[alcaponejunior]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/white-house-beer-recipe-obama_n_1818531.html

Interesting thing on that huff page is the top 20 selling craft breweries in the US.  I've had something from all of them.  Stone, Bell's, DFH, FFF etc.

I'm about to sign

[phillamb168]

Abraham Lincoln was the first president to reside in the current white house.

Yeah, but did he brew beer there? NO. He slayed vampires.

[alcaponejunior]

Abraham Lincoln was the first president to reside in the current white house.

Yeah, but did he brew beer there? NO. He slayed vampires.

True, he was busy slaying vampires, so he didn't have time to brew.  But Geo Wash left a huge stash of barleywine and imperial stout, so ol' Abe still had plenty of beer. :-)

[Pawtucket Patriot]

The Feds already did their job by making it legal for the states to allow it.  Whether homebrewing is allowed in your state is considered a "states" issue and the Federal government does not have any jurisdiction on it. 

Yeah, if your state has restrictive liquor laws, that's all on your state. The Feds can't make states allow homebrewing. The Feds have some power in the commerce clause to regulate businesses, for instance to prevent discrimination within a legal business operation (no "whites-only" restaurants.) Since homebrewing isn't commercial, I don't think it falls under commerce clause.

At one point in time, the commerce clause was interpreted pretty broadly.  In the case you mention above concerning the whites-only restuarant (Katzenbach v. McClung), the Supreme Court basically said that if Congress can reasonably conclude that, taken in the aggregate, an activity will have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, then it is within Congress' power under the commerce clause to regulate that activity.

It's a stretch, but Congress could conceivably regulate homebrewing under that interpretation.  However, the SC has limited the power of Congress under the commerce clause quite a bit since that case was decided.

I don't think that logic regarding the Commerce Clause works since the 21st Amendment gives state govts broad discretion in terms of how they will regulate alcohol.  But it does raise a constitutional question about which part  of the Constitution is more important.

Bingo.  The way congress "regulates" homebrewing in spite of the 21st Amendment is under its power to tax.  The bill that President Carter signed making it legal to homebrew was a tax exemption for beer brewed for personal or family use up to 100 gallons per year per adult, or 200 gallons per household. 

[hopfenundmalz]

Abraham Lincoln was the first president to reside in the current white house.
 

I have learned a lot in this thread. Time to learn more. What do you and Tom me. I know the the British burned the White House in the War of 1812, it was rebuilt, and remodeled. Truman lived much of his term in Blair house.

Was Lincoln the first to live in the 3rd floor addition?

[nateo]

The White House wasn't completely destroyed in the burning of Washington. It was gutted by the fire, but when they "rebuilt it" they used the original walls that were still standing.

http://www.whitehousehistory.org/whha_classroom/classroom_4-8-history-war.html

[narcout]

The Feds already did their job by making it legal for the states to allow it.  Whether homebrewing is allowed in your state is considered a "states" issue and the Federal government does not have any jurisdiction on it. 

Yeah, if your state has restrictive liquor laws, that's all on your state. The Feds can't make states allow homebrewing. The Feds have some power in the commerce clause to regulate businesses, for instance to prevent discrimination within a legal business operation (no "whites-only" restaurants.) Since homebrewing isn't commercial, I don't think it falls under commerce clause.

At one point in time, the commerce clause was interpreted pretty broadly.  In the case you mention above concerning the whites-only restuarant (Katzenbach v. McClung), the Supreme Court basically said that if Congress can reasonably conclude that, taken in the aggregate, an activity will have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, then it is within Congress' power under the commerce clause to regulate that activity.

It's a stretch, but Congress could conceivably regulate homebrewing under that interpretation.  However, the SC has limited the power of Congress under the commerce clause quite a bit since that case was decided.

I don't think that logic regarding the Commerce Clause works since the 21st Amendment gives state govts broad discretion in terms of how they will regulate alcohol.  But it does raise a constitutional question about which part  of the Constitution is more important.

Bingo.  The way congress "regulates" homebrewing in spite of the 21st Amendment is under its power to tax.  The bill that President Carter signed making it legal to homebrew was a tax exemption for beer brewed for personal or family use up to 100 gallons per year per adult, or 200 gallons per household.

Say that Congress decided to try to override a state law that made homebrewing illegal, do you think it would be successful in doing so under the commerce clause or would it fail (due to a more restrictive interpretation of that clause, the 21st amendment, or any other reason)?

