The following appeared in the January 2011 issue of Carolina Journal:

RALEIGH — A tip of the glass to Gov. Bev Perdue, who again suggested in December that she is mulling the privatization of liquor sales in North Carolina.

The mere mention of the dreaded “p” word led ABC board members and some elected officials to reach for the hard stuff. In a letter to Perdue, Jon Carr, the lobbyist for the N.C. Association of ABC Boards, said any plan placing the sale and distribution of spirits in private hands would be a disservice.

According to Carr, North Carolina ranks 48th nationally in per capita alcohol consumption and yet generates the third-highest tax revenues from booze sales. Carr also claimed that privatization would starve local governments of revenues and make it easier for minors to obtain alcohol illegally.

Nonsense. As a matter of principle, no government should maintain a monopoly on the price, access, and distribution of a legal product. While it’s reasonable both to outlaw alcohol sales to minors and prevent people from driving while intoxicated, placing a hammerlock on alcohol purchases harms consumers.

Moreover, recent scandals in New Hanover, Mecklenburg, and Guilford counties have shown that the current system of politically juiced ABC boards invites corruption.

To be sure, principle rarely trumps political expediency — particularly when major tax revenues are involved. But there’s no practical reason to keep liquor sales in state hands. Perdue should continue to pursue full privatization.

A number of state models are worth investigating. California, Louisiana, and Missouri, among others, allow anyone with a liquor license to sell any alcoholic beverage. Grocery stores, pharmacies, convenience marts, and specialty retailers offer a full range of beer, wine, and spirits.

Meantime, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Utah let grocery stores sell only low-alcohol beer and wine coolers; liquor, wine, and “full-strength” beer must be sold in liquor stores, which are in private hands. Maryland lets each county set its rules. Some privatized states maintain Sunday blue laws.

The claim that a private system would deny counties tax revenue is a red herring. Alcohol sales would continue to be taxed, with revenues flowing into county coffers. In fact, county revenue streams are not safe under the current monopoly. At any time, a General Assembly desperate for cash could divert the taxes raised by the current system from counties to the state.

Finally, it’s disingenuous to suggest that privatization would increase public intoxication, drunken driving, or underage drinking. Police will continue to enforce current laws. And the incentives to discourage illegal behavior would be much stronger in a private system.

If an ABC employee sells booze to a minor, unless criminal charges are filed, the public may never know. State personnel laws can keep the public from learning of any formal discipline.

By contrast, any private liquor license holder who sold to a minor would face swift, harsh, and public penalties.

Other states treat their residents who imbibe like responsible adults. North Carolina should, too.