leadership in ensuring effective liquor law in Massachusetts in 2004 and four years later, the ABCC was recognized as the NLLEA Agency of the Year under his guidance. Ted has dedicated recent years at the commission to addressing both unlicensed interstate and licensed direct-to-consumer alcohol shipments to Massachusetts consumers. 

“Ted never shies away from a difficult task and leans into the hard work by bringing cases with a wide industry impact,” added Roberson. “His dogged determination serves as an example to regulators around the country as to how to strike a balance between public health and safety and responsible growth of the industry.”

8/30/2023

We are pleased to announce that the Honorable Kathy Jennings will keynote the Center’s 16^th Annual Alcohol Law and Policy Conference taking place in Philadelphia, August 28-30, 2023. 

About Attorney General Jennings

A Wilmington native – General Jennings has spent her career working on behalf of the people of Delaware. As the state’s chief legal and law enforcement officer, Jennings demonstrates a focused commitment to “making Delaware a safer place to live and raise our children, making the justice system fair and equal for everyone, and combating the opioid epidemic.”

During her tenure, General Jennings has put her priorities into action, fighting to end mandatory life sentences for drug crimes and restore driving privileges for people with drug convictions to enable them to work. She also helped form the Crime Strategies Unit to closely engage with communities hardest hit by violent crime. Attorney General Jennings’ work experience shows the benefits of state-based policy, and we’re excited to hear more about the critical role this plays in the alcohol industry.

Prior to serving as Delaware’s 46th Attorney General:

• Prosecutor for the Delaware Department of Justice 
• Delaware State Prosecutor
• Chief Deputy Attorney General for the Delaware Department of Justice under Attorney General Charles Oberly
• Assisted in creating the Consumer Fraud Division
• Worked in private practice
• Chief Administrative Officer of New Castle County, Delaware

Americans Support State Based Alcohol Regulation and See Public Health and Safety as Priorities for Legislators

The Center for Alcohol Policy’s 2023 survey on public sentiment toward alcohol regulation in the U.S. found that attitudes among adult Americans remain the same: the long-standing alcohol regulatory system in the U.S. works, and people like it. There is overwhelming consensus throughout the nation that alcohol is a product that needs to be regulated. This includes similar numbers of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents showing that strong, state-based regulation of alcohol is one of the few issues that Americans of all affiliations agree on.

“Every other year the Center commissions a national survey that takes the temperature of Americans and their opinions regarding a wide variety of topics related to alcohol and its regulation. There are some questions that have been asked for over a decade and others specific to current industry trends. The survey results show that Americans are satisfied with the current alcohol regulatory structure and want to see public health and safety prioritized above all” said Kelly Roberson, Executive Director of the Center for Alcohol Policy.

Consensus is Clear: Americans Support State Based Alcohol Regulation and See Public Health and Safety as Priorities for Legislators

Alexandria, VA. – According to a recently released national poll commissioned by the Center for Alcohol Policy, Americans across the political spectrum continue to be satisfied with the state regulation of alcohol. This includes clear and overwhelming satisfaction with the current alcohol regulatory system. Public health and safety also continue to be the top priority when considering any future changes to the alcohol system.

“This year’s survey, as in past years, highlights the consistent sentiment across the nation that responsible alcohol regulation ought to be a priority for policymakers” said Pam Erickson, founder of Healthy Alcohol Marketplace and former executive director of the Oregon Liquor Control Commission. Pam is also a member of the Center for Alcohol Policy’s Advisory Council. “It is my hope that lawmakers and regulators will heed the call of Americans around the nation to prioritize public health and safety over the short-sighted pursuit of increased dollars. Alcohol, as we know, is no ordinary commodity and should be treated accordingly by policymakers and the public alike.”

Key findings include:

• Solid support exists across party lines for state regulation of alcohol
• Americans are satisfied with current alcohol regulations
• Americans want alcohol laws to prioritize safety
• The three-tier system is viewed as working well by Americans

The survey was conducted by New Bridge Strategy, completing 1001 online interviews with adults aged 21 and older throughout the United States. Interviews were drawn from online panels, and the sample was drawn proportionally throughout the country and is demographically representative of the adult population in this age group. The confidence interval associated with this sample is +/- 3.5% at the 95% confidence level; due to rounding, not all totals will sum to 100%.

