New Hampshire Clarifies: Yes, You Can Use A D.C. License To Buy Booze

If someone has this, they can have booze.

Good news for you, Tracy Samplecard!

What is it with all the Washington, D.C. confusion lately? There was that Transportation Security Administration agent who reportedly had no clue the District of Columbia was part of the United States, and now New Hampshire has had to clarify that yes, a D.C. license is a valid and acceptable form of identification one can use to provide proof of age when buying booze. Sigh.

Apparently some liquor stores in the state were sticking very closely to New Hampshire state law, reports the Concord Monitor, which says that there are four types of legal proof of age businesses selling alcohol can accept: a passport, a military card, or a driver’s license or photo identification from any of the 50 states, as well as provinces of Canada.

No mention of D.C. nor any U.S territories. Which means some customers are stymied at the checkout, a customer service rep at a New Hampshire co-op explains to the Monitor.

“It’s just one of those quirks,” he said, using an awesome word that makes a great last name. “We get three to four people each year who we can’t sell to because they don’t have proper identification. We apologize profusely and ask them for a passport… and then say, ‘You can probably go to another store where they will allow it.’ ”

The New Hampshire Liquor Control Commission updated that rule this week [PDF], reports WAMU.org, saying it knows very well that D.C is part of the country.

“Recently there has been confusion as to the acceptability of Washington D.C. driver’s licenses and non-driver identification cards for the purchase of alcoholic beverages within the state,” the clarification notes. “Although the language of RSA 179:8 does not specifically reference Washington D.C. it is understood that the District of Columbia is the capitol [sic] of the United States.”

Hear that, D.C.’ers in New Hampshire? You are real citizens, real citizens who can buy booze. So go forth, and guzzle, like only Americans can.

After Incident, Granite State Liquor Regulators Say D.C. License Is Valid [WAMU.org]

Read Comments2

Edit Your Comment

  1. SingleMaltGeek says:

    I guess residents of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands will have to drink Shirley Temples when in New Hampshire.

    Seriously though, how can legislators be so incredibly bad at their jobs? They’re supposed to say what they mean and mean what they say, and still they get the language so very wrong.

    • furiousd says:

      They’re usually too far removed from the situations they’re regulating. I have a friend that was flabbergasted (also an awesome word, but would make a bad last name) at the laws that they had to abide by that were nowhere close to being based in the reality of his profession. Mike Rowe mentions issues with outside perception of a field http://youtu.be/khoaA3rVNI0 and despite what was shown there, according to a USDA report http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/nahms/sheep/downloads/sheep11/Sheep11_dr_PartI.pdf (graph down in the page 90-100 area) 87.5% of operations use the recommended banding method. I haven’t polled farmers to see which ones have a traditional husbandry-type caring for their animals, but it seems like the way it was depicted, though gross, is far kinder to the animal. Similarly, too many laws are made by people removed from the situations being regulated or where a federal regulation could never adequately encapsulate the wide variety of situations the legal net encircles. I’m in favor of less regulation for this reason, I’m also in favor of professional politicians losing their jobs and being replaced by retirees who’ve gained experience in another profession. For instance, a veterinarian with 30 years of experience participating in the formation of laws that make sense in counsel with others in the same field but different geographic areas so that the laws make sense and aren’t burdensome to the governed.