That said, I'm not entirely sure Maine's strategy will be effective. As that Guardian article describes (with, full disclosure, lots of quotes from me), this has already been a two-time loser. It generally comes down to cost and enforcement. Most everyone agrees that the idea is good (those willfully cheating customers excepted), but putting a regulatory and enforcement structure in place causes people to balk. A point foes rush to make:
It was a point echoed by Sean Sullivan of the Maine Brewers' Guild. "We believe that crafting a beer-specific bill, targeting something that is already illegal, and shifting enforcement responsibilities to our already-overburdened liquor enforcement officials, would not be useful," Sullivan said.I'm not actually convinced this is a legitimate argument (foes are never disinterested bystanders), but it does appear to be an effective one. Somehow the burden does not overwhelm the governments in Germany, the Czech Republic, and the UK. The bill is completely vestigial now, and with public policy, the devil is always in the small print. If they do pull it off, it could be a beachhead for future legislation. Godspeed, Mainers, may you go where no Americans have gone before!