The Number one Source & Authority on Bartending, On Premise and Beyond!
Bartending |
Recipes |
Advertise with us! |
Shop |
© Bartender.com
Source: AP
Dec 16, 2009 – 3:41:18 PM
A proposed North Dakota ballot measure would raise the state tax on wine, beer and liquor. The tax collections would be reserved for spending on alcohol education and prevention.
Duane Peterson of Gwinner submitted the measure to Secretary of State Al Jaeger on Wednesday. Jaeger has until Christmas Eve to review the proposal and draft a short explanation of what it does. The secretary of state cannot change the measure’s wording.
Once Jaeger’s review is completed, supporters of the tax increase may begin gathering signatures to put it on North Dakota’s statewide ballot. They need to get signatures from almost 13,000 North Dakota voters
WASHINGTON, D.C. – At an important briefing yesterday at the National Press Club, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism showcased an informative, free consumer booklet to encourage responsible drinking decisions during the holiday season and beyond.
The brochure underscores that “Drinking can be beneficial or harmful, depending on your age and health status, the situation, and, of course, how much you drink.”
Based on the latest research, the booklet provides answers to commonly asked questions about alcohol including:
· What counts as a drink?
· How many drinks are in common containers?
· What is “low-risk” versus “heavy” or “at-risk” drinking?
· What are symptoms of an alcohol use disorder?
Through informative and clear graphics, the brochure illustrates important alcohol education facts such as “standard drinks,” which underscores that a standard drink of beer (12 oz. regular beer), wine (5 oz.), and spirits (1.5 oz. of 80-proof spirits) each contains the same amount of alcohol.
“Understanding the facts of standard drinks is a critical aspect of responsible drinking,” said Peter Cressy, President of the Distilled Spirits Council. “This substantive brochure provides scientific facts and tools to make responsible drinking decisions. Moderation and responsible decision making is not only relevant during the holiday season when family and friends are gathering, but also year round.”
The second part of the booklet, “Thinking about change?” offers tips, tools and resources for people who want to moderate their drinking or abstain.
To receive a copy of the booklet, consumers should go to: http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/RethinkingDrinking/Rethinking_Drinking.pdf
Source: Journal Sentinel
By Patrick Marley
Oct 29th
For all coverage in the Wasted in Wisconsin series visit our special section. Madison – An effort to strengthen the state’s drunken driving law will not include an increase in the liquor tax.
Instead, state senators will look to raising the fee for suspended and revoked driver’s licenses to help pay for the tougher laws, said Sen. Jim Sullivan (D-Wauwatosa), the lead Senate sponsor of the bill.
Leaders in the Senate and Assembly have not agreed on a final package, but senators have removed the biggest hurdle to a deal by dropping the liquor tax.
Democrats control both houses. They have made reforming drunken driving laws a top priority but have differed over the liquor tax.
The bill would make some fourth drunken driving offenses felonies and require more ignition interlock devices.
Sullivan said new estimates show the bill will cost about half as much as previously believed. That gives lawmakers a chance to drop the liquor tax increase, he said.
Assembly leaders welcomed the breakthrough.
“Now that they’re off the tax increase, I think we can work with them,” said Rep. Tony Staskunas (D-West Allis), lead Assembly sponsor of the measure.
“I think we’re moving in the same direction,” said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Madison), co-chairman of the Joint Finance Committee.
The committee had planned to take up the bill Wednesday, but had to drop it because of the disagreement over the liquor tax.
Now, the committee plans to take up the bill Tuesday. That would give the two houses a chance to pass the measure by Thursday, the last day they are scheduled to be on the floor this year.
The Assembly unanimously passed a bill in September to toughen drunken-driving laws. A Senate committee earlier this month passed a similar bill and added the liquor tax to it.
A recent cost estimate said the tougher laws would cost $36.5 million to $73.7 million a year, but Sullivan said a new estimate shows a range of about half that amount. Sullivan said the new estimate is lower because it recognizes the deterrent effect of requiring more ignition interlocks – Breathalyzer-like devices that allow vehicles to start only if drivers show they don’t have alcohol in their systems.
Sullivan has not fully refined his proposal and has not yet determined whether the increased fee would be for reinstating all suspended and revoked licenses or for just those of drunken drivers. Now, it costs $60 to reinstate a license.
Senate aides said they were considering a range of increases to make sure they generated enough money to pay for the drunken driving bill.
Move criticized
Joe Volk, executive director of the Milwaukee anti-poverty group Community Advocates, said a fee increase on suspended and revoked licenses would unfairly hit the poor. “This is just one more obstacle, more piling on, to poor people,” Volk said.
