The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1932-11-14
CONGRESS WILL
FACE FURIOUS
BEER BATTLE
Drys viii Exert Utmost
Efforts to Prevent
Brew Return.
CONTINUED From Page onel


Before the last election there
we're six: Maryland, New York,
Massachusetts,, Nevada, Montana,
Wisconsin.
Nine states repealed their en-
forcement laws in the last election:
Michigan, Louisiana, Washington,
New Jersey, California, Oregon,
Arizona, North Dakota, Colorado.
Fourteen Repeal Acts
That makes fourteen states which
have repealed enforcement acts
since national prohibition MARY
land never had any, and makes
more than 10000, 900 people eligible
to receive whatever congress offers
them.
But in the other thirty-three
states, even If the national law is
repealed, the state law remains.
Furious fights are certain in the
legislatures of many of these states
to repeal state laws and get them
in shape to profit by any national
modification.
The American Federation of
Labor and the Crusaders for the
vets, and the w. G. T. U. and Anti
Saloon League for the drys are al
ready active here.
Bear in mind that so far as con-
gress has power to legalize beer at
all, it must do it on the theory that
it is Misunderstanding.
Will Kill State Laws
That brings up the next problem.
If congress declares 4 per cent beer
Notwithstanding, 1t is possible that
practically all the state laws (Which
set a u of l per cent limit will be-
come unconstitutional, being in con-
flict with law of congress. And
then all restrictions on this revivl-
fled beer are off.
Beer will get big stimulus, in adj
dition to the definite prod of the
electorate, from the fact that the
government needs money, and needs
it badly
ANY aid beer would bring to I'M
employment or the grain surplus
would be help, too. Those fac
tors are going to be important to
fence-sitters in congress.
There will be literally scores of
beer bills thrown into the hopper as
soon as the gavel falls. In fact
there are scores left over from last
sssion. The judiciary committee will
have to hold hearings, weed out
those with very high or unlimited
alcoholic content, and pick one
Which seems likely to get court APP
proval.
Bitter Fight Sure
This will be fought bitterly both
In committee and on the floor. for
the drys are going to battle every
inch of the way
II modification should be blocked
in the lame duck" session, it is
certain to go through in some
form when the newly elected con-
gress meets in response to an ex-
pected call from President-E Elect
Franklin d. Roosevelt after his in
auguration, March 4.
For the astounding overturn in
the recent election completely
changed the complexion of con-
gress. The lame duck" congress
lines up: House, wet 1873, dry DAT:
senate, wet 81, dry IS.
But the new congress will line up:
House, wet 1913, dry 26, undecIared
So; senate, wet 81, dry 30, undeclared
B. Thus the drys lose 221 seats i'll
the next house and 35 in the senate.
almost a complete reversal.
Democrats and Wet
1t is thus clear that in the next
session house and senate will both
be Democratic and wet by good ma
jorities.
The platform on which it was SO
overwhelmingly given p W er
promised: l. Repeal of the,
eighteenth amendment by proposing
a repeater to truly representative
conventions in the states called to
act solely on that proposal"
2. Pending repeal, immediate
modification of the Volstead act to
legalize beer and other beverages
"of such alcoholic content as is per-
Missile under the Constitution.
With such tremendous ma
jority, the new congress is certain
to modify in some way, even if the
lame duck" congress does not.
But at the root of the matter lies
the eighteenth amendment. The
Democratic position is clear. 1t i'm
plies complete repeal, turning back
the whole matter to the states, and
clearing the federal Constitution of
any specific mention of liquor.
No Substitute Implied
It's demand that the federal
government use its power to EN-
able the states to protect them
selves" against outside liquor traffic.
does not imply any substitute
amendment to take the place of the
eighteenth.
Attorney-G General Mitchell, how
ever, believes that if substitute
amendment seemed to congress
necessary to give the federal gov
eminent power to protect dry
states, such a substitute could be