Issue #31: Florida's Remaining Dry Counties

Washington County is now wet, only two dry regions remain

What’s that?! A substack that isn’t about redistricting?? Its true. While we wait on the latest Congressional drafts from the state house, we can take a look at a more light-hearted topic. Booz!

Last Friday, Washington County, located in the heart of Florida’s conservative panhandle, held a all-mail referendum on the sale of liquor. Before this vote, Washington was just one of three remaining “dry” counties in the state. Dry counties in Florida forbid the sale of liquor; while beer and other low-alcohol drinks remains legal everywhere in the state. In this vote, Washington County gave over 66% in favor of becoming “wet.” In addition, residents voted to allow the sale of both packages from the store as well as individual drinks at bars/restaurants.

The Washington referendum had support in every precinct. Pro-WET sides had far more funds; raising tens of thousands of dollars from entities with a vested interest in selling drinks. The argument was simple; Washington was surrounded by wet counties. Residents already could get drinks and bring them back; so Washington should at least get some tax revenue.

So why did Washington County need to have a referendum? Why did there have to be two questions? Lets take a rapid-fire look at Florida’s prohibition history.

The Saga of Alcohol in Florida

Like many states, Florida has a long history with alcohol and subsequently prohibition. In the name of brevity, lets start with the end of prohibition. After the repeal of the 18th amendment, Florida passed a measure that set legal beer across Florida while leaving liquor sales up to the county in question. Anything under 6.2% alcohol content is a-ok; the rest subject to county rules.

After the referendum, the Wet/Dry status of a county largely reverted to its pre-prohibition rules - which saw much of the rural northern counties dry.

As the decades went on, more counties moved to Wet. The Florida laws established that a county needed to hold two referendums when deciding the issue. One question asking about going Wet or Dry, then the other about drinks being sold in just packages or as individual drinks as well. A county could, in practice, vote to allow liquor sales, but vote to only allow package sales from a store. As the years went on, some counties went entirely wet, supporting both questions, while others supported sales but only for packages.

By the 1990s, only a handful of counties remained dry in Florida. Several counties held many referendums over the decades. These referendums often became very heated affairs - pitting business communities against rural and religious voters. The leaders of DRY forces were almost always churches. In 1993, Santa Rosa County held a contentious referendum that saw the WET side fail after high turnout from DRY voters.

Santa Rosa would remain one of just six DRY counties by 2005. That year the county held another referendum. This time it was entirely by mail (tragically no precinct breakdown) - and the WET side won by 8,000 votes; with the county also backing individual drinks.

As the 2000s moved forward, more counties dropped their DRY status. In 2011, Suwannee County held referendums that saw liquor legalized.

One year later, Madison County held its own referendum; also voting to become wet and to allow individual drinks.

Then in 2017, Jackson County, which was wet but didn’t allow individual drinks, held a referendum on that 2nd question. The individual drinks side easily passed.

With these votes, we are now down to just Liberty and Lafayette as dry counties. Ironically, these are the two smallest counties in Florida, each with under 10,000 residents. Both are very rural, conservative counties.

Voter Drop-off in Question 2

If you were glancing those referendum maps, you may have noticed that the individual drink % often outpaces the WET %. Some casual observers have opined that dry voters must be deciding “well if it becomes legal, might as well allow individual drink.” This is not the situation. The raw vote totals in the maps reveal the real culprit - fewer votes cast. The raw votes cast for WET and DRINKS is almost always nearly the same, while the raw votes for DRY and PACKAGES often see a gap. Fewer votes are cast for question two; and the likely culprit is the DRY voters themselves. This skews the percentages, as the 2nd question is made up of more of the WET side.

The State Capital Debate and Alcohol

While working on my detailed history of the debate around Tallahassee being Florida’s capital, I came across a fascinating story. One of the issues that down-state politicians cited as a reason to move the capital out of Tallahassee was that the county was too rural and…. well less fun. For one, Leon County, home of the city, was dry. A referendum to become WET in 1951 failed.

WET forces were able to strike back in 1960, however, legalizing the sale of liquor in the county.

However, unlike the modern referendums, Question 2 did not see the type of drop-off in votes. On top of this, many reluctant wet voters seemed to exist. At the time, Tallahassee was feeling the pressure to modernize; and liquor could be easily purchased across the Georgie border already. The county approved sale of liquor, but balked at individual drinks.

This conservative attitude would give way in 1967. At this time, the last great push to move the capital out of Tallahassee was underway. Leon’s State Senator, Mallory Horne, knew Tallahassee needed to be viewed as a fun place for lawmakers to hang out in.

Issues like lawmaker comfort were a constant shaper of Tallahassee; from a paved road referendum in the early 1900s to making sure radio signals reached the city in a region filled with radio dead zones.

Since being a member of the legislature requires being a functioning alcoholic, Horne realized Tallahassee being totally WET would help matters. The Senator pushed for a new referendum. Both questions easily passed this time.

With these votes, Tallahassee was now WET, and the lawmakers could go about the business of representing Florida in the most dignified manner possible.

Well maybe not.