The need for Prohibition

During this entire lock down, Tasmac outlets have also been shut and all our Kudimagans are forced not to drink. In a sense, total prohibition has been forced upon our society and its quiet surprising how the majority of the habitual drinkers are managing nearly one month of abstinence. This natural experiment has provided an excellent opportunity to study the impact of prohibition and it has also given the courage to think about implementing total prohibition in our state. 

It has been unequivocally proved by many studies that a generation of youth has been affected by alcoholism which has been brought to the doorstep of every household by Tasmac. Many families have been ruined by alcoholism and there is 100% consensus that it is a social evil which needs to be eradicated. Our society has still not reached a stage where people will drink responsibly. By drinking responsibly, I mean drinking occasionally or otherwise but not at the expense of one's health and family well being. I doubt if that it also required.

Though there are many concerns regarding the implementation of total prohibition, the primary concern revolves around “economics’-the huge revenue loss prohibition will entail. This raises some philosophical questions: Should a desirable social reform be scuttled or delayed for monetary reasons? Isn’t the society’s moral capital more important than physical or economic capital? 

A slightly deeper analysis would bring things in the right perspective. Agreed, the Tasmac brings in huge revenue (more than 20,000 crores). But the key question is at what cost? Consider the health expenses the state incurs for treating all alcohol related illnesses-from gastritis, neurological disorders, cardiac diseases, diabetes to chronic liver failure, liver cirrhosis, carcinoma etc etc. Visit any government hospitals and one can find numerous alcohol related in-patients. The medical cost, cost of medical man power and the cost of health infrastructure arevery huge. Also alcohol causes numerous days of absenteeism (loss of man-days), resulting in reduction in state GDP and the resultant loss of tax revenue to the state. Further, the opportunity cost of money spent on treating alcohol related diseases is huge-if the amount spent on alcohol is used for productive consumption like healthy food for family, better schooling expenses for children or household consumer goods, the resultant gain in human capital and GDP & tax revenues would be much more. Hence the proposition that prohibition would lead to revenue loss to the state is very superfluous and is not proved. In the long run, prohibition can be atleast revenue neutral if not leading to more revenue.

I spoke to many people ( friends, relatives and contacts in rural areas)  who didn’t, rather couldn’t take liquor for almost 40 days. Almost all said that they were slowly getting used to prohibition and most felt that only if the shops are open they are getting the feeling to drink; otherwise they eat early and sleep off. One peculiar and interesting fact among drinkers is that when 4 or 5 friends go to the Tasmac shop, most of the times, one person pays for all the 4-5 persons one day and next day another person pays. Since everybody has to complete their turn of buying for others, the cycle goes on and becomes non-stop. In the end, most felt that it is better to leave the shops closed as it not only results in daily savings but also they are spending quality time with the family members.

TN people especially women never thought that prohibition was possible in the state. Both the two key political parties promised to bring in Prohibition in their election manifesto for 2016 elections. But people were not enthused much and it didn’t become a key election issue. However the situation now is different-people have seen “total prohibition” forcibly implemented in the state, thanks to Corona, and also have seen its positive spin offs. The women especially have got a hope, first time in their life, that prohibition could indeed be implemented in the state. They should not be let down and their hopes should be built upon. More than ever, People may now be ready to accept prohibition  Every crisis is an opportunity and we should never waste one. Its time all the political parties genuinely try to implement prohibition in the state instead of giving mere lip service and that will definitely take the state in the path of development. 

The economies of Prohibition

During this entire lock down, Tasmac outlets have also been shut and all our Kudimagans are forced not to drink. In a sense, total prohibition has been forced upon our society and its quiet surprising how the majority of the habitual drinkers are managing nearly one month of abstinence. This natural experiment has provided an excellent opportunity to study the impact of prohibition and it has also given the courage to think about implementing total prohibition in our state. 

It has been unequivocally proved by many studies that a generation of youth has been affected by alcoholism which has been brought to the doorstep of every household by Tasmac. Many families have been ruined by alcoholism and there is 100% consensus that it is a social evil which needs to be eradicated. Our society has still not reached a stage where people will drink responsibly. By drinking responsibly, I mean drinking occasionally or otherwise but not at the expense of one's health and family well being. I doubt if that it also required.

Though there are many concerns regarding the implementation of total prohibition, the primary concern revolves around “economics’-the huge revenue loss prohibition will entail. This raises some philosophical questions: Should a desirable social reform be scuttled or delayed for monetary reasons? Isn’t the society’s moral capital more important than physical or economic capital? 

A slightly deeper analysis would bring things in the right perspective. Agreed, the Tasmac brings in huge revenue (more than 20,000 crores). But the key question is at what cost? Consider the health expenses the state incurs for treating all alcohol related illnesses-from gastritis, neurological disorders, cardiac diseases, diabetes to chronic liver failure, liver cirrhosis, carcinoma etc etc. Visit any government hospitals and one can find numerous alcohol related in-patients. The medical cost, cost of medical man power and the cost of health infrastructure arevery huge. Also alcohol causes numerous days of absenteeism (loss of man-days), resulting in reduction in state GDP and the resultant loss of tax revenue to the state. Further, the opportunity cost of money spent on treating alcohol related diseases is huge-if the amount spent on alcohol is used for productive consumption like healthy food for family, better schooling expenses for children or household consumer goods, the resultant gain in human capital and GDP & tax revenues would be much more. Hence the proposition that prohibition would lead to revenue loss to the state is very superfluous and is not proved. In the long run, prohibition can be atleast revenue neutral if not leading to more revenue.

Those opposing prohibition argue that the primary justification for not imposing prohibition is the lack of any suitable method for a sustained implementation of prohibition. Their point is that even if there is sufficient political will, prohibition requires huge and continued bureaucratic time and energy which will be a drain on the scarce human resources and also the initial zeal is bound to get diluted within the initial few years leading to corruption and chaos. They also cite that even in states like Gujarat and Bihar, which have implemented prohibition, it is not too difficult to get liquor in black market. Further even within this limited duration of lock down there have been numerous instances of manufacture of spurious liquor which is not only difficult to control but also very dangerous. In sum their point is that if a law is difficult to implement, its better not to have it in first place. 

What is the take away? Its nothing but the respite that we are saved from a moral tangle- we are not letting a social reform to be held hostage only for economical reasons. So should we remain idle after reinforcing our pledge to find a fool proof strategy which is both effective and efficient, to enforce prohibition? 

The answer is a definite "No". It is my strong opinion that alcoholism is one of the most important social evils which directly affects the social and economic progress of millions of poor Indians. There can be no excuse for not generating sufficient political will to eradicate this. A true leader is not one who searches for excuses; a true leader is one who who has a genuine concern for the poor and political will to what is good for the people and society even at the cost of his political capital- political will-if not for prohibition, then for what?