Tom Dalldorf, publisher of the Celebrator Beer News, is launching CBN Evening Brews, a weekly video show reporting on beer news. The format is similar to a television news show, with two anchors — Tom Dalldorf and Alison Cook — who take turns reporting the stories, which are culled from around the world. There’s also video interviews, stills and other material to enhance the stories. Toward the end of the over 15-minute show, Dalldorf does an editorial commentary about the drinking age. A new episode will be up on the Celebrator website each week.

CBN Evening Brews : April 14, 2008 from Celebrator Beer News on Vimeo.

  at   

Vinnie and Natalie Cilurzo, while attending a Slow Food event in Torino in late 2006, befriended Agostino Arioli, who opened one of Italy’s earliest craft breweries. His brewery, Birrificio Italiano, makes a unique beer, La Fleurette, whose varied ingredients include flowers, black pepper and orange blossom honey. Agostino is in California this week for the world Beer Cup and the Craft Brewers Conference which begins next week in San Diego. But yesterday, he was in Santa Rosa visiting his friends at their brewery, Russian River Brewing. The plan was to brew his La Fleurette beer at Russian River, trying to approximate it as best they could using a different brew system. I spent the day documenting the brewing process. There are three galleries and approximately 54 photos of brewing the La Fleurette and the story of the beer, too. Start with gallery one and follow along as I present Brewing La Fleurette at Russian River. At the end of each gallery, there’s a link to the next part of the story, through three separate pages. Enjoy.

Agostino Arioli, from Birrificio Italiano in northern Italy, with Vinnie Cilurzo and Travis Smith, at Russian River Brewing.

The beer included two kinds of dried flowers, violets and roses (shown here).

At the point during the boil where dry-hopping normally occurs, the flowers are added along with orange blossom honey and black pepper.

For many more photos of the La Fleurette brew day at Russian River, start with Part 1.
 

A California state legislator, Jim Beall, Jr. of San Jose, is proposing a bill that will raise the taxes on beer a staggering $1.80 per six-pack or 30-cents a bottle, which amounts to over a 1400% increase! In addition, the tax on draft beer would be an additional $90 per keg, almost doubling their cost. Yeah, that sounds reasonable. This is his first term in the state assembly so perhaps he’s trying to make a name for himself. Any bill of this type needs a two-thirds majority to pass (doubtful at best) and then also, “because it’s a constitutional amendment, it would have to be approved by voters.” I’d be surprised to see voters agree to have the price of beer raised by that much. But even so, it’s worth looking at the propaganda behind Beall’s rationale, as it seems to come directly from the neo-prohibtionist playbook.

Mike Fox Sr., from the San Jose beer distributor M.E. Fox, said “Beall’s heart is in the right place” because he’s “dedicated in areas of health.” That’s far more credit than I’m willing to give him. As Dan Gordon puts it, far more realistically, “[w]e would all be looking for jobs.” Beall is trying to raise money for our beleaguered state which has had serious budget problems for several years, but he’s forgetting that putting the beer industry out of business isn’t going to do the state any favors economically. The California brewing industry in 2007 directly contributed $10,952,775,208 to our economy and another $8,136,322,492 by suppliers plus $5,557,441,516 in induced impact. That’s a total of $24,646,539,216 that beer contributes to our state economy. You can see the breakdowns of these figures at Beer Serves America.

Before I get into the apparent reasons he’s proposing this nonsense, I want to point out that he’s not seeking to raise the tax on wine or spirits, just beer. So it’s hard to swallow his rationale when he says the following, which are taken from a report by NBC Channel 11, in the Bay Area, and also in the Contra Costa Times.

“The fallout from alcohol consumption costs Californians nearly $36 billion a year in increased health costs, crime, lost productivity and injuries from accidents and abuse,” Beall said. “It’s time for the beer industry to help us with the staggering burden it has helped to create.”

