State needs well-regulated liquor control

A Missouri House Budget Committee member managed in a single stroke to set in motion a series of events that could put the future of liquor-law enforcement at risk in this state.

State Rep. Chuck Graham of Columbia apparently is unhappy with the way Liquor Control Division agents do their job in his district. So he would like to dismantle the department. Of course, the state would keep the part of the department that handles licensing, because that's a $30 million annual cash cow. But a $3.5 million budget cut would virtually eliminate enforcement agents' jobs and filter the money to drug and alcohol treatment programs. Local law enforcement agencies would be expected to pick up the slack, controlling bars and other retail outlets where liquor is sold in their various jurisdictions.

It's admirable to want to help those troubled by addiction, but the plan smacks of a personal vendetta that has very little to do with good government.

The whole purpose of licensing an activity is to control it. In this case, collective wisdom of decades of liquor-law enforcement have led state officials to the conclusion that the dispensing of alcohol is something that shouldn't be done willy-nilly.

A liquor license dictates what can be done, by whom and how. It's the reason bars in Missouri close at 1:30 a.m. and responsible bar owners issue a last call well before that time.

Local police have no interest in monitoring the sale of liquor, and there are plenty of good reasons why they shouldn't.

First, they have no authority to enforce the conditions that come with a liquor license, including bookkeeping and employee conduct. Second, they could have a conflict of interest because some police frequent the bars in their jurisdictions.

And third, they have enough to do.

In addition, liquor-control agents help bar owners obey the law, educating them and bar employees on what not to do. Local bar owners say they appreciate the assistance.

Now that the House committee has approved the cut, it will be up to another lawmaker to get the money back in.

Any reasonable legislator should do so if he or she believes the sale of liquor is something that needs to be seriously regulated, not simply considered just another responsibility for overworked local law-enforcement officers.