A website called Watchdog.org has published an article suggesting that the Vermont ban on happy hours — selling drinks at lower prices during certain times — is economically illogical.

Writer Jon Street quoted the owner of Burlington’s Ake’s Place, Ronnie Ryan, who suggested that the state should allow bars to lure in customers with occasional happy hours.

“Burlington is so rich in young professionals and college students, I’m confident it would help business, and if it helps our business it also helps the state as it will generate more money in taxes,” he said.

Bill Goggins, director of education, licensing and enforcement for the Vermont Department of Liquor Control, broadly explained the role of the state government in keeping people safe, while a fellow at the Cato Institute lamented, “Why should Vermont insert itself between deals that please restaurants and customers alike?”

Corin Hirsch was a Seven Days food writer 2011 through 2016. She was also a dining critic and drinks columnist at Newsday from 2017 to 2022, and contributes to The Guardian, Wine Enthusiast and other publications. She’s spoken often on colonial era drinking and is the author of Forgotten Drinks of Colonial New England, published by History Press in 2014.

14 replies on “Should Vermont Lift the Ban on Happy Hours? Watchdog.org Thinks So”

  5. The puritanical impulse of government: if people are enjoying something it’s time to put a stop to it.

  6. The slogan” I live in Vermont I do what ” I want is apparently just a book title. Really a bar can’t alter their drink prices for an hour… that’s a bit absurd. Actually it’s a lot ridiculous.
    Also, Ronnie Ryan should be ashamed… Boo I can’t lower liquor prices during happy hour… Well how about a little imagination Ron… Why not offer free party mix / chips / pretzels? Why not offer free billards or free juke box for an hour? Maybe even organize something akin to a trivia event, or some other competition/tournament?
    The state should only be making regulations that are necessary to protect the public and this doesn’t pass the sniff test. Business should stop with the complaining, be creative and think outside the box to get to where you want to be.
    I remember a bar one time advertising a pool tournament, $10 to enter with payouts. The DLC said… nope… no gambling. So instead of entering the pool tournament for $10 you could buy a tiny bag of Doritos for $10, which also came with “free” entry into the pool tournament. That was, at least then, perfectly fine.

  7. I recommend reading the article linked at the bottom of this, and also the comments from a regulator in another state at the bottom. Then look at the headlines for other articles on the website, that can help you decide just how slanted and in which direction, you think watchdog might be.

  8. In fact, I recommend reading the actual article this time, and the comment from one of the original regulators who points out that not all drink specials are prohibited, only certain types. Another thing worth noting are the headlines of the other articles on the watchdog site at the bottom of the page. If you’re looking for an idea about how slanted, and in which direction, watchdog appears to be.

  9. Bill Goggins is not “…head of the Vermont Department of Liquor Control…” He is the director of the Education, Licensing, and Enforcement Section, and reports directly to Michael Hogan, who is the Commissioner of DLC. Even the article you’re quoting gets it more correct: “Bill Goggins, director of enforcement at the Department of Liquor Control…”

  10. Why does having an affiliation with the Tea Party bring into question its potential bias? Is the Tea Party funded by big alcohol or something?

Comments are closed.