Spokane7
62°Quick links: 2012 graduating seniors • Summer camp guide • Jobs: The Road Ahead • Prep sports • News quiz
If you had a beer over the weekend, pat yourself on the back. You helped out the state economy.
A recent press release says beer has nearly a $3 billion impact on Washington’s economy, supports 33,000 jobs and generates nearly $230 million in federal, state and local taxes.
And the people sending the press release would know this because? They’re the National Beer Wholesalers Association, and they get their facts from the Beer Institute.
The wholesalers note that beer directly employs more than 20,000 people as brewers, distributors, sales clerks, bartenders and ballpark venders. Not sure if the remainders, which would include substance abuse counselors and law enforcement personnel assigned to drunk driving patrols.
They can break it down for Idaho and other states, and can even give figures for each congressional district at a Web site.
So why does the Beer Institute want us to know all this?
“These numbers demonstrate that our industry is essential to several sectors of the U.S. economy, particularly as the nation struggles to regain its footing in this uncertain climate,” said Jeff Becker, president of the Beer Institute. “For this reason, it is important that state and federal officials consider equitable tax policies that do not unduly harm an industry that provides so many domestic jobs and so much economic growth.”
So apparently they feel that they’ve done their share of generating taxes for right now, and are prepared for any attempt to raise those taxes.
Jim Camden is a veteran political reporter for The Spokesman-Review.
Jonathan Brunt covers Spokane City Hall for The Spokesman-Review.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
Gary D Rhodes on April 08 at 4:44 p.m.
I’m doing what I can for the economy right now.
I was wondering if you might look into the Admiralty Law as represented by the yellow fringe on flags at government installations and office buildings.
I was at Senator Cantwell’s office this morning and they said I could bring a “non-decorated” flag for display in her office. My guess is that before next Wednesday they will change their mind. But if she lets me display the non-fringed flag for a week in her office, that will prove to me that I need more tinfoil in my hat, and I’ll move on.
If I’m right, and they will not display the plain flag, you would have the start of a good story that could win you the Pulitzer.
Some background cause I know you are busy.
Martial Law Flag “Pursuant to 4 U.S.C. chapter 1, §§1, 2, & 3; Executive Order 10834, August 21, 1959; 24 F.R.6865; a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE border on three sides. The President of the United States designates this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the military. The placing of a fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag and the arrangement of the stars in the union are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but are within the discretion of the President as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy.” 34 Ops. Atty. Gen. 83.
President, Dwight David Eisenhower, by Executive Order No.10834, signed on August 21, 1959 and printed in the Federal Register at 24 F.R. 6865, pursuant to law, stated that: “A military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a yellow fringe border on three sides.”
Gary D Rhodes on April 09 at 10:00 a.m.
The reason this is vitally important right now, is the fact that we are losing our sovereignty slowly but surely to entities that are unconstitutional.
It’s hard to understand how this is happening when the framers worked so hard to protect us from a power-grabbing federal government. Now our lawmakers, who have taken an oath to defend and protect the Constitution, are usurping the plain meaning, and subverting our laws.
My belief that this can be done so easily, is that we are not required to follow the Constitution because we are under Admiralty conditions. It is hard to prove this because no one will challenge, or try to find the truth.
If I am not allowed to fly a plain flag in the Senator’s office, do you think that means anything? It’s easy to label this a wild conspiracy. I hope you can do more.
jimc on April 09 at 5:43 p.m.
Mr. Rhodes,
I have to say you’ve gone way outside my area of expertise by raising a question about the admiralty flag. I always thought the fringe was for decoration, and I know I’ve seen it on flags for years at formal settings.
I’ll have to do some research next week, because I’m tied up on Friday.
But if anybody has anything to add in the meantime, please feel free to chime in.
Jim Camden/Spin Control.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on April 15 at 2:58 p.m.
Jim, I believe “Fringe” is the operative word here… j