Even if I assume that “alcohol consumption” has created this budget problem (and not our politicians who mismanaged it), beer is not all alcohol and should not be the only one punished. And even if I assume beer is culpable, not all beer drinkers are. Most are responsible drinkers who drink in moderation. Why should everyone be punished with higher prices because a few people can’t handle addiction or other associated problems. Those problems may be real, but why should I pay for someone who can’t be responsible if I can manage to be? Punish the people who actually do cause the problem, don’t use a shotgun approach and punish the responsible and irresponsible alike. If we had universal health care like the rest of the civilized world, this wouldn’t even be an issue.

“Beer is the alcohol of choice for under-age drinkers,” Beall said. “Research tells us that kids who begin drinking before they are 15 are more prone to become alcoholics. They are also more susceptible to alcohol-related problems such as vehicle accidents and assaults later in life than people who wait until they are 21 or older to take their first drink.”

It’s the choice of underage drinkers because it’s more available. Beer outsells other alcoholic beverages by at least four to one, in some cases more than that. So it’s more an issue of what’s around more than anything else. Plus, when I was a kid many of my friend’s parents kept their more expensive booze locked up in a liquor cabinet making it much harder to get at, whereas beer was in the refrigerator. I doubt things have changed all that much, suggesting one more reason that beer is easier to find. Then there’s our refusal to educate our youth about alcohol, including the insulting fact that in many places parents are even forbidden to teach their own children about alcohol.

Beall also likens the beer tax to that of cigarettes, which is fairly high, saying. “The people who use alcohol should pay for part of the cost to society, just like we’ve accepted that concept with tobacco.” But not everyone who drinks costs society anything. In fact, the majority of people are moderate drinkers who do so responsibly. Problem drinkers who may exact a cost to society are a small minority of all drinkers. Beyond that, tobacco itself is a danger to a smoker’s health and to those he or she smokes around, it has been proven scientifically to be an unhealthy product. Beer, by contrast, has been shown to have many health benefits and the vast majority of beer drinkers therefore receive health benefits from their moderate alcohol consumption.

Beall said the money would “force those responsible for the problem to pay for it.”

This statement really galls me. I’m not responsible for the problem. Virtually everyone I know, whether in the beer industry or not, isn’t responsible for the problem. I’m no more responsible for another person’s inability to show restraint than a teetotaler. So why should I and all the other responsible drinkers be “forced to pay for it” as Beall so cavalierly says.

Beall claimed the tax could make beer harder for teens to obtain because of higher prices.

Beall’s office cited a National Academy of Science study on under-age drinking that recommended a raise in taxes on beer to curb consumption by teen-agers who, as a group, are highly price-conscious.

Bullshit. I, and every other adult, should have to pay more for beer because law enforcement can’t stop underage drinking? How is that in any way fair? Everyone should pay higher prices on the off chance that minors can’t afford it? That is so far off the deep end of reasonable logic that it’s stunning. I’m price conscious, too, but I guess I don’t count in Beall’s world view.

If he really cared about underage health, or about everyone paying their “fair share” of any damage they cause, then why isn’t he trying to tax McDonald’s, Burger King and the other fast food joints? Why isn’t he trying to raise the tax on Big Macs and Whoppers? They’re making our youth obese and unhealthy, exacting a terrible cost now and in a future where as obese adults, they’ll continue to be a burden on our dysfunctional healthcare system. I could go on and on like this. Soda is unhealthy for kids and adults alike, but schools put soda machines in cafeterias, hallways and even classrooms.

Beer corporations continue to rake in profits. The United States’ largest brewer, Anheuser-Busch, reported a net income of $2.1 billion in 2007, nearly 8 percent above the previous year; Molson Coors reported $507 million in revenue after taxes.

He’s talking here about three, maybe four corporations, only two of which actually brew beer in California. That leaves over 1400 breweries nationwide that are most definitely NOT raking in big profits. But apparently he’s willing to wage war against over 1400 small and medium-size businesses in order to impact three he doesn’t like.

