Content deleted Content added
→Post-repeal: Link for unfamiliar term (to page on topic, with 'expand' template to reflect nationwide applicability). |
m made sure opinions were shown as opinions in the text |
||
| (19 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 14:
}}
The '''Prohibition era''' was the period from 1920 to 1933 when the [[United States]] prohibited the production, importation, transportation, and sale of [[alcoholic beverage|alcoholic beverages]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Prohibition {{!}} Definition, History, Eighteenth Amendment, & Repeal |url=https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933|access-date=2021-11-18|website=Encyclopædia Britannica|archive-date=January 20, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230120195553/https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933|url-status=live}}</ref> The alcohol industry was curtailed by a succession of state legislatures, and
Led by [[Pietism|Pietistic]] [[Protestantism in the United States|Protestants]], prohibitionists first attempted to end the trade in alcoholic drinks during the 19th century. They aimed to heal what they saw as an ill society beset by alcohol-related problems such as [[alcoholism]], [[Domestic violence|family violence]], and [[Saloon bar|saloon]]-based [[political corruption]]. Many communities introduced alcohol bans in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and enforcement of these new prohibition laws became a topic of debate. Prohibition supporters, called "drys", presented it as a battle for [[Public morality|public morals]] and health. The movement was taken up by [[Progressivism in the United States|progressives]] in the [[Prohibition Party|Prohibition]], [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] and [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] parties, and gained a national grassroots base through the [[Woman's Christian Temperance Union]]. After 1900, it was coordinated by the [[Anti-Saloon League]]. Opposition from the beer industry mobilized "wet" supporters from the wealthy [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] and German [[Lutheran]] communities, but the influence of these groups receded from 1917 following the entry of the U.S. into the [[First World War]] against Germany.
Line 22:
By the late 1920s, a new opposition to Prohibition emerged nationwide. The opposition attacked the policy, claiming that it lowered local revenues and imposed "rural" Protestant religious values on "urban" America. Some criminal gangs gained control of the beer and liquor supply in some cities.<ref>{{cite book|first=Margaret Sands |last=Orchowski |title=The Law that Changed the Face of America: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K0hKCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA32|year=2015|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|page=32|isbn=978-1-4422-5137-3|access-date=May 16, 2017|archive-date=January 20, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230120195554/https://books.google.com/books?id=K0hKCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA32|url-status=live}}</ref> The Twenty-first Amendment ended Prohibition, though it continued in some states. To date, this is the only time in American history in which a constitutional amendment was passed for the purpose of repealing another.
The overal effects of Prohibition on society are disputed and hard to pin down. Some research indicates that alcohol consumption declined substantially due to Prohibition,<ref name="Moore1989">{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/16/opinion/actually-prohibition-was-a-success.html|title=Actually, Prohibition Was a Success |first=Mark H. |last=Moore |date=October 16, 1989|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|language=en|access-date=May 29, 2017|author-link=Mark H. Moore|archive-date=February 16, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210216135435/https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/16/opinion/actually-prohibition-was-a-success.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|editor-first=Jack S. |editor-last=Blocker |display-editors=etal |title=Alcohol and Temperance in Modern History: An International Encyclopedia|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BuzNzm-x0l8C&pg=PA23|year=2003|publisher=ABC-CLIO|page=23|isbn=978-1-57607-833-4|access-date=October 17, 2015|archive-date=January 20, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230120195555/https://books.google.com/books?id=BuzNzm-x0l8C&pg=PA23|url-status=live}}</ref> while other research indicates that Prohibition did not reduce alcohol consumption in the long term.<ref name=":4" /><ref name="Miron" /><ref name=":1" /> Americans who wanted to continue drinking alcohol found loopholes in Prohibition laws or used illegal methods to obtain alcohol, resulting in the emergence of black markets and crime syndicates dedicated to distributing alcohol.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |title=What were the effects of Prohibition? |url=https://www.britannica.com/question/What-were-the-effects-of-Prohibition |access-date=2023-07-14 |website=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |language=en}}</ref> By contrast, rates of [[liver cirrhosis]], [[Alcoholic psychoses|alcoholic psychosis]], and [[infant mortality]] declined during Prohibition.<ref name="Moore1989" /><ref name="MacCounReuter2001">{{cite book|title=Drug War Heresies: Learning from Other Vices, Times, and Places|last1=MacCoun|first1=Robert J.|last2=Reuter|first2=Peter|date=August 17, 2001|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-79997-3|page=[https://archive.org/details/drugwarheresiesl00macc_0/page/161 161]|language=en|url=https://archive.org/details/drugwarheresiesl00macc_0|url-access=registration}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |first=Jack S. Jr |last=Blocker |title=Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation |journal=American Journal of Public Health |date=February 2006 |pages=233–243 |doi=10.2105/AJPH.2005.065409 |pmc=1470475 |pmid=16380559 |volume=96 |issue=2}}</ref> Because of the lack of uniform national statistics gathered about crime prior to 1930, it is difficult to draw conclusions about Prohibition's impact on crime at the national level.<ref name=":1" /> Prohibition had a negative effect on the economy by eliminating jobs dedicated to the then-fifth largest industry in the United States.<ref name=":5" /> Support for Prohibition diminished steadily throughout its duration, including among former supporters of Prohibition, and lowered government tax revenues at a critical time before and during the [[Great Depression]].<ref name=":5" /><ref>{{cite journal |first=Wayne |last=Hall |title=What are the policy lessons of National Alcohol Prohibition in the United States, 1920–1933? |journal=[[Addiction (journal)|Addiction]] |year=2010 |volume=105 |issue=7 |pages=1164–1173 |doi=10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02926.x |pmid=20331549 }}</ref>
==History==
Line 32:
On October 28, 1919, [[United States Congress|Congress]] passed the [[Volstead Act]], the popular name for the National Prohibition Act, over President [[Woodrow Wilson]]'s [[Veto power in the United States|veto]]. The act established the legal definition of intoxicating liquors as well as penalties for producing them.<ref name="nih2006">{{cite book | author =Bob Skilnik | title =Beer: A History of Brewing in Chicago | publisher =Baracade Books | year =2006 | isbn =978-1-56980-312-7}}</ref> Although the Volstead Act prohibited the sale of alcohol, the federal government lacked resources to enforce it.