Sullivan’s plan would also raise an existing penalty on offenders from $20 to $163. That increase was part of an earlier version of the bill.
The bill would:
. Make a fourth offense a felony if it occurs within five years of the previous offense. Now, drunken driving isn’t a felony until the fifth offense.
. Require ignition interlocks for all repeat drunken drivers and for first-time offenders with blood-alcohol levels of 0.15 or greater – nearly twice the legal limit for driving.
. Make a first-offense drunken driving a misdemeanor if a child younger than 16 is in the vehicle. Wisconsin is the only state to treat first offenses as traffic tickets, rather than crimes. The provision wouldn’t affect punishments for those with two or more offenses if they were caught driving with a child in the vehicle.
. Expand statewide a Winnebago County program that gives judges the option of offering reduced jail time to offenders who complete alcohol or drug treatment. Backers say it saves money while reducing recidivism.
The version of the bill the Senate Judiciary Committee approved two weeks ago would have raised the tax on hard liquor 58%, from 85.86 cents per liter to almost $1.36. It would have raised $25 million a year
Cognac Training Toolkit Now Available Online
The Bureau National Interprofessionnel du Cognac (BNIC) has launched a new trilingual training website:
www.conference.cognac.fr. The site, featured in English, French and German, is aimed at wine and spirits professionals, trainers, educators, journalists and anyone wanting to know more about Cognac, anywhere in the world.
Introductory Level One (VS), for beginners
Intermediate Level Two (VSOP), aimed at those who need a deeper knowledge of Cognac for work or pleasure
Advanced Level Three (XO), aimed at professionals, journalists and students in advanced courses.
The site comes complete with internet links, giving access the latest figures on Cognac. There is also an extensive (copyright-free) picture and video library.
As the BNIC’s Director of Marketing and Communication, Jérôme Durand, explains, “One of the most important roles of the BNIC is to inform. Training professionals and educating the consumer is essential today. We are delighted to have a real multi-lingual, multi-level toolkit now available on-line, which can enable people all over the world (95% of Cognac is exported) to understand the cultural background, complexity and richness of Cognac.”
Lawmaker says time is right for raising rates on alcoholic beverages
Source: The New Mexican
By Steve Terrell
11/3/2009
When lawmakers return to Santa Fe in January to consider ways to cover the state’s budget deficit, one likely target is raising taxes on alcoholic beverages.
During the recent special session, two lawmakers – Rep. Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, and Sen. Bernadette Sanchez, D-Albquerque – introduced bills that would have raised the state’s excise tax on beer, wine and distilled spirits. Neither bill received serious debate because of Gov. Bill Richardson’s proclamation precluding tax-increase legislation during the short special session.
But with all financial bills fair game in the regular 30-day session – and the budget crisis continuing – Egolf said Tuesday that he’ll introduce his “dime-a-drink” tax hike again next year, along with legislation to raise cigarette taxes and motor-vehicle registration fees.
The last time legislators seriously considered raising taxes on alcohol, during a special session in 2003, the liquor industry fought hard – and won. At the end of that session, Richardson, who had supported a liquor tax hike, declared, “If the liquor industry thinks they’ve beaten Bill Richardson, they’re wrong.” But Richardson never raised the issue again.
Egolf believes the idea’s time has come. He points to a poll – commissioned last month by the New Mexico Education Partners, which includes teachers unions and other professional educator organizations – that shows 70 percent of the 400 registered voters surveyed supported increasing taxes on tobacco and alcohol products to increase revenues for public schools. In that poll, which has a margin of error of 4.9 percent, only 27 percent opposed the idea of increasing what are sometimes referred to as “sin taxes.”
Egolf said his bill would raise the rates on the various types of alcoholic beverages by an amount that would boost the price of a single serving by about 10 cents. This, he said, would generate between $43 million and $50 million in new revenue for the state.
But the liquor industry argues that such an increase would hurt business.
“In a recession, it’s a bad idea to raise any tax,” longtime liquor lobbyist Ed Mahr told a reporter Tuesday. “Things are tough out there for businesses. The excise taxes here are too big already.”
Mahr pointed out that New Mexico has some of the highest excise taxes in the country.
Both the excise tax on beer (41 cents per gallon) and wine ($1.70 per gallon for most wines) are among the top 10 highest such state taxes, according to a study published this year by The Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan tax-research group. The state excise tax on distilled spirits ($6.06 per gallon) is the 17th highest such levy in the nation.
In 2003, when the Legislature was considering a tax increase on alcohol, a national liquor industry group called the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States launched a campaign of radio ads saying the proposed tax increase would seriously hurt New Mexico hotels and restaurants and the people who work there. The group still maintains this would be the case.