[nateo]

Say that Congress decided to try to override a state law that made homebrewing illegal, do you think it would be successful in doing so under the commerce clause or would it fail (due to a more restrictive interpretation of that clause, the 21st amendment, or any other reason)?

Given how unpredictable the SCOTUS has been lately, I doubt you can answer that question with anything short of asking them directly. Given how much beer is shipped across state lines for various comps, I'm surprised this issue hasn't been resolved already.

[Pawtucket Patriot]

The Feds already did their job by making it legal for the states to allow it.  Whether homebrewing is allowed in your state is considered a "states" issue and the Federal government does not have any jurisdiction on it. 

Yeah, if your state has restrictive liquor laws, that's all on your state. The Feds can't make states allow homebrewing. The Feds have some power in the commerce clause to regulate businesses, for instance to prevent discrimination within a legal business operation (no "whites-only" restaurants.) Since homebrewing isn't commercial, I don't think it falls under commerce clause.

At one point in time, the commerce clause was interpreted pretty broadly.  In the case you mention above concerning the whites-only restuarant (Katzenbach v. McClung), the Supreme Court basically said that if Congress can reasonably conclude that, taken in the aggregate, an activity will have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, then it is within Congress' power under the commerce clause to regulate that activity.

It's a stretch, but Congress could conceivably regulate homebrewing under that interpretation.  However, the SC has limited the power of Congress under the commerce clause quite a bit since that case was decided.

I don't think that logic regarding the Commerce Clause works since the 21st Amendment gives state govts broad discretion in terms of how they will regulate alcohol.  But it does raise a constitutional question about which part  of the Constitution is more important.

Bingo.  The way congress "regulates" homebrewing in spite of the 21st Amendment is under its power to tax.  The bill that President Carter signed making it legal to homebrew was a tax exemption for beer brewed for personal or family use up to 100 gallons per year per adult, or 200 gallons per household.

Say that Congress decided to try to override a state law that made homebrewing illegal, do you think it would be successful in doing so under the commerce clause or would it fail (due to a more restrictive interpretation of that clause, the 21st amendment, or any other reason)?

My gut tells me that under the canon of construction that a specific statute trumps a general one, Congress would lose under a Commerce Clause argument.  To me, the 21st Amendment (specific statute) is an exception to the Commerce Clause (general statute), thereby allowing states to regulate what would otherwise be in the exclusive purview of Congress. 

Although, some would argue that the 21st Amendment is a truism to the extent that it merely restores to the states the rightful power to regulate alcohol.  From that viewpoint, the Commerce Clause would have no bearing on the question since the states' power to regulate alcohol predated the Constitution and alcohol regulation is not an expressly enumerated power.

Now, in the commercial alcohol sphere, there do exist commerce clause issues.  They mostly revolve around the dormant commerce clause doctrine.  Granholm v. Heald is probably the most well-known modern case on the subject.    Check it out if you'd like to know more about the balance between the 21st Amendment and the dormant commerce clause doctrine -- sounds exhilarating, right!?   

[narcout]

From that viewpoint, the Commerce Clause would have no bearing on the question since the states' power to regulate alcohol predated the Constitution and alcohol regulation is not an expressly enumerated power.

I don't know that I follow, hasn't Congress often used the CC to regulate activity not related to any other expressly enumerated power?

Check it out if you'd like to know more about the balance between the 21st Amendment and the dormant commerce clause doctrine -- sounds exhilarating, right!?   

Since I no longer practice law, it's probably a good idea to exercise the muscles now and then.  It's sad how much knowledge I've lost since taking the bar exam.  I should re-read some of your blog posts...

[garc_mall]

Here you go:

   


Ale to the Chief: White House Beer Recipe

By Sam Kass, White House Assistant Chef and the Senior Policy Advisor for Healthy Food Initiatives

With public excitement about White House beer fermenting such a buzz, we decided we better hop right to it.

Inspired by home brewers from across the country, last year President Obama bought a home brewing kit for the kitchen. After the few first drafts we landed on some great recipes that came from a local brew shop. We received some tips from a couple of home brewers who work in the White House who helped us amend it and make it our own. To be honest, we were surprised that the beer turned out so well since none of us had brewed beer before.

As far as we know the White House Honey Brown Ale is the first alcohol brewed or distilled on the White House grounds. George Washington brewed beer and distilled whiskey at Mount Vernon and Thomas Jefferson made wine but there's no evidence that any beer has been brewed in the White House. (Although we do know there was some drinking during prohibition…)

Since our first batch of White House Honey Brown Ale, we've added the Honey Porter and have gone even further to add a Honey Blonde this past summer. Like many home brewers who add secret ingredients to make their beer unique, all of our brews have honey that we tapped from the first ever bee-hive on the South Lawn. The honey gives the beer a rich aroma and a nice finish but it doesn't sweeten it.