Not to mention that this couldn’t come at a worse time for the brewing industry, when there is a shortage of key ingredients, notably hops and barley, and prices have skyrocketed over the last year. Most breweries already raised their prices around January, some of them significantly. But I’m willing to bet Beall already knows that. Kicking someone when they’re down, that’s a bully’s trick in my opinion.

He never says so, but all of Beall’s tortured arguments smack of anti-alcohol propaganda. Whether he’s somehow tied to the neo-prohibitionists, or merely been influenced by their rhetoric, is unclear. The biography on his campaign website offers no clues beyond his interest in the health care system. To me, all he’s done is show how unreasonable the self-righteous can be. He must really hate beer and the people who make, distribute and sell it, because how else to explain his proposal to put an entire industry out of business.

Last summer, Labatt USA moved its headquarters from Connecticut to Buffalo, New York. The Associated Press is reporting that Labatt USA has now added a buffalo to their beer label to reflect their new business location. “Labatt USA President Glen Walter hand-delivered a case of the newly labeled beer to Mayor Byron Brown Thursday. In exchange, Brown proclaimed Thursday ‘Labatt USA Day.'” I can’t find an image of the new label anywhere, but I’m curious to see what it looks like. Is it a blue buffalo?

We already know that the price of barley has doubled over the least year, but according to a scientist from New Zealand, global warming may keep that situation from getting any better and will continue to hamper efforts to increase the supply of barley to be used in making beer.

From the AP story:

Jim Salinger, a climate scientist at New Zealand’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, said climate change likely will cause a decline in the production of malting barley in parts of New Zealand and Australia. Malting barley is a key ingredient of beer.

Speaking at the Institute of Brewing and Distilling ‘s 30th Asia Pacific Section Convention, Salinger predicted “the price of beer is likely to rise in coming decades because climate change will hamper the production of a key grain needed for the brew — especially in Australia.”

Though Salinger was talking about only his native New Zealand and Australia, it’s not hard to extrapolate that the same climate changes will have similar effects in other parts of the world, too. He finished his talk on this cheery note. “[C]limate change could cause a drop in beer production within 30 years, especially in parts of Australia, as dry areas become drier and water shortages worsen.”

According to a news radio station in Seattle, Washington, KOMO Radio, farmers in the Yakima area have responded to the rising price of hops and are pulling out other crops to plant hop rhizomes this year. From the report:

Growers are feverishly reconditioning yards and adding new land at an unheard-of pace. Growers are receiving multiple-year contracts with prices front-loaded to help them shoulder the estimated $6,000-per-acre cost to plant yards and also upgrade equipment.

I presume the acres mentioned in this report are in addition to the 6,000 of high alphas that was announced in January at the hop growers convention.

Ralph Olson, general manager of grower-owned HopUnion of Yakima, a buyer who deals primarily with smaller craft brewers, thinks the figure may be closer to 8,000 acres by the time all is said and done. That would be a jump of nearly 25 percent in acreage in one year.

That would suggest an additional 2,000 acres, of which hopefully at least some will be aroma hops. There’s been a lot of speculation but no one’s been sure what would happen this year. Now that spring is upon us and it’s time to start planting, it’s looking like more hops are being planted than previously expected. If that trend continues in other places where hops are traditionally grown then that’s very good news indeed.

David J. Hanson, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Sociology of the State University of New York at Potsdam, has been researching alcohol and drinking for over 40 years. He’s also the host of the Alcohol Problems & Solutions website, which is quite remarkable for both it’s scope and size.

Hanson’s goal with the site “is to provide information to stimulate thought and discussion about alcohol issues.” The sheer number of topics tackled is nothing short of amazing, including Alcohol Information, Alcohol Issues, Drinking & Driving, Alcohol & Youth, and Alcohol & Health divided into at least twenty-six sub-categories. I have literally lost hours at a stretch just wandering around and reading what’s there. He has no agenda to push and a result his view is unlike any other around, where neo-prohibitionist and cheerleading websites alike tend to only nakedly take one side. You never feel that way with Hanson’s writing, and as a result he’s much easier to take at face value, even on the occasions when I don’t agree with him.