Prohibition was successful in reducing the amount of liquor consumed, cirrhosis death rates, admissions to state mental hospitals for alcoholic psychosis, arrests for public drunkenness, and rates of absenteeism.<ref name="MacCounReuter2001"/><ref name="Blocker2006">{{cite journal|last=Blocker|first=Jack S.|year=2006|title=Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation|journal=[[American Journal of Public Health]]|language=en|volume=96|issue=2|pages=233–243|doi=10.2105/AJPH.2005.065409|issn=0090-0036|pmc=1470475|pmid=16380559}}</ref><ref name="Lyons2018"/> While many state that Prohibition stimulated the proliferation of rampant underground, organized, and widespread [[The Mafia during Prohibition|criminal activity]],<ref name="t100524">{{Cite magazine |author=David Von Drehle |title=The Demon Drink |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1989146,00.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100515040622/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1989146,00.html|archive-date=May 15, 2010| magazine=Time | location=New York | page=56 |date=May 24, 2010 }}</ref> Kenneth D. Rose and Georges-Franck Pinard
On March 22, 1933, President [[Franklin Roosevelt]] signed into law the [[Cullen–Harrison Act]], legalizing beer with an alcohol content of 3.2% (by weight) and wine of a similarly low alcohol content. Subsequently, on December 5, ratification of the [[Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution|Twenty-first Amendment]] repealed the Eighteenth Amendment. However, United States federal law still prohibits the manufacture of [[Distilled beverage|distilled spirits]] without meeting numerous licensing requirements that make it impractical to produce spirits for personal beverage use.<ref>{{cite web |title=General Alcohol FAQs |url=https://www.ttb.gov/faqs/general-alcohol |website=Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) |access-date=27 August 2022 |archive-date=January 20, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230120200113/https://www.ttb.gov/faqs/general-alcohol |url-status=live }}</ref>
Line 157:
In [[Cicero, Illinois|Cicero]], Illinois, (a suburb of Chicago) the prevalence of ethnic communities who had wet sympathies allowed prominent gang leader [[Al Capone]] to operate despite the presence of police.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The War on Alcohol: Prohibition and The Rise of the American State|last=McGirr|first=Lisa|publisher=New York: W.W. Norton & Company|year=2016|isbn=978-0-393-06695-1|location=New York|page=6|quote=Criminal gangs controlled the large working-class enclave of Cicero just west of Chicago proper as well; it was soon dubbed "Caponetown." Surrounded by factories, the enclave served as the base for the gangster's operation. Capone operated uninhibited by police, his illegal empire smoothed by his political connections, violence and wet sentiments of many of Chicago's ethnic political leaders.}}</ref>
The [[Ku Klux Klan]] talked a great deal about denouncing bootleggers and threatened private vigilante action against known offenders. Despite its large membership in the mid-1920s, it was poorly organized and seldom had an
Prohibition was a major blow to the alcoholic beverage industry and its repeal was a step toward the amelioration of one sector of the economy. An example of this is the case of [[St. Louis]], one of the most important alcohol producers before prohibition started, which was ready to resume its position in the industry as soon as possible. Its major brewery had "50,000 barrels" of beer ready for distribution from March 22, 1933, and was the first alcohol producer to resupply the market; others soon followed. After repeal, stores obtained liquor licenses and restocked for business. After beer production resumed, thousands of workers found jobs in the industry again.<ref>{{cite journal | title =50,000 barrels ready in St Louis | journal =New York Times | date=March 23, 1933 }}</ref>
Line 175:
===Post-repeal===
{{Further|Dry state|Dry county|List of dry communities by U.S. state}}
[[File:Alcohol control in the United States.svg|thumb|upright=1.5|Map showing dry (red), wet (blue), and [[moist county (Kentucky, US)|mixed]] (yellow)
The Twenty-first Amendment does not prevent states from restricting or banning alcohol; instead, it prohibits the "transportation or importation" of alcohol "into any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States" "in violation of the laws thereof", thus allowing state and local control of alcohol.<ref>U.S. Constitution, Amendment XXI, Section 2.</ref> There are still numerous [[dry county|dry counties]] and municipalities in the United States that restrict or prohibit liquor sales.<ref>{{cite web |author=Jeff Burkhart |url=http://nationalgeographicassignmentblog.com/2010/08/19/the-great-experiment-prohibition-continues/ |title=The Great Experiment: Prohibition Continues |publisher=National Geographic Assignment |year=2010 |access-date=November 20, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101227183011/http://nationalgeographicassignmentblog.com/2010/08/19/the-great-experiment-prohibition-continues/ |archive-date=December 27, 2010 }}</ref>
