Loko Legislatures
Bans against alcohol energy drinks have picked up steam, and it looks like the legislatures are trying "one-up" each other in their prohibitions. Consider Iowa: "The caffeinated frenzy has also spread to Iowa (House File 25 and Senate File 1) where caffeine in liquor, wine and beer is banned, including cocktails. No more Kahlua, black Russians, rum and coke and specialty craft beer like coffee or cocoa brews." Link. The whole thing strikes me as a frenzied over-reaction. People have been drinking Red Bull and vodka for years; they've been drinking run and Coke for decades. There's nothing to stop me from drinking a pint of vodka, then popping a caffeine pill. Oh well. I guess it show that there's no problem that a legislator doesn't believe he can overcome, no matter how absurd his belief. In fact, I suspect the belief is a pre-requisite for climbing the political ladder. * * * * * * * Festivals. I'm running across more and more sites that provide listings for beer-drinking events. As I surf upon them, I'll try to pass them along here. For festivals in the Beltway area during the next couple of weeks, go here. For Midwest Beer Festivals 2011, go here. I would love to make it to the festival in Ypsilanti: I got engaged in Ypsilanti, it's Joe Sobran's home town, and I hear the festival is great. If my schedule allows, I'll stumble over (well, drive over and stumble back). * * * * * * * Beer Taxes Too Low? Man, where have I been? I'd never even heard of the Marin Institute until I read about their apparent neo-Prohibitionist beliefs in this article: Marin Institute Attacks State Beer Taxes ”¦ Again. The article reproduces a generous excerpt from a Marin Institute press release. The gist of the release: beer taxes are too low. The Marin Institute says it's because of brewers' lobbying power ("Big Beer"). Funny thing is, it singles out Wyoming:
The worst state is Wyoming, which has the distinction of the lowest tax rate ”“ $0.02 per gallon ”“ set in 1935, during FDR's first term. Factoring for inflation, the value of Wyoming's beer tax has decreased 94%. A simple 5 cents per drink increase in the state's beer tax would yield $7.75 million in new revenue. Considering that Wyoming's annual budget shortfalls are projected to hit $5 million by 2013, a modest beer tax increase would erase all budget shortfalls in the state, reduce drinking, and increase health and safety a little.
Wyoming? It also doesn't have an income tax. That must be a result of lobbying by . . . I'm not sure. As one adroit reader pointed out here a few weeks ago, Wyoming doesn't need much ordinary tax revenue because of its oil production. And last I checked, Anheuser-Busch and Miller aren't headquartered in Wyoming. And Wyoming is sparsely populated. Why would "Big Beer" focus its efforts there? I'd never heard of the Marin Institute. I don't think I need to hear of them again.
