Quote:
Originally posted by IvySpice (in part)
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.)
|
True as to the potential of states making a choice, but reality in most states, I think, is that its really a Hobson's choice. I agree that it's not going to happen.
Quote:
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
|
A little more likely perhaps, but only a very, very, very little more likely. Ah well.
Threaded Mode