If you want a behind the scenes look at our home-brewing process, this video offers some proof.

Inside the White House: Beer Brewing

So without any further ado, America – this one's for you:

White House Honey Ale Recipe

White House Honey Porter Recipe

Download a printable PDF of both recipes.

White House Honey Porter

Ingredients

    2 (3.3 lb) cans light unhopped malt extract
    3/4 lb Munich Malt (cracked)
    1 lb crystal 20 malt (cracked)
    6 oz black malt (cracked)
    3 oz chocolate malt (cracked)
    1 lb White House Honey
    10 HBUs bittering hops
    1/2 oz Hallertaur Aroma hops
    1 pkg Nottingham dry yeast
    3/4 cup corn sugar for bottling

Directions

    In a 6 qt pot, add grains to 2.25 qts of 168˚ water. Mix well to bring temp down to 155˚. Steep on stovetop at 155˚ for 45 minutes. Meanwhile, bring 2 gallons of water to 165˚ in a 12 qt pot. Place strainer over, then pour and spoon all the grains and liquid in. Rinse with 2 gallons of 165˚ water. Let liquid drain through. Discard the grains and bring the liquid to a boil. Set aside.
    Add the 2 cans of malt extract and honey into the pot. Stir well.
    Boil for an hour. Add half of the bittering hops at the 15 minute mark, the other half at 30 minute mark, then the aroma hops at the 60 minute mark.
    Set aside and let stand for 15 minutes.
    Place 2 gallons of chilled water into the primary fermenter and add the hot wort into it. Top with more water to total 5 gallons if necessary. Place into an ice bath to cool down to 70-80˚.
    Activate dry yeast in 1 cup of sterilized water at 75-90˚ for fifteen minutes. Pitch yeast into the fermenter. Fill airlock halfway with water. Ferment at room temp (64-68˚) for 3-4 days.
    Siphon over to a secondary glass fermenter for another 4-7 days.
    To bottle, make a priming syrup on the stove with 1 cup sterile water and 3/4 cup priming sugar, bring to a boil for five minutes. Pour the mixture into an empty bottling bucket. Siphon the beer from the fermenter over it. Distribute priming sugar evenly. Siphon into bottles and cap. Let sit for 1-2 weeks at 75˚.

White House Honey Ale

Ingredients

    2 (3.3 lb) cans light malt extract
    1 lb light dried malt extract
    12 oz crushed amber crystal malt
    8 oz Bisquit Malt
    1 lb White House Honey
    1 1/2 oz Kent Goldings Hop Pellets
    1 1/2 oz Fuggles Hop pellets
    2 tsp gypsum
    1 pkg Windsor dry ale yeast
    3/4 cup corn sugar for priming

Directions

    In an 12 qt pot, steep the grains in a hop bag in 1 1/2 gallons of sterile water at 155 degrees for half an hour. Remove the grains.
    Add the 2 cans of the malt extract and the dried extract and bring to a boil.
    For the first flavoring, add the 1 1/2 oz Kent Goldings and 2 tsp of gypsum. Boil for 45 minutes.
    For the second flavoring, add the 1/2 oz Fuggles hop pellets at the last minute of the boil.
    Add the honey and boil for 5 more minutes.
    Add 2 gallons chilled sterile water into the primary fermenter and add the hot wort into it. Top with more water to total 5 gallons. There is no need to strain.
    Pitch yeast when wort temperature is between 70-80˚. Fill airlock halfway with water.
    Ferment at 68-72˚ for about seven days.
    Rack to a secondary fermenter after five days and ferment for 14 more days.
    To bottle, dissolve the corn sugar into 2 pints of boiling water for 15 minutes. Pour the mixture into an empty bottling bucket. Siphon the beer from the fermenter over it. Distribute priming sugar evenly. Siphon into bottles and cap. Let sit for 2 to 3 weeks at 75˚.

[tonyp]

We did it!!

Ale to the Chief: White House Beer Recipe

Gratz guys!!

[Mark G]

Finally... We can get down to critiquing the recipe.

[Kaiser]

I was actually hoping that we can get to 25,000 signatures.

Kai

[garc_mall]

Someone needs to tell the White House that they don't need to secondary