April 13, 2022

"Obvious efforts to circumvent the law for example an unreasonably small portion of soup, a serving of canned beans, a handful of lettuce... will be treated as a violation of the law."

Said the New York State Liquor Authority, quoted in "No ‘Cuomo chips’ allowed: ‘Substantial food’ needed for to-go booze" (NY Post). 

"Cuomo chips" refers to the way bars and restaurants responded to a Cuomo-era requirement that bars and restaurants serve food along with liquor.

In response, the owner of Saratoga Springs’ Harvey’s Irish Pub automatically put $1 “Cuomo Chips” on customers’ tabs so they weren’t required to fork over the money for a full meal when patrons just wanted to sip on a beer or cocktail....

At first, the chips were deemed good enough, then Cuomo said they weren't: 

A front-page story in The Post last July labeled the former gov “Drinktator” for his edict, and he only confused New Yorkers further when he bizarrely claimed, “There is no bar that only serves alcohol.” “To be a bar, you had to have food available — soups, sandwiches, etc. More than just hors d’oeuvres, chicken wings,” he explained during a press conference. “You had to have some substantive food — the lowest level of substantive food were sandwiches.” 

Many bars got creative with their meals, offering Lunchables, a single sliver of cheese quesadilla or H Mart dumplings cooked in a hot dog steamer, bar staff and customers previously told The Post. 

Patrons of a Ridgewood joint said at the time that one spot is offering “soup” consisting of hot water and a bouillon cube. Another bar served a $1 gluten-free vegan taco consisting of a single corn tortilla, while in Bushwick establishments served gazpacho and a dry cup of ramen...

The "substantial food" issue is an excellent lightweight distraction to leaven the NY Governor's race. It's an interesting opportunity for Cuomo, who's hinted he might run against the incumbent Kathy Hochul, who just became much more vulnerable (as discussed in the previous post).

25 comments:

jake said...

As if we needed another example of a government made problem with a government solution that has yielded more problems. What an effort in buffoonery.

gilbar said...

here's an idea, since new cases are down (literally!) more than 90% YTD..
Let people do what they want.
They want to go to a crowded bar, and breath on each other? It's Their Body.. Their Choice
They want to stay home and shun life? It's Their Body.. Their Choice
see?

Hospitals aren't full, aren't filling.. New Cases continue to plummet.. What's the Problem?
GET YOUR LAWS OFF OF MY BODY!!!!

Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this son of New York said...

I was at a Lake George hotel last spring, at the bar, when a Hassidic guy came in and just wanted a beer, "No can do unless you buy this piece of chocolate cake!", so he left. This seems like a religious freedom issue.

iowan2 said...

The question would me. Why does the Govt care about a bar delivering liquor? Where do they have to they power to intervene?

I'm examining Chesterton's fence, and can't suss out its original purpose, are at least determine if the same circumstances warrant its continued existence.

West TX Intermediate Crude said...

Obvious attempts to comply exactly with the letter of the law will be treated as violations of the law.
FIFY.
Show me the man, I'll find you his crime.

jrapdx said...

I live a long way from NY so I don't have a stake in Cuomo's current actions. But his crappy conduct has been in the news, we hear about it anyway.

Any doubt the guy is a genuine POS? Wrong in every possible way, some might call him "evil". For good reasons too.

Run for office? Again? Two questions: WTH is wrong with him (other than the obvious)? WTH is wrong with NY voters? If people vote for him, let alone reelect him governor, that's just nuts.

Is there a state in the Union more decrepit or morally bankrupt than NY has become?

Leland said...

A similar game with bars was played in Texas during the pandemic. As places began to reopen, bars were told they had to serve food to open. These were bars licensed to serve alcohol, not food. Once they complied; TABC demanded these owners renew their license to allow for serving food and drinks.

gilbar said...

jrapdx said...
Is there a state in the Union more decrepit or morally bankrupt than NY has become?

And The Prairie State of Illinois said... Hold My Beer

Wilbur said...

jrapdx said...
Is there a state in the Union more decrepit or morally bankrupt than NY has become?

Check out the great State of Illinois. I checked out 36 years ago, and never regretted it.

tim maguire said...

If government is now setting regulations by whim, why not go full force and make it the law of the land that each morning all bar owners have to find out what the governor had for breakfast and require that people wanting a beer have to have that too? Closing time should be when the governor goes to bed.

tim maguire said...

iowan2 said...I'm examining Chesterton's fence, and can't suss out its original purpose, are at least determine if the same circumstances warrant its continued existence.

