Prohibition: Triumph or Disappointment? Essay Example

Introduction

The great America of today has come a long way to attain the status. The journey was marked by dramatic legislation that often called for a second thought resulting in repeal. One such legislation was the 18th Amendment that gave birth to prohibition. Prohibition was a temperance movement that called for an absolute ban of "the manufacture, transportation, and sale of intoxicating liquor" (Clark 12). Prohibition came to force upon the ratification of the 18th Amendment on January 1919 and the passage of the Prohibition Act by the Congress. Nonetheless, prohibition did not last as it was repealed in 1933, but it has remained an interesting topic of debate in American history whose lessons can still be applied to today's contentious issues such as abortion, the drug war, and gambling. The audience is divided along a consideration of the entire prohibition movement as a triumph or doom. The debate requires a thoughtful effort to evaluate the motivations of the prohibition against the results. Although Prohibition was motivated by good social and economic intentions, it turned out a disappointment of the century because it instead led to a myriad of social and economic costs to the population.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Background and Motivations of the Prohibition

The journey to Prohibition started long ago with several individuals and groups of people coming together to loud their voices towards the ban of alcohol. As early as 1785, a physician called Benjamin Rush initiated the debate against alcohol through his published temperate pamphlets which argued that alcohol was a "disease" that caused addiction (Kucerova 9). Rush's sentiments made some of the Americans to see alcohol as an evil and a sin that needed to be uprooted from the society. It was the beginning of temperance movements that viewed excessive drinking as evil. The temperance movements, in Maine, for example, resolved to educate individuals on the evil danger of alcohol and called for people to abstain from the spirits (Kucerova 9). The religious groups were also drumming up support against alcohol. In the 1830s, the Presbyterians, Protestants, Baptists, and Methodists among others claimed that Christ was almost coming back and they set out to preach against alcohol that was corrupting people into sin and evil deeds (Kucerova 9).

In the 1860s, the momentum of the temperance movement increased with the entry of women in the course. Women through their associations such as the Woman Suffrage Association and the American Woman Suffrage Association argued that alcohol was the main source of their suffering. Women said that men spent all their salaries on alcohol instead of buying food and supporting their families (Kucerova 17). Also, drunken men abused their wives and children (Kucerova 17).

The Prohibition efforts got boosted with the formation of Anti-saloon League of America in 1893 which brought together various individuals, religious and non-religious, who altogether believed that America was losing its religious values and morality as a result of manufacture, sale, and consumption of alcohol (Kucerova 18). The members of the organization agreed to decrease the influence of the spirits on the society by pursuing legal means. The organization engaged politicians and in 1913 introduced an amendment to the U.S Congress that eventually became the 18th Amendment to the constitution.

In a nutshell, therefore, Prohibition can be said to have been driven by the motivation to end sin and immorality in the society. It was an intention to help members of the society avoid misuse of income on alcohol and also to avert women abuse by men. Thornton adds that Prohibition was an attempt to reduce corruption and crime, solve social problems, reduce the tax burden resulting from prisons and poorhouses, and overall enhance health and hygiene in America (3). Alcohol was thought to increase crimes such as homicide which led to many people being incarcerated and increased spending on prisons which was a tax burden to citizens. Also, alcohol was deemed a health hazard.

Negative Consequences of Prohibition

Although Prohibition had positive intentions, its implementation was a complete failure with several negative consequences for the population. Some of the major negative consequences are discussed.

Organized Crime

The immediate result of Prohibition was an increase in organized crimes. Upon realizing that demand of alcohol would drastically increase after its ban, the syndicates established bootlegging operations throughout the country that resulted in organized crime in major cities such as the New York and Chicago (let by Johnny Torrio and Al Capone) (Kucerova 31). The aim of the criminal groups was to make money illegally. Bootleggers were the individuals that supplied alcohol through the underground means to those who needed. Alcohol was part of American culture and many could not do without it especially during party times. Bootleggers saw this as an opportunity to make money by illegally making and selling alcohol to those who needed. When they could not manufacture, they smuggled the substance from Canada and Mexico (Kucerova 31). To protect the new lucrative business opportunity, the syndicates established criminal gangs known as the Mafia. The politicians who participated in the illegal alcohol trade established gangs to get rid of opponents, but later the gang groups operated in extortion, robberies, and other crimes (Kucerova 33). The increase would translate into more people being imprisoned and there would be more taxpayers money spent on incarcerations amounting to an economic cost.

Speakeasy

The Mafia gangsters opened secret bars where people would drink alcohol known as speakeasy meaning to make an order quietly in a secret place. Speakeasies grew quickly in New York and Chicago reaching about 30,000 and 20,000 respectively (Kucerova 34). These secret drinking hubs brought together gangsters, police, politicians, and artists who needed the substance.

