>Congress said that no state with a drinking age under 21 could receive federal highway funds.
Yes, but the states are still making a choice. Not every state immediately changed after the Congressional policy was passed; Louisiana maintained its lower drinking age for quite a while before buckling. It was making more from the sales tax on legal alcohol sales to under-21s than it was getting in highway funds. Altering the tax structure could make that choice fiscally feasible. (I don't think it's going to happen, but it could.)
Also, the wording of the state law makes a huge difference. NC will lose funds if it makes it legal to sell alcohol to under-21's, but it could freely decide to reform its tort structure to relieve private entities of responsibility for the foolish acts of guests. That would make a gigantic difference in the liability -- and thus the alcohol-friendliness -- of universities and fraternities.
This is a little more likely, especially given the general movement toward tort reform at the national level.
Ivy
|