The Salt Lake Tribune is reporting that two weeks ago the Utah State Senate met to discuss liquor laws. In the meeting all twenty Senate Republicans decided against abolishing private club memberships in favor of a more common system of simply walking into a bar and getting a drink. Not one moderate who was willing to side with their Republican governor was willing to speak up and say they supported the measure. Not one thought the measure was necessary to stay competitive for tourist dollars, not. Not one considered the possible tax benefits. No, they went to the classic stand by – the children.

Ah, but here is the disturbing part: in the same Tribune article stated that “Senator Lyle Hillyard (R-Logan)… said he was only half listening during the meeting ‘because this isn’t one of my top priorities’.”

Now I must admit that it is refreshing for lawmakers to finally admit that they are not paying attention the needs of our state outright, but wow, really? Only half listening? This is proof that Hillyard in particular, and most Republicans in the Legislature need to go.

Yes, yes, I know Republicans are elected because they represent the ideals of the people and that they have every right to govern, but can you honestly say that when they say that they are only half listening to an issue such as this?

Now before you go off saying that there is no way legislators can be interested in every issue that comes before them, let me just point out that this is not some law from a bunch of crazy environmentalists, human rights activists, or concerned parents who want better public education – oh no, this bill came from the desk of Governor Jon Huntsman. Even with this fact in mind, they still do not pay attention to legislation.

Furthermore we can not ignore the second part of all of this, the creation of pseudo facts such as those spewed by Senator (and Senate President-elect) Michael Waddoups (R- Taylorsville) who said “Unless we find something better that protects our children and protects us from drunken drivers, we want no change in private club memberships.”

I would like Senator Waddoups to tell me how children would be further harmed by the abolishment of private clubs. The sad fact of the matter is that the abusive and neglectful parent who could beat there kids after drinking is not somehow prevented by having to pay $5 at a bar. As far as drunk driving goes, well perhaps this is true, except for the fact that generally the person who saved $5 at the door and got himself an extra beer or gin and tonic, has probably already planed ahead enough to get good and sloshed already and the removal of one extremely minor barrier will not change this fact.

Now, for some real facts from someone who actually goes to bars and knows the behavior of people who frequent such establishments. The vast majority of those who go to bars do so for social reasons, not to get tanked. The removal of a $5,10, or 20 cover charge would benefit the state, and more directly children, financially because those tax dollars go directly to the education fund. This, of course, is just for the locals. Looser liquor laws also mean that tourists (who, by the way, often walk to the closest bar) have one more stay an extra day or two, do to a better night life. They spend more dollars both inside and outside bars, and the state benefits. Finally the issue of drunk drivers. Yes, I will concede that there are troublesome bars that care less about irresponsibility. How do we solve this? Perhaps better enforcement? Perhaps more police on the street? Perhaps this could be paid for with the added benefits listed above?

In short the system is currently dysfunctional – I have not paid a cover in months due to the various loopholes we drinkers all know exist. All private clubs do is give legislators a warm fuzzy feeling and outsiders another reason not to come here.

P.S.: Congrats to the Legislature upseting me well before the session even starts! This must be a new record.