THE INFAMOUS "clam" is dead. My favorite drink at Jaberwoke, and therefore a large part of my social life, is now forever spoiled as part of the Virginia Department of Alcohol Beverage Control's recent crackdown on the Corner.
The clam's official name is the "walrus drink," which is an assortment of liquors and juices in a huge clam shell with numerous large straws. Not only a delicious drink, or "hangover in a bucket" as a friend once called it, the clam is a social experience. Over the past few days (our mourning period), my friends and I reminisced about all of our favorite clam stories -- there are spilled clams, multiple clams in one night, birthday clams, post-football game clams, guest appearance clams, karaoke night clams, end of the semester clams, being single on Valentine's Day clams, farewell clams or even blackout clams. Whatever the occasion, the clam is a memorable (or not so memorable) social experience, and our University community has suffered a great loss at the hands of the Virginia ABC.
Now that we have given the clam a proper funeral, it is time to chastise our much despised assassin, the local Virginia ABC representative. When Jaberwoke started the drink in September, owner Jim Galloway and his bar manager consulted the local ABC official about the clam. The official gave the okay to Jaberwoke, since there are no legal limits to the size of a drink or the amount of alcohol in a drink. However, during the local ABC's recent crackdown, the official was taken aback by the size of the drink. According to Galloway, the new official "was uncomfortable with that much liquor in front of a person." The official also referenced a state law which prohibits more than two drinks in front of a person at one time. Galloway quickly complied with ABC and removed the infamous clam from the Jaberwoke drink menu (tear drop).
The immediate concern, however, is with the ABC official's tyrannical decision-making power. We can claim that large drinks, like the clam, are shared by multiple people and therefore do not constitute more than two drinks for one person, or we can bypass the "no drink specials after 9 p.m." law and argue that the drink deal is not necessarily a "deal," but an actual menu item. There are countless objections, but local bar owners cannot contest the ABC official's sanctions and decision-making power.
The ABC official has the power to stop alcohol sales. For most Corner bars, alcohol sales account for up to 70 percent of their business. Without this income, most local bars are unable to pay high rent and overhead costs on the Corner. Therefore, local bars do not dare disobey ABC regulations, because a single official can feasibly force a restaurant or bar into bankruptcy for minor violations. This unlimited power, however, is conducive to abuse and possible misinterpretations of the law. Galloway said "the regulators keep us in business." Yet government officials should not have the authority to unilaterally enforce ambiguous state laws based on "comfortability" and thereby jeopardize the livelihood of local businesses.
Granted, local owners may appeal regulations in court, but for small businesses, legal and time costs often outweigh the necessary changes to correct ABC violations. The resultant system therefore places local bars at the discretion of ABC officials who irregularly and unevenly enforce minor drinking laws.
The state regulations just provide ABC officials with one more opportunity to place unnecessary restrictions on local bars and impede their rights to conduct business, despite vigorous attempts to comply with legal age limits. Hail to the ABC dictator who unilaterally decides how much alcohol we can drink at local bars! The clam is a social entity, not a social detriment. Bring back the clam!
Michael Behr's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at mbehr@cavalierdaily.com.