Lethal Liquor

Before Prohibition, beer was the most favorite alcohol that was enacted. However, during Prohibition, beer could be easily available because of its bulkiness. The bootleggers colluded with middle-men who supplied them with distilled spirits. The distilled spirits made higher profits for the bootleggers in a short time but had devastating health consequences for the consumers. Due to low quality and dangerous illegal liquor, it was estimated that more than 50,000 were poisoned during the probation period (Kucerova 32).

Corruption

During prohibition, corruption was the order of the day. According to Peck "corruption became a commonplace" because people wanted to drink and the urge made them offer any amount to police or politicians or anybody who would facilitate their access to the much-needed substance. Bribes flowed to bureau agents, law enforcers, and politicians (34).

Applying the Iron Law of Prohibition to Understand its Negative Effects

The way alcohol consumption seemed to increase during prohibition is stunning and can be better understood by examining the "Iron Law of Prohibition." According to Cowan, the iron law of Prohibition states that "the more intense the law of enforcement, the more potent the prohibited substance becomes" (Cowan 26). This is to say that when a drug substance is banned or prohibited so that it is not consumed under normal market constraints, it will be adulterated, increase potent variability, and made more dangerous. This was evident in the alcohol produced during Prohibition. The underground economy run by the Mafia and other middle-men who produced alcohol shifted from beer production to spirits (Kucerova 34). The beer was a bulk and weaker substance which was difficult to supply during prohibition, and this made the opportunists turn to stronger and more compact alcohol brands such as whiskey. In fact, the price of alcohol increased more than 700% whereas spirits just increased by 270% (Thornton 15). Again, this was a hurdle to supply of beer as it was no longer affordable to the consumers who needed. The producers and smugglers also shifted from supplying beer to stronger alcoholic beverages such as the fortified wine which was of higher potency (Thornton 15). Also, the people turned to patent medicinal alcohol with higher alcohol concentration (Thornton 15). The highly potent alcohol was more dangerous to human health than the alcohol that they consumed before Prohibition.

The Prohibition Debate

The proponents of Prohibition often argue that positive results were realized during the period. They suppose that Prohibition led to increased alcohol consumption, reduced crime eased congestion in prisons, and increased labor productivity. For example, Stelzle argued that Prohibition was already yielding fruits even before it was implemented by compiling data and comparing the state of Maine and New Jersey (3). In the study, the Stelzle concluded that in Maine where Prohibition had already taken place, there were many positive results including 60% of people owning homes unlike 34% in New Jersey (3). However, such data was flawed because Maine was an urbanized state whereas New Jersey was a rural state where poverty would be expected to be higher.

Ironically, alcohol consumption did not decrease during Prohibition as argued by proponents. According to Thornton, spending on alcohol was higher during prohibition than before. In fact, alcohol consumption had been falling from 1910 and reached an all-time low in 1921 occasioned by the depression (15). However, during the Prohibition period, illicit manufacture and sale of alcohol expanded. The result was an expansion in resources devoted to law enforcement. The Bureau of Prohibition increased its spending from $4.4 to 13.4 million during the prohibition period (Thornton 16). A newspaper, The Telegraph-Herald, stated that Rochester city in New York incurred direct crime costs amounting to $1.5 million in 1929. It is to say that instead of Prohibition reducing alcohol consumption, it opened new avenues for illicit brews and cost the taxpayers more money to service law enforcement. This was equal to creating a burden for the law-abiding citizens who pay taxes.

Similarly, the promise by Prohibition proponents to reduce public spending on prisons did not materialize. At the beginning of Prohibition, Reverend Billy Sunday expressed high optimism to audiences declaring that "the reign of tears was over" (Thornton 13). He further promised that "prisons will turn into factories and jails into storehouses" (Thornton 13). Billy assured audiences that children would laugh and women smile as men would be walking upright (Thornton 14). But this was far from the reality. Soon after Prohibition began, homicides increased from 5.6% per 100,000 people during the first decade of the 20th century to 10% per 100,000 individuals during the 1920s (Thornton 14). In major U.S cities, crimes increased by 21% between 1920 and 1921 as the percentage of persons arrested for drunkenness and disorderly conduct grew by 41% (Thornton 14). Overall, cases of homicides, battery, burglary, and assault increased by 13% during the Prohibition (Thornton 14). This is a clear indication that prisons became fuller than before leading to more spending. Thus, the promise of turning prisons into factories became an illusion. Also, to think that men would start walking upright could not happen because there were thousands of speakeasies that supplied even the more dangerous liquor.

Conclusion

It was unfortunate that those who crafted Prohibition received the opposite results instead of the intended positive cost savings. Initially, the proponents of prohibition expected that ban of manufacture and sale of alcohol in the nation would lead to a reduction in crime, increase labor productivity, reduce prison expenditures and get rid of alc...