The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller

Was Prohibition repealed?

Michelle Minton
Fellow in Consumer Policy Studies, Competitive Enterprise Institute

This Sunday, December 5, many people will raise their glasses and celebrate Repeal Day — the anniversary of the end of Prohibition, a day when Americans regained a measure of individual freedom. However, some recent actions by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suggest that aspects of Prohibition linger on nearly 80 years after the passage of the 21st Amendment. As a result, consumers are witnessing a dwindling variety of products and entrepreneurs are seeing their dreams and businesses washed down the drain.

On November 17, after a handful of irresponsible college students poisoned themselves with alcohol, the FDA issued warning letters to four brewers of beverages that contained caffeine and alcohol, giving them 15 days to either reformulate their product or take it off shelves. In the letters, the FDA concluded that the combination of caffeine and alcohol could result in “central nervous system effects,” which “may result in adverse behavioral outcomes.”

The FDA stated that it was unaware of publicly available data that would demonstrate the safety of caffeine added directly to alcoholic beverages — but it provided no evidence indicating that caffeine mixed with alcohol was unsafe. Yet for all of the agency’s scare mongering, people have been combining the two ingredients for decades in various forms, including liqueurs like Kahlua and mixed drinks like Irish coffee and rum and Coke — and more recently in hard teas, Red Bull and vodka, and coffee- or chocolate-flavored beers.

Of the four companies to which the FDA sent warning letters, three caved and said they would reformulate their products without caffeine. Only one brewery has refused to comply with the FDA’s arbitrary demands. New Century Brewing Company was founded in 2004 by Rhonda Kallman, co-founder of the Boston Brewing Company, which makes Samuel Adams beer. After 15 years with Boston Brewing, Kallman set out on her own to make a brew with caffeine called Moonshot.

Unlike Four Loko, the drink that kicked off the FDA’s witch hunt, Moonshot has a modest amount of alcohol — 5 percent ABV — and less caffeine than a half of a cup of coffee — 69 milligrams. Yet, for some reason, Kallman’s beer was lumped in with the candy-flavored alcohol energy drinks that have 12 percent ABV and over 200 milligrams of caffeine. Things did not go smoothly for New Century.

As a one-woman operation run out of her Massachusetts home, Rhonda Kallman has had to fight plenty of battles, concerning regulations, competition, and funding. In 2009 she also battled with breast cancer, a fight that forced her to take her beer off of the market in order to focus on recovering. After beating cancer, reformulating her beer, and receiving regulatory approval from government agencies, Kallman was able to get Moonshot back on shelves by late 2009. And then came the Four Loko scare.

Four Loko, like many other alcoholic energy drinks, has a purpose — to be exceedingly drinkable, get you wired, and get you drunk. These drinks are cheaper and more readily accessible than their immediate predecessor — vodka and Red Bull. While thousands of adults drink these products responsibly without negative effects, earlier this year several youths drank enough Four Loko to end up in the hospital. As a result of Four Loko’s popularity among the young and the uncertainty about its effects, there has been a widespread call around the nation for policy makers to “do something.”

  • Pingback: Killed by Regulations: New Century Brewing, RIP

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Howchy-Kaddami/100001559894691 Howchy Kaddami

    Is this what passes for journalism these days? The problem with Moonshot beer has been it’s dismal reviews based on it’s terrible taste characteristics.
    If Ms. Minton really wanted to look into this, and not simply create a bold, and ridiculous headline, she could easily find a host of negative reviews of this poorly concieved product. Kellman was a grand marketer for Boston Beer, she never knew anything about creating a great beer, that was done by Jim Koch and Joseph Owades. With Moonshot’s poor taste and body, it is only a gimmick beer and it’s only gimmick is caffiene. While Minton enjoy’s trying to portray the government regulations as darconian, in fact they are very reasonable. Kellman herself has stated that Moonstone is a “party beer”, given this fact, it’s bad taste, it can only be reasonable to conclude that it’s created for late night drinking by people no longer aware of it’s terrible taste.
    According the the National Highway Safety Administration
    “For fatal crashes occurring from midnight to 3 a.m., 76 percent involved alcohol.” Minton surely knows this tragic statistics and it’s disheartening to think that an employee purported to be an expert on insurance matters would be so unconcerned for human life and suffering to advocate for such an irresponsible product. Surely she can find a more worthwhile cause than “moonshot ’69″ the failed beer.

    Enjoy the following Moonshot reviews: (look some up for yourselves)

    –>”Texture is flat and barely fizzy. Forget this one!”
    –>” The caffeine might be a good gimmick to sell the beer but the beer itself isn’t one worth drinking.”
    –>”With or without the caffeine, it’s a woefully unpleasant beer. Swap out one of the O’s in Moonshot with an I and that’s a bit more accurate”
    –>”I bought this beer in a pick 6 pack and thank god because I would not drink a second. Combines two things that do not belong together.”
    –>”Drinkability- nope. I finished 1, and won’t drink another one. This is a gimmick beer that doesn’t work.”
    –>”The taste is just awful. Skunky, dry, and pungent really.Do yourself a favor and don’t get it.”

    • Michelle_Minton

      Is this what passes for logic these days?

      So, because something tastes bad gives the government the right to ban it?

      Taste or even quality is not the issue here. The issue is to defend the right of businesses to offer their product freely to willing customers. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. But it shouldn’t be up to any government body to obliterate the right of businesses to attempt to sell their product.

      When it comes to the freedom of speech we have to defend even speech we don’t like in order to protect the right for all. The same goes for products we don’t like. If you don’t like the taste don’t buy it.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Howchy-Kaddami/100001559894691 Howchy Kaddami

        Resorting to silliness in the name of defending rights. Lets create a beer mixed with nicotene! Why not? And why not add some codiene? We can make it with child labor, we must assert rights you know and the evil old stodgy government has no handle on the meaning of the constitution.

        And be sure to avoide that which you cannot defend
        “According the the National Highway Safety Administration
        “For fatal crashes occurring from midnight to 3 a.m., 76 percent involved alcohol.” Minton surely knows this tragic statistics and it’s disheartening to think that an employee purported to be an expert on insurance matters would be so unconcerned for human life and suffering to advocate for such an irresponsible product.

        The government is not off the mark here, this is not a rights issue, but a common sense safety issue just like stopping sales of cigarettes to minors and banning smoking in public places. This saves lifes just like so many other reasonable laws. If we need to draw a line this is not the battle, this is a fools fight. Maybe if the author ever has children she cares about, she will think more maturely and consider the implications of irresponsible juvenile journalism.

  • Supernatural Witness

    Liberals whine about social conservatives legislating morality yet it is always their agency system that oppresses freedoms; and, that, without any actual laws being passed or public votes being taken.