He’s continually updating the news section to follow what’s being discussed about alcohol policy and politics. And he never shies aware from the controversies that are so much a part of this debate. In addition, there are also resource pages that include collections of articles, readings and other references on Alcohol Advertising, Alcohol in the Diet, Anti-Alcohol Industry, Binge Drinking, Brain & Alcohol, Breast Cancer and Alcohol, Breathalyzer Accuracy, Cancer and Alcohol, Diabetes and Alcohol, Drunken Driving, Deceptive Alcohol “Facts,” Heart Disease, Legal Issues, Longevity and Alcohol, Social Norms Marketing, Underage Drinking, Women’s Health & Alcohol, and Zero Tolerance. Fascinating stuff.

This is my third pick for “Website of the Month,” which I started featuring on the right sidebar two months ago, because I get so many link requests, and because I have so many in my blogroll, I wanted to highlight the best ones I come across.

Sacramento Brewing will be serving up their Spring Brewmaster’s Dinner on April 23, beginning at 6:30. The dinner will be five courses and the cost is $50. It will be held at their Town & Country location. Call 916.485.4677 for reservations. I’ll probably see you there.

The Menu:

Dinner: 6:30 PM

First Course

Fresh wild Alaskan ivory salmon with spicy pecan butter

Beer: India Pale Ale

Second Course:

Robollita (Italian bean soup)

Beer: Nut Brown Ale

Third Course:

Arugula & spinach salad with sun dried tomatoes, dry salami, and baby mozzarella

Beer: Hefeweizen

Fourth Course:

Seared breast of duck with mushroom cannelloni and golden marsala sauce

Beer: Red Horse Ale

Fifth Course:

Beer poached pear strudel served with Brussels Blonde reduction sauce

Beer: Brussels Blonde

Peter Hoey, brewmaster at Sacramento Brewing (on left), at the GABF Brewer’s Reception last year, along with Rich Norgrove from Bear Republic and Arne Johnson of Marin Brewing.

 
4.23

Sacramento Spring Brewmaster’s Dinner

Sacramento Brewing Co., Town and Country Village, 2713 El Paseo Lane, Sacramento, California
916.485.4677 [ website ]
 

Last year I did an annotated list of the Top 50 so I could see who moved up and down, who was new to the list and who dropped off. Four breweries dropped off the list and there are three new ones who weren’t on last year’s list. The reason that math doesn’t work out is because last year the combined breweries of Gambrinus were listed together but this year they were separated again, with two of them making the top fifty. So here is this year’s list again annotated with how they changed compared to last year.
 

