Alcohol

"I'm Not Trying to Stop Anybody from Doing Anything"

|

Don't you wish your governor was named Butch Otter?

Who knew? They make liquor in Idaho. Right now, it's illegal for distilleries to offer tastings in the Potato State. A bill to legalize the tastings gained some traction, but then died in committee on Monday under a hail of Mothers Against Drunk Driving-style talking points:

Rep. Lynn Luker, R-Boise, asked [Rep. Jim Clark, R-Hayden Lake] if there are any studies on "how many people drive an automobile to these booze boutiques." Clark said no, but that most people likely do; he stressed, however, that the same drunk driving laws apply regardless of the bill.

Clark also told the committee that people likely wouldn't swallow most of the alcohol they sample; he said at both wine and spirits tastings, "you taste it, you get the sense of it on the lips, then you spit it out."

But Rep. Ken Andrus, R-Lava Hot Springs, asked, "How are you going to stop 'em from swallowing it if it's in their mouth?"

"I'm not trying to stop anybody from doing anything," Clark responded.

And that's sort of the crux of the thing, isn't it?

And these days, no discussion of any bill, ever, anywhere in America is complete without this stock line:

"HB 393 is a small-business jobs bill," Clark told the House State Affairs Committee. "The big emphasis here should be jobs—this is a jobs bill."

NEXT: Who Doesn't Trust Science Now?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. A law that could require spitting instead of swallowing?

    Hell has come to Idaho.

    1. Spitters are quitters.

  2. The nanny state needs to die a quick painful death.

    1. Good luck. That ain’t happening anytime soon.

      1. I will make it happen.

  3. How about, “this is a liberty” bill?

  4. But this can’t be, as SIV and other right-leaning libertarians often tell us the GOP is more libertarian friendly and Idaho has large GOP majorities in both houses and a “libertarian” GOP governor in Butch Otter. Additionally we all know MADD is a liberal Democratic organization (the same posters say this often), so this simply, simply cannot be.

    1. This can’t be. You normally address comments that have actually been made. Always, even. Yet here you answer nonexistent arguments. This simply, simply cannot be.

      /snark

    2. Butch Otter is not a Libertarian in any sense of the word, he’s just another NeoCon.

  5. Instead of spending time, energy, and resources on lobbying and publicity, wouldn’t MADD’s cause be better served by them pushing for the development and distribution of instant sobriety pills?

    1. Moral scolds hate technical fixes.

      1. See, also, e-cigarettes.

    2. Only if you think MADD’s cause is stopping drunk driving. At this point MADD looks a lot more like a prohibition movement than a drunk driving prevention movement.

      1. The founder of MADD agrees with you. She accomplished her goals with the organization. Drunk driving is no longer a joking matter, there are serious consequences for doing it. Problem solved. No need to continue on.

  6. PL, the story just can’t be true. The libertarian-GOP in Idaho would never let this happen. And we all know a liberal nanny group like MADD would have no clout in such a red state. Just close your eyes to the story, it can’t be true.

    1. You said this already, you gibbering fuckwit.

    2. Dude, you’re smarter than this. At least I thought so.

      1. He came to pick a fight. The GW thread has obliged.

        MNG should feel more ashamed that Tony is on his side.

    3. Seriously, what the fuck are you going on about? You are not this fucking stupid, but recently you seem to be trying pretty hard to convince people here that you are. Very few here have much more regard for Republicans than Democrats.

  7. “HB 393 is a small-business jobs bill,” Clark told the House State Affairs Committee. “The big emphasis here should be jobs?this is a jobs bill.”

    Hmmm. My take –
    HB 393 is a small-business jobs freedom bill. The big emphasis here should be jobs liberty?this is a jobs mind your own goddam business bill.

    1. I see Nick beat me to it.
      Crap!

  8. Who knew? They make liquor in Idaho.

    Point of fact, my favorite vodka is made in Rigby, Idaho.

  9. Do they not have bars in Idaho? I wonder if there are any studies on how many people drive vehicles to THOSE booze boutiques?

    1. And what is a “Booze Boutique” anyway? In my experience the usual name for such places is “liquor store”.

  10. “HB 393 is a small-business jobs bill,” Clark told the House State Affairs Committee. “The big emphasis here should be jobs?this is a jobs bill.”

    You know what I secretly wish for? I wish that the American public would finally acknowledge the indisputable fact that no politician in this Earthly realm has had, has or will ever have the power to “create jobs” without actually starting a business of their own. Holy fuck, that would be awesome times ten.

  11. This is the fascist mentality that feminizing our country has brought to us.

    1. Go eat a bag of dicks.

      1. Unfortunately, it would seem that there nowhere near as many female libertarians as male. Those that exist, such as yourself, are to be commended (as are all who embrace the don’t fuck with me, and I won’t fuck with you school of thought). The fact is, women’s suffrage coincided with the growth of government. While I am well aware that correlation does not equal causation, it doesn’t mean it should be discounted out of hand.

        http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op…..12707.html
        “Even after accounting for a range of other factors ? such as industrialization, urbanization, education and income ? the impact of granting of women’s suffrage on per-capita state government expenditures and revenue was startling. Per capita state government spending after accounting for inflation had been flat or falling during the 10 years before women began voting. But state governments started expanding the first year after women voted and continued growing until within 11 years real per capita spending had more than doubled. The increase in government spending and revenue started immediately after women started voting.”

        There is a great deal more, and that link is just an editorial based upon his own research. The methods used to determine and account for the other factors are addressed in the paper itself, but I could not find a free link to post. Understand that I am in no way advocating removal of a woman’s right to vote. Even if I thought it would help (it wouldn’t), I would never suggest anything that removes a person’s rights based upon anything except a demonstrated desire to remove those of others. I am merely saying that, unpalatable as the thought may be, there is evidence to support the theory. I welcome criticism on this subject, as I am sure that there is evidence somewhere to help refute this conclusion. Unfortunately this is an issue where most people immediately jump to personal attacks.

  12. MADD’s arguments are stupid, but so is Jim Clark’s assertion that most people won’t actually swallow the booze. Yes, professional tasters (and some serious amateurs) may take advantage of the spit bucket, but I’m guessing they make up a VERY small percentage of the people who will stop by these distilleries for samples. Leave it to politicians to end up arguing something completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

    1. And with spirits you really need to swallow to get the full flavor of the finish.

      1. Where a typical pour at a winery’s tasting bar is 1 – 2 oz, a typical sample at a craft distillery is about 1 – 2 ml, less than 10% as much. AFAIK, too, very few of the current smaller craft distilleries such as we’re thankfully seeing in the northwest have more than 3 products to sample, anyway – and not all of them have tasting rooms.

        Dry Fly, in Spokane, is in a unique position, in that the front 5 feet or so of their facility (one side of the yellow line on the floor) is a tasting room, and the rest is a bonded warehouse. So, the door’s locked and, unless you’re there for a filling party (which they hav at least twice a week), you have to stay in the front.

  13. “I’m Not Trying to Stop Anybody from Doing Anything”

    This person is obviously unqualified for the position he occupies.

  14. We also have the obligatory text banning while driving law working it’s way through the so called conservative Idaho statehouse. WTF

  15. But Rep. Ken Andrus, R-Lava Hot Springs, asked, “How are you going to stop ’em from swallowing it if it’s in their mouth?”

    I asked your wife that exact same thing.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.