I think it's a kind of prohibition-lite. People will get less drunk if they take food with their drink.

John henry said...

This goes back 125 years to Raines Law 1896. From wikipedia

The meal requirement was met by the cheapest sandwich available, sometimes reused across tables, or sandwiches made of rubber.[3]

Jacob Riis wrote in 1902 of saloon keepers who mocked the law by setting out "brick sandwiches," two pieces of bread with a brick in between, thus fulfilling the legal requirement of serving food. He also writes of an altercation in a saloon where a customer attempted to eat a sandwich that the bartender had served just for show; "the police restored the sandwich to the bartender and made no arrests."[5]


Mr. Forward said...

"...unreasonably small portion of soup..." How are they going to tell? Most of the restaurants I've gone to since Bidenflation are serving quantities that used to be the kid's menu.

hawkeyedjb said...

A couple of posts later there is reference to a woman discussing the "right to be let alone." That's something that ought to be in the damned constitution. COVID turned a great many useless government busybodies into useless busybodies with more power.

John henry said...

The reason for the Raines law was to try to keep poorer people out of bars and curb drinking by making it more expensive

Similar motivation behind the Cuomo laws

Tommy Duncan said...

Our southern border is open to illegals and drugs. Our big Democrat run cities are awash with violent crime. And this is what we spend our time enforcing?

EAB said...

Craft brew place across the street had a $1 PB&J during COVID.

Does it count as “making it” when you know the owner of your favorite NYC Chinese restaurant, who’d let us add Mai Tais to our delivery order? He’d put them in soup containers. This was back in late ‘90s, so a totally illegal accommodation.

Wince said...

Obvious efforts to circumvent the law for example an unreasonably small portion of soup, a serving of canned beans, a handful of lettuce... will be treated as a violation of the law.

"A slight disorder of the stomach can make them cheat... A crumb of cheese. A fragment of underdone potato."

mikee said...

The governor of Texas, to promote take-out dining during COVID, decreed that take-out cocktails were legal for restaurants to sell. The excellent margaritas at my local Rio Grande Restaurant were repackaged in styrofoam cups with lids, then wrapped in cling wrap to insure nobody, and I mean NOBODY, would sip on them while driving home with a bag full of enchilada mole and fajitas. This cling wrap was decreed to meet the requirement to avoid "open alcoholic beverage containers" in vehicles, which is a big No-No in our state.

Unwrapping the cling wrap, inserting a straw, and sipping on a frosty delicious margarita on the five minute drive home from the restaurant in the August heat, and maybe sneaking in a nacho chip from the top of the delivery bag, too, would be very, very wrong, and again, NOBODY in Texas would ever do this, and never did. Thank you, Governor Abbot, for not being like Cuomo.

JK Brown said...

In the late 1990s, on a port call in Costa Rica, I learned they had a law requiring food with every drink. So with every beer, you got a tiny cup of something. First time I had ceviche. The food came with the drink, no discussion.

Where I grew up, beer joints, had to serve food. So they would make burgers. Often those burgers became a sales item themselves as they were extra to the base business so not cut-to-the-bone. Even before legal to drink, you could order to go, pick up and leave.

On the flip side, mid-1990s, in Seattle, a beer/wine and food joint near me started serving brunch on Sundays. One Sunday, I saw them having to refuse service to a couple with an infant in arms since legally they were a bar. I don't even remember if you could get alcohol before noon.

Joe Smith said...

If you aren't happy with Buffalo wings, blue cheese dipping sauce, and a couple of frosty beers, then I don't want to know you.

Sounds like a balanced meal to me...

Joe Smith said...

If you have to buy food as well as alcohol, it seems to me that you would spend MORE time in that super-spreader bar.

Why did Cuomo want to kill more people?

Jupiter said...

Thank God for the New York State Liquor Authority. How would we ever get through a day without their help? If they all died vomiting blood tomorrow, I'm sure someone would miss them. Hard to say who, but some of them probably have mothers.

n.n said...

No soup for you! Nexxxt! Be like Cuomo, Whitmer et al, sacrifice a granny at your friendly neighborhood planned parent/hood. Together, we can.

Bunkypotatohead said...

Beer cheese soup with a side of Beer Nuts should be adequate.