Attacking the Nightlife Industry

One of the city's most robust industries is entertainment, specifically nightlife. According to The New York Times, this should be stunted along with many of our other economic activities under the guise of "Improving the Quality of Nightlife" (editorial, October 8, 2006). Here are some of the details of the Times' proposals:

• "The police would surely get better cooperation from the clubs if the city had greater say over whether the owners could keep their licenses."
• "It needs to take a close look at the licensing process and the density problem not just in New York City but in Syracuse, Buffalo and other places as well. And it must make the licensing process perfectly transparent, so that everyone can see where all the licenses, actual and proposed, are located on the map. (In some places, that will mean bypassing local political cliques who keep this to themselves.)"
• "[T]he authority should devise a strategy for cutting back the number of licenses in areas that are deemed to be overly saturated. When owners close down or give up a license in an area troubled by club noise and violence, the liquor authority should be able to retire the license rather than giving it to a new applicant."

First of all, I'm not so bothered by a democratic process that ends up restricting nightlife. I think it's a bad idea, because nightlife is a healthy sector of the economy, and certainly plays a huge role in making New York a livable 24-hour city.

However, there is no reason a state bureaucracy should have any say in the matter under and circumstances. They shouldn't even have the power to grant licenses to an establishment; this power should be local, and a locality should have the right to simply not even require a license if it pleases. There is no reason, under any circumstances, by any stretch of the imagine, for the state to be involved in granting liquor licenses to establishments in New York City, Buffalo, Syracuse, or anywhere else. These matters should be left to village, city, and county governments.

The state liquor control board, if it isn't abolished outright, should have a single goal: making sure that liquor is safe to drink, and not bathtub moonshine. There is no reason for the state to be wasting its money on any other project.

As for violent bouncers, that shouldn't be a problem unique to the alcohol business. Bouncers who commit violent acts should be treated the same way as mall security guards who commit violent acts.

And as far as underage drinking goes, it's time to work with the state to repeal that policy of preventing young adults from drinking. Young adults are going to drink anyway, and there should be safe places for them to drink, so they don't binge drink with a powerful substance that they have little to no control over.