I was reading a Virginian Pilot article the other day about the happy hour rules. Were you aware that ABC laws in Virginia prohibit the advertising of happy hour? Back in the day, I spent some time in Atlanta and happy hour was, well, happy. I mean, none of this two-for-one stuff. Those folks had 3-1 and it was advertised everywhere.
Take a look at the rules:
The guidelines
Happy hour may not be conducted during the hours of 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. each day. Happy hour is defined as a specified period of time during which alcoholic beverages are sold at prices reduced from the customary price established by you.The following practices are prohibited:
– A person may not possess more than two drinks at any one time during a happy hour. A drink is defined as any beverage containing the amount of alcoholic beverages customarily served to a person as a single serving.
– The volume of alcoholic beverages contained in a drink may not be increased at any time without increasing proportionately the customary or established retail price charged for such drink.
– Two or more drinks may not be sold for one price, such as “two for one” or “three for one” at any time.
– Mixed Beverages may never be sold in pitchers
– Drinks may never be given away
– An unlimited number of drinks may not be sold for one price, such as “all you can drink for $5.00” at any time. Packaged deals (i.e. New Year’s Eve gatherings, etc) must specify a limited number of drinks.
– Happy hour may not be advertised in the media or on the exterior of the licensed premises.
– These rules shall not apply to prearranged private parties, functions, or events, not open to the public, where the guests thereof are served in a room or rooms designated and used exclusively for private parties, functions or events.
So what do you think? Are VA’s happy hour rules too strict? Or are they just right?
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
I know it will shock many to hear this, given my teetotaling nature, but I think it’s just stupid. Without looking at the laws themselves, I’ll guess that they’re a bipartisan product of the moralizing control folks on the right and the tsk tsk’ers on the left from some time in the early 80s, after a lot of pushing/scolding by MADD.
There’s a place for punishing bars (oh, wait, none of those in Virginia either!) for irresponsible serving, without putting the force of law into deciding how many drinks can be on the table.
Like a good martini, my opinions on the matter are mixed. I love a good happy hour when I’m within walking distance or when there’s good public transportation, but the three things I feel like we should studiously avoid combining into one horrible traffic scenario are drunk driving, rush hour, and the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel.
Having said that, the ABC’s guidelines seem a tad puritanical. What a bunch of buzzkills.
Vivian,
I sat on Governor Chuck Robb’s Citizen Advisory Commission to ABC. MB is is right about the influence that MADD had on the pols. Restaurants/Bars only serve 17% of all alcoholic beverages consumed in the Commonwealth. The state ABC stores, suoermarkets, gas stations, and convenience stores account for most of the rest of the consumption. The convenience store lobby in Richmond is extremely strong. They joined with MADD many times to limit the liberalization of the ABC regs for restaurants/bars.
At one meeting, I had to take the convenience store lobbyest out into the hallway and ask him if he wanted me to present to MADD the idea of no cold beer sales at convenience stores. I told him a cold six pack is more than 2 drinks in front of a customer at one time- “a car driving customer”. The lobbyest immediate stopped siding with MADD in asking for even stricter guidelines on restaurants/bars.
The sad thing is not much has changed since the Robb administration.
anon – fished that one out of the spam filter, too.
Damn Viv, you’re turning into a libertarian. Welcome to the fold.
What I want to know is why can they sell pitchers of beer but not pitchers of martinis? 😉
This one’s my fav. “Two or more drinks may not be sold for one price, such as “two for one” or “three for one” at any time.”
The irony is that the people who think they are qualified to micromanage the post-workday revels of the prols aren’t even as good at math as this rodent.
Follow me here: It is illegal to sell booze two for one, but it is legal to sell booze for half price.
Mathematically, they are the same thing. I propose, a constitutional amendment, that all laws written by people who couldn’t pass the 4th grade SOLs be deemed unconstitutional.
randomly checking to see if your spam filter actually does have a problem with the word “anonymous” in the name section for some reason, since Anonymous is a Woman was also filtered yesterday.
btw, vivian isn’t turning into a libertarian. She’s been against government intervention on individual choices from everything where people can and cannot smoke to who can and cannot marry since long before she started this blog. Pay attention. 😉
How ’bout DAMM — Drunks Against MADD Mothers?
Good point, Hampster 🙂 But then you know math is something the pols have a bit of trouble with. 😉
JQP – I’m going to watch carefully the anonymous thing. While I can set the spam filter to catch certain words, anonymous is not among the ones I’ve added. The only thing I can do is keep fishing them out of the spam stuff and hope that Akismet “learns.”
Yeah – I’m pretty much against government interfering in personal decisions. I’m a grownup – I can think for myself, thank you very much 🙂
I haven’t thought this through so I could be completely wrong. But couldn’t we abolish the ABC, set a tax on alcohol to make up for lost ABC store revenue, and give the money to local police to enforce drunk driving and underage drinking laws?
“I’m pretty much against government interfering in personal decisions….”
…so long as one does not want a pay-day loan. 🙂
“I propose, a constitutional amendment, that all laws written by people who couldn’t pass the 4th grade SOLs be deemed unconstitutional.”
Unfortunately, many of the voters cannot pass those tests, either. That’s how we get these morons in office in the first place.
Nope, Mouse. The government has created an unlevel playing field. If they want to level it, fine. But I do not countenance government allowing one group of businesses have a leg up against their competitors. It ain’t right.
TGM – not sure if that would work, only from the standpoint that if we abolished the ABC, who would issue/monitor liquor licenses?
The idea with banning 2 for 1 or 3 for 1 is that is forces people to buy in 2 or 3 drink increments rather than drinking their normal amount for less money. The math of 2 for 1 v. 1/2 price are only the same if you intended to drink 2, 4, 6, etc. The question that should be asked is what impact on drinking habits is seen from 1/2 price v. 2 for 1, etc.