1. Anheuser-Busch; #1 last year, no surprises
2. Miller Brewing; ditto for #2
3. Coors Brewing; And #3, too
4. Pabst Brewing; And #4, too
5. Boston Beer Co.; Second year at #5, having moved up 2 spots the previous year
6. D. G. Yuengling and Son; Same as last year
7. Sierra Nevada Brewing; Same as last year
8. New Belgium Brewing; Up 1 spot from #9 last year
9. High Falls Brewing; Up 1 spot from #10 last year
10. Spoetzl Brewery; Split off from Gambrinus, which last year was #8
11. Widmer Brothers Brewing; Same as last year, after shooting up 6 spots the previous year
12. Redhook Ale Brewery; Same as last year
13. Pyramid Breweries; Up 1 spot from #14 last year, having moved up 6 spots the previous year
14. Matt Brewing; Up 2 spots from #16 last year
15. Minhas Craft Brewery; Same as last year
16. Deschutes Brewery; Up 1 from #17 last year
17. Iron City Brewing (fka Pittsburgh Brewing); Down 4 from two years at #13, just coming out of bankruptcy
18. Boulevard Brewing; Same as last year
19. Full Sail Brewing; Up 2 from #21 last year
20. Harpoon Brewery; Same as last year
21. Alaskan Brewing; Down from #19 last year
22. Magic Hat Brewing; Up 2 from #24
23. Anchor Brewing; Down 1 from #22
24. Bell’s Brewery; Up 2 from #26 last year, after moving up 9 the previous year
25. Goose Island Beer; Up 6 from #31, the second year in a row they’ve moved up 6
26. August Schell Brewing; Up 2 from #28
27. Shipyard Brewing; Up 2 from #29
28. Summit Brewing; Down 1 from #27
29. Mendocino Brewing; Up 1 from #30
30. Abita Brewing; Up 2 from #32
31. Gordon Biersch Brewing; Down 6 from #25
32. Brooklyn Brewery; Up 2 from #34
33. Stone Brewing; Up 4 from #37, after moving up 11 the previous year
34. Rogue Ales; Up 2 from #36
35. Long Trail Brewing; Down 2 from #33
36. New Glarus Brewing; Down 1 from #35, after jumping 10 spots the previous years
37. Kona Brewing; Down 14 from #23
38. Dogfish Head Craft Brewery; Up 4 from #42
39. Firestone Walker Brewing; Up 1 from #40, after rising 7 the previous year
40. Great Lakes Brewing; Up 1 from #41
41. Lagunitas Brewing; Up 3 from #44
42. Flying Dog Brewery; Up 3 from #45
43. Sweetwater Brewing; Up 3 from #46
44. BridgePort Brewing; Split off from Gambrinus, which last year was #8
45. Rock Bottom Brewery Restaurants; Down 6 from #39
46. Gluek Brewing (now known as Cold Spring Brewery); Not in the Top 50 last year
47. Straub Brewery; Down 4 from #43
48. Odell Brewing; Down 1 from #47
49. BJs Restaurant & Brewery; Not in the Top 50 last year
50. Victory Brewing; Not in the Top 50 last year

The following breweries dropped off the list, meaning they were on the 2006 list but are not on the 2007 list of the Top 50 breweries.
 

• Stevens Point Brewery
• Mac and Jack’s Brewery
• Big Sky Brewing
• Otter Creek Brewing
• Gambrinus; Last year the combined totals of their breweries, Spoetzl Brewery, BridgePort Brewing, Pete’s Wicked, and Trumer Brauerei were #8; this year they were considered separately

At 12:01 a.m., 75 years ago, beer became legal for the first time in thirteen years, but in only 19 states. Though it would be eight more months until Prohibition officially ended (on December 5), President Franklin D. Roosevelt kept his first campaign promise by encouraging Congress to modify the Volstead Act and they passed the Cullen-Harrison bill, which FDR signed into law on March 23. The bill allowed the sale and manufacture of low-alcohol beer (3.2% alcohol by weight/4.0% by volume), along with light wines, too. For brewers, it represented a return to brewing and those that had remained opening making non-alcoholic products quickly retooled. Those that had been shuttered for over a decade had a harder time re-opening, but some did manage it. Ultimately Prohibition did irreparable harm the industry as a whole and less than half of America’s breweries did not survive.

The Brewers Association this year cleverly called the celebration “75 Years of Beer” since this year is the 75th anniversary of 3.2 beer being legalized in 19 states. But that won’t work next year, because “76 Years of Beer” just doesn’t have the same ring to it. From their press release:

Historians note that Prohibition officially ended on December 5, 1933, with the ratification of the 21st Amendment. But earlier that year, newly-elected President Franklin D. Roosevelt took steps to fulfill his campaign promise to end the national ban on alcohol. He spurred Congress to modify the Volstead Act to allow the sale of 3.2 percent beer in advance of the Twenty-first Amendment being ratified. Thus on April 7, 1933, Roosevelt himself received newly legalized beer at the White House to toast what was the beginning of the end for Prohibition. In the 24-hours that followed, more than 1.5 million gallons of beer flowed as Americans celebrated.

