The return of Prohibition

NuckyBY CHUCKS ENEIP

Friday is usually reserved for articles about movies, but late last night Poor Scholars’ own Chucks Eneip sent an exasperated email demanding that this story be posted on Friday. So, we obliged and put it up. Happy Friday! 

It is probably not news to you that today sequestration has begun. It is impossible to turn on news programming without hearing debates on how the 8% across the board spending cuts being implemented, due to Congress’ inability to trim up our spending, will damage the economy and our country as a whole. We will see job losses, federal worker furloughs, damage to our education and health systems, and much more. The debate has focused on these terrible cuts and their impact on the economy, but I truly believe Americans are missing one apocalyptic side to the debate.

Recently, a class-action lawsuit has been filed against Anheuser-Bush for diluting their alcoholic beverages during the brewing process, therefore lowering their alcohol by-volume. Now, I am not one for supporting frivolous lawsuits, and do believe they severely damage research and development, as well as the economy. Sure, there are plenty of cases that are completely just, but filing lawsuits against a company’s harmless practice only serves to drive prices up and keep growth stagnant.

However, when I read that decreased alcohol content was a possibility, I was, to be honest, outraged. When I stroll into my local 7/11 or liquor store and pick up an ice-cold rack of brew before a night out, I expect that drinking 18 beers means drinking 18 beers. I paid for this damn buzz, and you better give it to me. So as you all can imagine, I was shocked to read a former employee quoted in the suit saying, “Adding water to the brewing process cuts the stated alcohol content by 3 to 8 percent.” I said to myself, “there it is, that pesky 8% again!!” In 1919, right in the midst of prohibition politics, the Volstead Act was passed by congress, limiting the amount of alcohol in beverages to less than 1%. This was of course, considered by many to be the beginning of prohibition, which legally began in 1933. Congress began by limiting consumption in beer leading up to this hellish time in American history, and is seems this sequester is a sign that we may be facing prohibition 2.0. The news of Budweiser cutting alcohol percentage of their beer by up to 8% coupled with attempts at lowering alcohol by volume in Maker’s Mark is clearly indicative of the same preemptive plans government agencies are putting into place to meet their 8% cutback obligations. This class-action lawsuit is entirely misdirected towards the Anheuser-Bush company and should be dropped immediately. Our real concern lies with Congress demanding 8% cuts all willy-nilly, and in demanding answers to what these alcohol companies know that we do not. Instead of attacking these companies, we should support them in fighting off these cuts, for now it may be an 8% cut, but soon we may all find ourselves back in 1933…After all, the Republican party is already there.

Advertisements
Tagged ,

One thought on “The return of Prohibition

  1. Chucks, way to connect the dots on this one here. I am going to start stocking up on bricks of Busch Light. I think you are on to something. Genius is how I would describe this.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: