Session Ales on tap to be illegal in Colorado?

[elkdog]

http://www.denverpost.com/legislature/ci_16725693

I didn't see discussion of this aspect of the new legislation, but find it, if this article is correct, to be insane. Ordinary Bitter, Mild, and the lightest of Light Lagers are of course the downfall of society...

If this has been discussed, then walk on by, but I can't find it.

 

[Nateo]

If I bought beer more than once a month, and if the beer I buy was ever under 4% ABV, then I might care.

 

[bob1852]

So, in Colorado Bud Light is considered a "malt liquor"??????????

 

[mlanoue]

I suppose there's been a dumber fight throughout the course of history, but I can't think of one at the moment.

 

[cheezydemon3]

.......wow!

I guess it may be a good thing, since the BMC crowd will have to expand their horizons, but short of that, the measure is idiotic.

Only filterless cigarettes can be sold either!

 

[elkdog]

So, in Colorado Bud Light is considered a "malt liquor"??????????

Lots of weird nomenclature here. I'm just trying to think of a good reason to ban low-alcohol beers on tap. "No, you need more alcohol before you drive home."

 

[IrregularPulse]

Coors, Budweiser and Miller — appear to have just enough alcohol to remain flowing.

What a coincidence.

 

[bob1852]

I suppose there's been a dumber fight throughout the course of history, but I can't think of one at the moment.

Well, there was that.....

yeah, you're right.

 

[stageseven]

.......wow!

I guess it may be a good thing, since the BMC crowd will have to expand their horizons, but short of that, the measure is idiotic.

Not according to the article. "Light versions of the big three — Coors, Budweiser and Miller — appear to have just enough alcohol to remain flowing."

 

[riverfrontbrewer]

Lots of weird nomenclature here. I'm just trying to think of a good reason to ban low-alcohol beers on tap. "No, you need more alcohol before you drive home."

Really has nothing to do with alcohol consumption, it is a pissing match between convienience and grocery stores versus liquor stores. Since the liquor store lobby has continually been successful in restricting the convienience and grocery stores ability to try to change the law so they could sell full strength beer/wine/booze, they are firing back. Over 4% bars/liquor stores/restaurants, under sold at convienience and grocery stores only.

 

[mychalg9]

wait....what?

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

Butthurtsgebot

 

[MarzBock]

This makes no sense what-so-ever! Why in the world would they want to ban low alcohol content beer from the pubs? Is it just so that convenient stores have a monopoly on session beer? That is really wierd...

I remember when I lived in Texas, our friends from colorado would come down to buy beer so they could get "real budweiser", ie: bud with a higher EtOH content. I always thougth they sold the weaker bud in colorado due to the elevation effects on drinking (higher altituted = easier buzz). Maybe that wasn't the real reason, but the fact was that bud sold in CO was a few % points lower ABV than Texas bud. Does anyone else remember this phenomenon?

Marz

 

[bob1852]

Butthurtsgebot

Ah yes, the ancient beer pissing match between the state run liquor stores and the private businesses. Ended nastily in ancient Germany...

 

[riverfrontbrewer]

This makes no sense what-so-ever! Why in the world would they want to ban low alcohol content beer from the pubs? Is it just so that convenient stores have a monopoly on session beer? That is really wierd...

Marz

Marz-it's not so much that they want a monopoly on session beer, they are just pissed that they continually loose the battle to sell full strength booze in the state house.

 

[philrose]

Ah yes, the ancient beer pissing match between the state run liquor stores and the private businesses. Ended nastily in ancient Germany...

I don;t think liquor stores are state run in CO, I was just there this year and bought some beer/whiskey at what seemed like a privately run business

 

[bob1852]

I don;t think liquor stores are state run in CO, I was just there this year and bought some beer/whiskey at what seemed like a privately run business

Yeah, I believe it's more of a permitting/distributing issue versus a true state run store...

 

[Desert_Sky]

well duh, the Marijuana dispensaries are trying to rid themselves of a bit of competition. Well played pot, well played

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

This makes no sense what-so-ever! Why in the world would they want to ban low alcohol content beer from the pubs? Is it just so that convenient stores have a monopoly on session beer? That is really wierd...

AFAIK, it's a long battle between liquor stores and convenience stores and everyone else is getting caught in the poo-slinging crossfire. The liquor stores have a monopoly on all beers except session beers, they can sell everything over a certain percent. The convenience stores can't sell regular strength beer and can only sell the session stuff. It's a ridiculous 'solution' to something that is really a non-problem to begin with. Some liquor store can't survive without a monoploy on regular-strength beer? Cry me a river, let 'em fail...that's how a free market is supposed to work.

The most obvious solution is to just let both liquor stores and convenience stores (including grocery stores) sell all beer regardless of strength. If your establishment can't survive under that then your establishment doesn't deserve to survive.

 

[RchanceN]

Seems like the typical story of a more powerful business organization using politicians lacking sense and morals to screw the other guys. Economy? Jobs? Environment? Meth labs?

Nah, let's make sure bars aren't serving low ABV beers. I'm going to propose that low sodium foods not be allowed in grocery stores.

 

[philrose]

Yeah, I believe it's more of a permitting/distributing issue versus a true state run store...

ah gotcha

 

[Hannable1975]

I like this from the article:

"Convenience and grocery stores' licenses are restricted to selling only beer at or below that threshold, thanks to rules aimed at limiting the flow of alcohol to the general public."

SO, if the BMC crowd is OVER and thus OK for the Pubs, does that mean there may be a state where you can go to the Grocery and NOT see 100 different ways to buy Bud? Not see 25 different Coors displays?

I might call a real estate agent - I'd love to live in a place like that .....

 

[riverfrontbrewer]

No, because the BMC companies ALSO make beer under the 4% threshhold for this exact reason....to be able to stack the shelves at non liquor stores as well.

 

[philrose]

AFAIK, it's a long battle between liquor stores and convenience stores and everyone else is getting caught in the poo-slinging crossfire. The liquor stores have a monopoly on all beers except session beers, they can sell everything over a certain percent. The convenience stores can't sell regular strength beer and can only sell the session stuff. It's a ridiculous 'solution' to something that is really a non-problem to begin with. Some liquor store can't survive without a monoploy on regular-strength beer? Cry me a river, let 'em fail...that's how a free market is supposed to work.

The most obvious solution is to just let both liquor stores and convenience stores (including grocery stores) sell all beer regardless of strength. If your establishment can't survive under that then your establishment doesn't deserve to survive.

Yes. banning bars from offering ordinary bitter/dry stout will not lead to 7-11's selling high quality, low alcohol beers instead of 3.2 versions of bud light. just like you say the beer drinker is going to be caught right in the middle.

 

[azscoob]

Hmmm, maybe I should open a chain of stores there selling pitchforks and torches, in fact I could franchise them throughout the US.

 

[PVH]

I like this from the article:

"Convenience and grocery stores' licenses are restricted to selling only beer at or below that threshold, thanks to rules aimed at limiting the flow of alcohol to the general public."

If I didn't know what a mediocre paper the Post was, I would be surprised they printed this. The rules are not "aimed at limiting the flow of alcohol to the general public." The rules are aimed at maintaining the viability of mom and pop liquor stores all over the state that could not survive absent such protection.

Grocery stores can sell beer, wine and liquor, but only at one location. So what we get are lots of small, overpriced stores, and a few truly massive booze warehouses in the more populated areas. Nothing limits the flow of alcohol to the public. The scheme does, however, increase the flow of money to liquor store owners. It's a racket, and everyone knows it.

 

[bob1852]

It's a racket, and everyone knows it.

Doesn't Colo Springs have the biggest liquor store in the country?

 

[ReverseApacheMaster]

Anytime you find weird laws like this, you can count on the major brewers and liquor stores to be the primary lobbyists.

The way I see it is if people can only buy 3.2 beer, or are more likely to have 3.2 available at home, they have to drink a lot of it to get buzzed/drunk so you sell more beer that is more water which equates to more money. If people are used to drinking several beers and then go to bars where their choice is a more expensive, higher alcohol version of the same beers then they will drink more beers at a higher prices which all equates to more money to the big breweries.

 

[PVH]

Doesn't Colo Springs have the biggest liquor store in the country?

I think the biggest store is in Thornton, north of Denver. Like I said, we end up with a few truly massive and not very convenient stores. And you can get good deals there. But if you could operate more than that single store, you would find those prices in more stores all over the state.

On a side note, our beer tax is as low as it gets, which is nice.

 

[elkdog]

I think the biggest store is in Thornton, north of Denver. Like I said, we end up with a few truly massive and not very convenient stores. And you can get good deals there. But if you could operate more than that single store, you would find those prices in more stores all over the state.

On a side note, our beer tax is as low as it gets, which is nice.

I understand the battle between the stores, and having lived in NC- where you can buy beer and wine at supermarkets/convenience stores but have to go to a state run store for liquor, CA- where it's all sold everywhere, and NJ- where you have to go to a private liquor store for any alcohol, I get the commercial forces in play. The part I don't understand is why bars got dragged into this, especially in such a silly way. What's the economic sense behind that? (I'm genuinely asking, not rhetorically asking here.)

 

[PVH]

The part I don't understand is why bars got dragged into this, especially in such a silly way. What's the economic sense behind that? (I'm genuinely asking, not rhetorically asking here.)

Because their licenses do not allow them to sell the low-alcohol beer that they are selling. I strongly doubt that the convenience store and grocery store folks care at all if bars are selling the same product they are selling. It's not about competition. What they're doing is highlighting this silly distinction between low and high alcohol beers. I think they're trying to show the public that.

Maybe we'll luck out and people will pressure their legislators to scrap the whole lame system. Only a couple of years ago we finally were able to buy regular beer on Sunday. The main argument on that old gem wasn't even that people shouldn't drink on Sunday - you could already go to the bar at 7am and take shots of bourbon if you wanted, or just buy the 3.2 beer at the grocery store. The argument was that the liquor store owners should be able to be closed on Sunday without fearing some other store would be open and make money. Apparently, they deserved their "day off" more than the poor schlubs who work every other kind of retail job.

 

[coypoo]

I understand the battle between the stores, and having lived in NC- where you can buy beer and wine at supermarkets/convenience stores but have to go to a state run store for liquor, CA- where it's all sold everywhere, and NJ- where you have to go to a private liquor store for any alcohol, I get the commercial forces in play. The part I don't understand is why bars got dragged into this, especially in such a silly way. What's the economic sense behind that? (I'm genuinely asking, not rhetorically asking here.)

I bet they will get it figured out. Bars make sooo much money off of beer and there is no way they are going to quit selling BMC beer b/c they would all go out of business. +95% of the beer that is sold is BMC and for the "traditional" bars I would bet that 99% of the beer they sell is BMC b/c people just want a cheap buzz. There is way to much money at stake for this to not change

 

[bob1852]

I bet they will get it figured out. Bars make sooo much money off of beer and there is no way they are going to quit selling BMC beer b/c they would all go out of business. +95% of the beer that is sold is BMC and for the "traditional" bars I would bet that 99% of the beer they sell is BMC b/c people just want a cheap buzz. There is way to much money at stake for this to not change

But that's the whole point. Because Budlight is 4.2% ABV is will still be sold. Because Guiness is 4% ABV, it won't.

This isn't a BMC issue....

 

[PVH]

I bet they will get it figured out. Bars make sooo much money off of beer and there is no way they are going to quit selling BMC beer b/c they would all go out of business. +95% of the beer that is sold is BMC and for the "traditional" bars I would bet that 99% of the beer they sell is BMC b/c people just want a cheap buzz. There is way to much money at stake for this to not change

But they won't have to stop selling BMC. The alcohol content of those beers is high enough to be within the bars' licenses. This is about beers of less than 3.2 ABW.

Preventing bars from selling BMC would be straight-up crazy talk.

 

[elkdog]

Because their licenses do not allow them to sell the low-alcohol beer that they are selling. I strongly doubt that the convenience store and grocery store folks care at all if bars are selling the same product they are selling. It's not about competition. What they're doing is highlighting this silly distinction between low and high alcohol beers. I think they're trying to show the public that.

Maybe we'll luck out and people will pressure their legislators to scrap the whole lame system. Only a couple of years ago we finally were able to buy regular beer on Sunday. The main argument on that old gem wasn't even that people shouldn't drink on Sunday - you could already go to the bar at 7am and take shots of bourbon if you wanted, or just buy the 3.2 beer at the grocery store. The argument was that the liquor store owners should be able to be closed on Sunday without fearing some other store would be open and make money. Apparently, they deserved their "day off" more than the poor schlubs who work every other kind of retail job.

That makes sense. I was hoping some CO folks would get involved in this thread to fill in the parts the article didn't address. Thanks!

 

[dfc]

Thankfully Arizona doesn't have these crazy laws.

 

[Dr_Gordon_Freeman]

Can't people choose for themselves what they imbibe? "Land of the Free" is becoming a joke these days.

 

[elkdog]

Can't people choose for themselves what they imbibe? "Land of the Free" is becoming a joke these days.

Dude, look at our history. In terms of alcohol, it's been a lot worse, and it seems to me that the trend is toward increased availability (fewer dry counties, etc.). The state I live in only started allowing beer higher than 6% abv in 2005, and NC is a pretty good beer spot. Lots of regulations are actually being amended to allow greater choice, as well as to allow homebrewing (the ultimate in private consumption). Besides, the people of CO can drink any of those products. The distribution system that gets the booze to the people is pretty wonky, and that's the point here.

 

[Dr_Gordon_Freeman]

Dude, look at our history. In terms of alcohol, it's been a lot worse, and it seems to me that the trend is toward increased availability (fewer dry counties, etc.). The state I live in only started allowing beer higher than 6% abv in 2005, and NC is a pretty good beer spot. Lots of regulations are actually being amended to allow greater choice, as well as to allow homebrewing (the ultimate in private consumption). Besides, the people of CO can drink any of those products. The distribution system that gets the booze to the people is pretty wonky, and that's the point here.

The fact that the govt (federal/state/local/whatever) controls distribution is the problem. There is no reason whatsoever that there needs to be any middleman in the system. The fact that people would be made criminals for selling their brew directly to the public just blows me away.

It all stems from prohibition era thinking... these laws need to be abolished. It has nothing to do with public health, and it has everything to do with a govt enforced monopoly.

 

[elkdog]

The fact that the govt (federal/state/local/whatever) controls distribution is the problem. There is no reason whatsoever that there needs to be any middleman in the system. The fact that people would be made criminals for selling their brew directly to the public just blows me away.

I can drink to that.