“April 7th is a day to recognize the past 75 years of beer and the beer community’s contribution to American’s quality of life. The explosion of creativity and innovation by those who make beer is an American success story,” said Charlie Papazian, President of the Brewers Association.

“As we celebrate this significant day in the history of beer, we also recognize the incredible contributions beer has made to our nation and the economy over the last 75 years,” added Jeff Becker, President of the Beer Institute. “Today, our industry contributes nearly $190 billion annually to the U.S. economy and provides more than 1.7 million jobs to our nation’s workforce.”

“April 7th is the perfect time to highlight the entrepreneurial spirit and economic contributions America’s beer industry brings to our country. Americans now have access to nearly 13,000 labels of beer — within the safest alcohol distribution system in the world — because of the state-based regulatory system that was established 75 years ago,” added Craig Purser, president of the National Beer Wholesalers Association (NBWA).

See, that’s a lot of angles that have little to do with repeal or the specific history of the event but which capture the spirit of the celebration, namely a holiday talking about beer’s virtues.

Another historian that I greatly admire, Maureen Ogle (author of Ambitious Brew: The Story of American Beer) tells the true story of the events surrounding April 7 in an op-ed piece in the L.A. Times.

She writes:

Today, we look back on Prohibition as an exercise in temporary insanity, but the 13-year experiment in sobriety was rooted in our quintessentially American faith that we can perfect the world. A broad cross section of people — men and women, urban and rural, young and old — supported the ban on alcohol because they believed that it would reduce crime, alleviate poverty, strengthen the family and nurture a more perfect union.

That lofty vision collapsed under the weight of reality. Prohibition spawned an underground economy devoted to making, shipping and selling booze. The officials trying to enforce it earned more from bribes, kickbacks and the resale of confiscated alcohol than from their meager salaries. The poison of such corruption permeated daily life. It undermined respect for the Prohibition amendment and, by extension, for the Constitution itself. Worse, Americans realized that in banning the production of alcoholic beverages, one of the nation’s largest and most heavily taxed industries, they had closed the spigot on a significant source of both jobs and revenue.

Maureen also has a number short stories having to do with April 7, 1933 on her blog that are worth reading.

Bob Skilnik also sent out his own press release in an effort to make sure the right story is told.

April 7th is Not the 75th Anniversary of the End of National Prohibition

“What was was once a trite beer history canard has become an outright lie,” says beer historian Bob Skilnik. “I can only hope that the apparent rewriting of U.S. brewing history is either an innocent result of poor research and not a shameful display of industry greed, just for the sake of a bump in beer sales.”

Bob Skilnik, author of “Beer & Food: An American History” (ISBN 0977808610, Jefferson Press, Hardcover, $24.95), argues that industry embellishments and poor research have distorted the true date of Repeal on December 5, 1933, which signified the revocation of the 18th Amendment and the enactment of the 21st Amendment and brought back the manufacture and sale of all alcoholic beverages.

“Congressional events leading up to April 7, 1933 allowed only the resumption of sales for legal beer with an alcoholic strength of no more than 3.2% alcohol by volume (abv), weak by today’s standards. Congress had earlier passed the so-called Cullen-Harrison Bill which redefined what constituted a legally ‘intoxicating’ beverage. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the bill on March 23, 1933. The bill’s passage took the teeth out of the bite of the Volstead Act of 1919 and raised the Prohibition-era legal limit of alcoholic drinks from .05% abv to 3.2% abv.”

“Bringing breweries back online on April 7, 1933 in states whose legislatures agreed to go ‘wet’ again gave a tremendous shot in the arm of an economy in the throes of the Depression. In just forty-eight hours, $25,000,000 had been pumped into various beer-related trades as diverse as bottling manufacturers to the sawdust wholesalers whose product lay strewn on the floors of saloons. For the first day of nationwide beer sales, it was estimated that the federal tax for beer brought in $7,500,000 to the United States Treasury.”