Council spokesman Ben Jenkins, in a phone interview Tuesday, called the alcoholic beverage excise tax “the hospitality tax.”
“Any increase is going to have an effect on your hospitality industry and your tourism industry,” Jenkins said. He pointed out that the industry has suffered in the state. According to the latest report from the state Department of Workforce Solutions, the hospitality and leisure industry lost 1,300 jobs between September 2008 and September 2009.
But Egolf disputed the contention that his tax increase would hurt the hospitality industry. “That’s crazy,” he said. “If you are going out with your friends to have three or four beers – with a designated driver, of course – you’re not going to stay home just because it’s going to cost you an extra 40 cents.”
Jenkins said he didn’t know whether his organization would run radio ads in New Mexico next year to fight a tax increase.
But one thing bound to continue is the liquor industry giving campaign contributions to legislators and other state officials.
Last year, according to the National Institute on Money in State Government, the alcoholic beverage industry dropped $109,926 on state politicians. Of that, more than $39,000 went to state Senate candidates, while more than $42,000 went to House candidates.
In the last gubernatorial race in 2006, liquor manufacturers and distributors contributed $57,425 to Richardson and $14,378 to Lt. Gov. Diane Denish. J.R. Damron, a Republican gubernatorial candidate, received $500.
Richardson’s rhetoric against the liquor industry might have cost him though. In 2002, when he first ran for governor, he had received more than $152,000 from liquor interests.
Marin Institute Reports on Alcohol Revenue and State Budgets in Crisis
SAN RAFAEL, Calif., Nov. 17 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Marin Institute, the alcohol industry watchdog, released a report today analyzing the successes and failures of states that proposed bills to raise alcohol taxes during the 2009 legislative session.
Twenty-five states introduced bills in 2009 to increase alcohol revenue, 14 of the measures were defeated thanks in large part to industry lobbying, leaving an estimated $2.6 billion dollars on the table. Moreover, because most alcohol taxes are not adjusted for inflation, U.S. state and federal treasuries lost an estimated $5.87 billion in real beer tax revenue alone in 2008.
“Not since the Great Depression have states been so challenged economically,” stated Michele Simon, research and policy director at Marin Institute. “And yet by caving to Big Alcohol lobbying pressure, legislators are foregoing valuable revenue and contributing to the gap between the cost of alcohol-related harm and our ability to pay for it.”
Alcohol tax revenue has been a reliable and popular source of income for states, especially when the money is allocated to treatment or prevention programs, which makes sense considering that taxpayers generally pay the tab for alcohol-related harm (e.g. police and healthcare costs). However, due to intense industry lobbying, state and federal governments remain hesitant to keep alcohol tax rates up to date. “The growing gap between the decrease in the real value of alcohol taxes and prices and the costs of the negative consequences of drinking is a ticking time bomb,” Simon stated.
Six states: Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and North Carolina, passed bills and will be seeing an estimated $340 million dollars in new revenue. Ten states still have alcohol revenue legislation pending, including California. There, Assembly Bill 1019 could raise $1.44 billion to establish the Alcohol-Related Services Program, which would help mitigate the estimated $38.4 billion in annual alcohol-related harm in the golden state.
“Marin Institute recommends that policymakers and advocates revisit alcohol tax rates in their states and consider introducing new “charge for harm” legislation that would allocate revenue to programs and services to help reduce underage and excessive drinking and various types of alcohol-related harm,” added Simon. “States should index tax rates to inflation, so the real value does not decrease over time, and make the tax increases permanent.”
To download the entire report, In the Red, Alcohol Revenue and State Budgets in Crisis please visit MarinInstitute.org.
Contact: Michael Scippa 415-548-0492
Jorge Castillo 213-840-3336
Yes, it’s beer! But, it’s for dogs.
Here’s how to order:
1-866-499-5548
Non-alcoholic and non-carbonated, our Happy Tail Ale is the ultimate liquid refreshment for your best friend. Our beer is made in a real brewery and starts with artesian water and choice malted barley. Brewed in 500-gallon copper kettles, Happy Tail Ale also features all-natural beef drippings (no by-products or chemicals!). Plus, it’s fortified with Glucosamine and Vitamin E! Every ingredient in Happy Tail Ale is human grade, as Dog Star Brewing Company does not believe in giving our canine family members less than superior food and beverages.
Sure, there are lots of ways you show your dog you love him: Taking him for a walk, giving him a belly rub, tossing him a few treats…but how about a beer? Of course, you can’t give him the same beer you grab from the fridge when YOU want a treat! Alcohol, hops and carbonation are bad for dogs. But what about giving him a drink that not only tastes good, but is healthy as well?