 The Center for Alcohol Policy looks forward to continuing to be a resource to educate policymakers, regulators, and the public about alcohol, its uniqueness and its regulation.­­­­­

The room block is officially open for the 16th Annual Alcohol Law and Policy Conference in Philadelphia, PA. The Center is excited to hold our conference at the historic Bellevue Hotel, which is located just steps from City Hall and boasts gorgeous views in the heart of Philadelphia’s Center City.

The Center for Alcohol Policy is pleased to announce that Nathan Sabo, a Medina, Ohio based Research Team Leader, has been named the winner of its 14th Annual Writing Competition.

Sabo graduated from Baldwin University with a Bachelor of Science in Biology, and later pursued a Master of Science in Environmental, Occupational, Health, and Safety from the University of Findlay – all while serving in the Ohio Army National Guard. He now leads a team of technicians to perform study protocol driven functions such as test material administration, blood draws, and data collection. He is also attending courses through Full Sail University for a Bachelor of Science in Video Game Design.

The national writing competition is intended to foster debate, analysis, and examination of alcohol policy in the 21^st Century. Last year’s topic addressed the growing ubiquity of alcohol and whether there is a regulatory need to address this potentially concerning trend.

“After Prohibition, states generally issued licenses for on-premise and off-premise sale of alcohol.  Drinking was thus largely confined to bars, restaurants, the home, and private clubs.  Alcohol is now regularly offered in places like salons, grocery stores, clothing stores, and galleries.  Is this trend towards ubiquitous availability of alcohol a good one?  And is there a new regulatory regime needed to address this trend?“

Sabo’s winning essay, “The Ubiquitous Availability of Alcohol: Freedom Isn’t Free” provides an in-depth analysis on how health and safety should be at the forefront when considering alcohol regulation and availability. Sabo brings in data from various peer reviewed sources, for a concise and thorough discussion on the widespread use of alcohol, finding that many current regimental policies work as intended, but need further enforcement in the name of public health.

“Overall, the more ubiquitous alcohol becomes, the more it increases the density of alcohol outlets, increases consumption of alcohol, and increases alcohol-related problems,” writes Sabo.

Registration for the Center for Alcohol Policy’s 16th Annual Alcohol Law and Policy Conference is officially open! The 2023 ALPC will be held Monday, August 28 – Wednesday, August 30, 2023 in Philadelphia, PA at the Bellevue Hotel.

As one of the most valuable conferences on the calendar – and one of the very few with open registration – the Center is proud to offer everyone a seat at the table. From public health and safety advocates to regulators, industry members to legislators – all are welcome, and all are invited to attend our annual flagship conference!

16th Annual Alcohol Law & Policy Conference

Today the Center for Alcohol Policy released a new whitepaper outlining the battle over taxation in the alcohol industry. The report was commissioned by the Center and authored by Patrick Maroney, President of Maroney Consulting Services, LLC and former Director of the Colorado Department of Revenue’s Liquor Enforcement Division.

“The practice of conducting background checks on liquor license application is a must in order to ensure an orderly and safe marketplace.  Keeping unscrupulous actors out of the alcohol industry is an important role of government entities tasked with regulating alcohol production, distribution and sales,” said report author Patrick Maroney.

Maroney’s report provides an overview of the origin of alcohol taxation, and its primary intent of regulating consumption in addition to funding government entities. Citing Toward Liquor Control, Maroney explores the benefits of different levels of taxation for different alcohol products, striking a balance between availability and overconsumption.

After a historical review of the benefits of targeted alcohol tax regimes, Maroney outlines how in modern times, alcohol excise taxes are falling. He finds it critical that legislators and regulators understand the history of alcohol laws, regulations, and taxation toward the goal of public health and safety, but also recognize there is no silver bullet.

“Even prior to Prohibition, there has been a strong understanding of the need to regulate different types of alcohol differently – including how each product is taxed,” said Brannon Denning, Advisory Council for the Center for Alcohol Policy. Denning is also an Associate Professor of Law at Samford University’s Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama. “Taxes represent an important aspect of alcohol regulation, one where there is an understanding that the stronger the beverage there ought to be a corresponding increase in its regulation. However, taxation alone will not solve the public health and safety concerns of the nation and policymakers must utilize a broader chest of regulatory tools to accomplish those goals.”