Line 212:
===Crime===
It is difficult to draw conclusions about Prohibition's
A 2016 NBER paper showed that South Carolina counties that enacted and enforced prohibition had homicide rates increase by about 30 to 60 percent relative to counties that did not enforce prohibition.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last=Bodenhorn|first=Howard|date=December 2016 |title=Blind Tigers and Red-Tape Cocktails: Liquor Control and Homicide in Late-Nineteenth-Century South Carolina|journal=NBER Working Paper No. 22980 |doi=10.3386/w22980 |doi-access=free}}</ref> A 2009 study found an increase in homicides in Chicago during Prohibition.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Asbridge|first1=Mark|last2=Weerasinghe|first2=Swarna|date=2009|title=Homicide in Chicago from 1890 to 1930: prohibition and its impact on alcohol- and non-alcohol-related homicides|journal=Addiction|language=en|volume=104|issue=3|pages=355–364|doi=10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02466.x|pmid=19207343|issn=1360-0443}}</ref> However, some scholars have attributed the crime during the Prohibition era to increased [[urbanization]], rather than to the criminalization of alcohol use.<ref name="CookMachin2013">{{cite book|title=Lessons from the Economics of Crime: What Reduces Offending?|date= 2013|publisher=[[MIT Press]]|isbn=978-0-262-01961-3|page=56|language=en|quote=Proponents of legalization often draw on anecdotal evidence from the prohibition era to argue that the increase in crime during prohibition occurred directly because of the criminalization of alcohol. Owens (2011), however, offers evidence to the contrary—exploiting state-level variation in prohibition policy, she finds that violent crime trends were better explained by urbanization and immigration, rather than criminalization/decriminalization of alcohol.|first1=Philip J.|last1=Cook|first2=Stephen|last2=Machin|first3=Olivier|last3=Marie|first4=Giovanni|last4=Mastrobuoni}}</ref> In some cities, such as [[New York City]], crime rates decreased during the Prohibition era.<ref name="PinardPagani2000">{{cite book |last1=Pinard |first1=Georges-Franck |last2=Pagani |first2=Linda |title=Clinical Assessment of Dangerousness: Empirical Contributions |year=2000 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JqdKV7t-89EC&pg=PA199 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |language=en |isbn=978-1-139-43325-9 |page=199 |quote=These declines in criminality extended from 1849 to 1951, however, so that it is doubtful that they should be attributed to Prohibition. Crime rates in New York City, too, decreased during the Prohibition period (Willback, 1938). |access-date=October 4, 2018 |archive-date=January 20, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230120200737/https://books.google.com/books?id=JqdKV7t-89EC&pg=PA199 |url-status=live }}</ref> Crime rates overall declined from the period of 1849 to 1951, making crime during the Prohibition period less likely to be attributed to the criminalization of alcohol alone.<ref name="PinardPagani2000"/>{{why|date=June 2018}}<!-- Wouldn't that eliminate urbanisation and make a temporary spike during prohibition more likely to be the cause? -->
[[Mark H. Moore]]
{{Blockquote|Opponents of prohibition were fond of claiming that the Great Experiment had created a gangster element that had unleashed a "crime wave" on a hapless America. The WONPR's Mrs. Coffin Van Rensselaer, for instance, insisted in 1932 that "the alarming crime wave, which had been piling up to unprecedented height" was a legacy of prohibition. But prohibition can hardly be held responsible for inventing crime, and while supplying illegal liquor proved to be lucrative, it was only an additional source of income to the more traditional criminal activities of gambling, loan sharking, racketeering, and prostitution. The notion of the prohibition-induced crime wave, despite its popularity during the 1920s, cannot be substantiated with any accuracy, because of the inadequacy of records kept by local police departments.|sign=|source=}}Along with other economic effects, the enactment and enforcement of Prohibition caused an increase in resource costs. During the 1920s the annual budget of the [[Bureau of Prohibition]] went from $4.4 million to $13.4 million. Additionally, the [[United States Coast Guard|U.S. Coast Guard]] spent an average of $13 million annually on enforcement of prohibition laws.<ref>{{cite book|title=Bureau of Prohibition, Statistics Concerning Intoxicating Liquors|publisher=Government Printing Office|year=1930|location=Washington|page=2}}</ref> These numbers do not take into account the costs to local and state governments.
Line 223:
=== Discrimination ===
According to Harvard University historian Lisa McGirr, Prohibition had a disproportionately adverse
===Economy===
| |||