Your dog will love our Happy Tail Ale, cold from the fridge and in a flavor he loves!
The Distilled Spirits Council is joining with dozens of national, state and local organizations in supporting the Federal Trade Commission’s “We Don’t Serve Teens” 2009 Fall campaign to help get the word out that serving alcohol to teens is unsafe, illegal and irresponsible.
“Research shows that not only are parents and other adults the primary influence over a teen’s decision regarding drinking but they are also a primary source of alcohol for teens — whether they know it or not,” said DISCUS President Peter H. Cressy. “As the school year begins, this campaign provides an important reminder to parents and other adults that serving alcohol to teens is unsafe, illegal, and irresponsible.”
The “We Don’t Serve Teens” education campaign is based on research showing that most teens who drink obtain alcohol from social sources — including sneaking alcohol from their parents’ homes; having older friends buy it; or obtaining it at parties. The campaign website, www.dontserveteens.com, provides information about teen drinking, how to reduce teens’ access to alcohol, practical tips for parents on talking to teens about alcohol and camera ready campaign materials.
The “We Don’t Serve Teens” nationwide campaign has been supported by a diverse group of public and private partners, including America’s leading distillers, federal, state, and local governments, advertising and media organizations, and consumer groups.
Since its inception, the “We Don’t Serve Teens” Back-to-School campaign has generated an unprecedented 1.1 billion advertising impressions with a market value of over $9 million, and has been recognized by the U.S. Senate and officials from 40 states.
“The ‘We Don’t Serve Teens’ campaign has been hailed as one of the most successful public service campaigns in history. These types of public-private partnerships are truly making a positive impact in the fight against underage drinking,” said Cressy noting that the latest Federal data from the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health released yesterday shows a continued steady decline in underage drinking.
According to the survey, past month drinking among youth 12 to 17 years old dropped from 15.9% in 2007 to 14.6% in 2008; binge drinking was down from 9.7% in 2007 to 8.8% in 2008; and heavy drinking was down from 2.3% in 2007 to 2.0% in 2008. In addition, the most recent Monitoring The Future study found a continued decline in youth reporting that it is “fairly easy” or “very easy” to get alcohol.
Organizations supporting the campaign include the Distilled Spirits Council, U.S. Department of Treasury’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, American Beverage Licensees, Beer Institute, National Alcohol Beverage Control Association, National Association of Broadcasters, National Conference of State Liquor Administrators, National Consumer League, National Organizations for Youth Safety, Students Against Destructive Decisions, The Century Council, and Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of America
MADD’s Opposition to Beers at the White House Exposes Group’s Anti-Alcohol Sentiment
Washington — Today, the American Beverage Institute (ABI) criticized Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) for publicly lamenting that President Obama chose to hold a “Beer Summit” in an effort to cool tensions between the gentlemen involved in the recent police incident in Cambridge.
“MADD is no longer an organization that opposes drunk driving, but an anti-alcohol group that has been hijacked by the modern day temperance movement,” said Sarah Longwell, ABI Managing Director. “That someone in a position of leadership at MADD would criticize President Obama for simply drinking beer, illustrates the neoprohibitionist mentality that now dominates the group.”
Last week, President Obama met with the men involved in the Cambridge police incident in an attempt to diffuse the situation. Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, and Cambridge police Sergeant James Crowley enjoyed cold beers while working out their differences. But in an interview this weekend, the President of the Delaware chapter of MADD, Nancy Raynor, expressed concern that the event could send the wrong message to young people who saw the president drinking on TV.
“MADD’s position on the ‘Beer Summit’ should remind Americans that the group once dedicated to preventing drunk driving has transitioned into leading the anti-alcohol movement,” said Longwell. “MADD has even been denounced by its founder Candy Lightner as ‘very neo-prohibitionist.’”
MADD is now focused on preventing any alcohol consumption prior to driving through its support for polices like sobriety checkpoints, which serve to scare drivers who may have enjoyed one drink prior to driving home. Recently, MADD went so far as to denounce New Jersey’s Flying Fish Brewery for naming its beers after turnpike exits, claiming that the brewery was promoting drunk driving.
MADD even wants to put alcohol-sensors in the cars of all Americans. The federal government is already funding the development of such technology and MADD has asked for $30 million more from Congress to go toward the project (learn more at www.InterlockFacts.com). The director of that project has admitted that the alcohol sensors would be set below the legal limit, representing the end to moderate, responsible consumption of alcohol prior to driving.
“MADD should return to its original mission of stopping drunk driving,” said Longwell. “The more time and resources the group spends pushing an anti-alcohol agenda, the more irrelevant it becomes.”
Bartending |
Recipes |
Advertise with us! |
Shop |
© Bartender.com