In the next few months, scores of states held constitutional conventions which led to the passage and enactment of the 21st Amendment, the first time a constitutional amendment had nullified another. It also gave municipal, state and federal governments the time to sort out the taxation and regulation of the entire drink trade, a legacy that continues.

On December 5, 1933, the true end of National Prohibition became a reality when Utah signed on to the Repeal amendment, satisfying the requirement of needing at least 36 states for the enactment of the 21st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

I certainly admire his tenacity in trying to set and keep the record straight. As a history buff myself, I’m keenly aware that a lot of our history that we take for granted is simply wrong, for a variety of reasons. It’s quite remarkable to contemplate, but much of what was in our history textbooks is simply not correct, not exaggerations or off a little, but completely fabricated or with most of the facts incorrect. I think I’ve mentioned this before, but James W. Loewen’s Lies My Teacher Told Me is a fascinating study on just how wrong is so much of what we were taught in school.

But I’m also a calendar geek (I guess we need a new word for that, too — perhaps holiday head or time bandit?) and the way holidays come about has almost nothing to with reality or the truth of when the events that are being celebrated took place. Christmas is the classic example, with their being no actual certainty when Jesus’ birthday was, and I’ve read accounts placing it in the spring, as well as other times of the year, too. Thanksgiving, if it ever really took place at all, was not when we celebrate it. The Declaration of Independence was actually adopted on July 2, and both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson believed that would be the date we celebrated American independence. It took two more days of making changes to the document which was then ratified with the modifications on the fourth. The rest is, well, history. You get the idea.

But there’s no law or ethic or whatever preventing a group of people from celebrating whatever they want whenever they want. What’s tricky is merely reaching a tipping point where enough other people agree to recognize the date as well. Mother’s Day, for example, is a relatively modern invention, with our version of it originating just after the Civil War, even though its roots are ancient. But different countries celebrate it on very different days. The actual date doesn’t really matter in the end nearly as much as the spirit of what is being celebrated. If we keep alive the notion that prohibition was a failed experiment that exacted a terrible cost on our nation, that legislating morality is a bad idea and you can’t really stop people from doing something that they find pleasurable, then who among us should be bothered by whether it’s remembered on April 7 or December 5? I realize the difference here is that we know with historic certainty that repeal did not take place on April 7, so we should definitely avoid calling it Repeal Day; that honor should go to December 5. But I see no reason not to also celebrate on April 7. With the neo-prohibitionists nipping at our heels once more with the vigor of a junkyard dog, setting aside two days each year to remind our critics that Prohibition will not work and celebrate how much beer enriches our lives, our economy and our society in positive ways seems like a good idea to me. Since it is the day that beer once more legally flowed after thirteen years, we can justifiably called it “The Return of Beer Day” or “3.2 Beer Day” or “Back to Beer Day” or even “New Beer’s Eve” as it was originally known.

To learn more about the history of Prohibition, here are some interesting links:

• Alcohol Prohibition Was A Failure, Policy Analysis from the Cato Institute
• Alcohol, Temperance & Prohibition, from Brown University
• April 7 is NOT the 74th Anniversary of the End of National Prohibition 2008, by Bob Skilnik.
• April 7 is NOT the 74th Anniversary of the End of National Prohibition 2007, by Bob Skilnik, with an excerpt from his wonderful book Beer & Food.
• Prohibition: A Lesson in the Futility (and Danger) of Prohibiting, from the book Ain’t Nobody’s Business If You Do
• Schaffer Library of Drug Policy History of Alcohol Prohibition
• Temperance & Prohibition History, from Ohio State
• The Day Beer Flowed Again, by Maureen Ogle
• Thinkquest’s Prohibition — The “Noble Experiment”
• Wikipedia