# data[].attributes.body
The 21st Amendment repealed the previous Eighteenth Amendment which had established a nationwide ban on the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol on December 5, 1933.

# data[].attributes.body
During the prohibition there was two separate opinions concerning the recent ban of alcohol these groups were know as either "Wet" or "Dry".

# data[].attributes.headline
How did the 21st Amendment affect Industries?

# data[].attributes.subject
How did the 21st Amendment affect Industries?

# data[].attributes.body
As states began to ratify the approval of alcohol, liquor legally began to flow in some American cities. As patrons purchased their first authorized drinks since 1920. Delivery truck engines purred as they left liquor warehouses. Thousands of champagne corks popped, and hundreds of thousands of glasses clinked to toast drinkers’ regained freedom. Licensed hotels, restaurants and nightclubs dusted off their dormant glassware, and waiters relied on muscle memory to mix drinks from the “cocktail wagons” that they wheeled to customers’ tables (Klein, 2023, para. 6). This not only positively affected major alcohol companies, but also affected transportation organizations and bars/restaurants.

# data[].attributes.body
The 18th Amendment is the imposing of the federal prohibition of alcohol. In the Constitution, it states "After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited." (Congress, Section 1). It emerged from the organized efforts of the temperance movement and the Anti-Saloon League. Most of the organized efforts supporting prohibition involved religious coalitions that linked alcohol to immorality, criminality, and, with the advent of World War I, unpatriotic citizenship.

# data[].attributes.body
The prohibition caused a rise in mass disobedience. People who could afford the high price of smuggled liquor flocked to speakeasies and gin joints.

Working-class consumption largely moved from saloons into the home. “Bathtub gin” and moonshine took the place of mass-produced liquor, and hosts might use additives to turn grape juice into wine for their guests. Americans who sought to remain in the liquor business found ways to redistill the alcohol in perfume, paint, and carpentry supplies. They continued redistilling even after learning that many of these products contained poisons meant to deter such transformations.

There were also many strategies for circumventing federal law: some states might refuse to pass prohibition laws, repeal existing laws, or underfund enforcement agencies. Federal law enforcement agencies were stretched too thin—and were too poorly funded by Congress—to make a substantial impact on American drinking habits when local and state agencies were uncooperative. The persistent problems wrought by poor law enforcement inspired Americans not only to ignore the Eighteenth Amendment but to overturn it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in January 1919 and enacted in January 1920, outlawed the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors." This amendment was the culmination of decades of effort by organizations such as the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, and built upon the dry laws of eighteen states. The Prohibition Amendment had profound consequences: it made brewing and distilling illegal, expanded state and federal government, inspired new forms of sociability between men and women, and suppressed elements of immigrant and working-class culture.

During the Prohibition era's first years, amendment supporters were gratified by a decline in arrests for drunkenness, hospitalization for alcoholism, and instances of liver-related medical problems. These statistics seemed to validate their campaign and to suggest that America's future might include happier families, fewer industrial accidents, and a superior moral tone.

The rise of mass disobedience to prohibition laws took the amendment's advocates by surprise. People who could afford the high price of smuggled liquor flocked to speakeasies and gin joints. These establishments could be quite glamorous. Whereas pre-Prohibition saloons had seldom welcomed women, the new world of nightclubs invited both the bob-haired "flapper" and her "sheik" to drink cocktails, smoke, and dance to jazz.

Working-class consumption largely moved from saloons into the home. "Bathtub gin" and moonshine took the place of mass-produced liquor, and hosts might use additives to turn grape juice into wine for their guests. Americans who sought to remain in the liquor business found ways to redistill the alcohol in perfume, paint, and carpentry supplies. They continued redistilling even after learning that many of these products contained poisons meant to deter such transformations.

Whether smuggled from Canada, homemade, or redistilled from industrial alcohol, liquor commanded high prices on the black market. Gangsters like Al Capone and George Remus provided alcohol to many consumers, and some became folk heroes. But their celebrity images obscured the reality of how liquor profits underwrote organized crime's development. Criminal organizations profited from Americans' insatiable desire for liquor, and then defended those profits by murdering hundreds of their competitors and infiltrating legitimate businesses, labor unions, and government.

Why did Prohibition fail, and why was it repealed? The roots of this problem lay in the wording of 1920's Volstead Act, a piece of federal legislation. Specifically, the Volstead Act mandated "concurrent enforcement" of prohibition-that is, enforcement through federal laws and agencies as well as by state and local laws and agencies. While lawmakers argued that the Volstead Act would translate into extensive enforcement, in practice it meant the opposite. For example, in states where many residents did not desire prohibition, such as New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, state "prohibition" laws actually violated the Volstead Act by permitting some wines and beer. There were many strategies for circumventing federal law: some states might refuse to pass prohibition laws, repeal existing laws, or underfund enforcement agencies. Federal law enforcement agencies were stretched too thin-and were too poorly funded by Congress-to make a substantial impact on American drinking habits when local and state agencies were uncooperative. The federal Prohibition Bureau never had more than 3000 agents, and about 10 percent of those agents were fired for corruption. Henry Ford recommended putting enforcement in the hands of the Army and Navy. That suggestion never had much traction, but it suggested the extent of dry frustration.

Without the financial or personnel resources to make a bold and comprehensive assault upon the liquor traffic, law enforcement agencies used "sting" operations. Prohibition agent Elliot Ness famously used wire-tapping to discern the secret locations of breweries. Prohibition agents Izzy Einstein and Moe Smith drew upon less sophisticated tactics. Once inside an illegal barroom, they would place an order, pour the liquor down a funnel and into their pockets, and then arrest the bartender. When word of their tricks spread among bar owners, Einstein and Smith began to wear elaborate disguises. By some estimates the pair made four thousand arrests in five years.

Ultimately, only a small percentage of liquor distributors found themselves arrested. But even this limited number of accused-there were approximately 65,000 federal criminal actions in the first two years of Prohibition-was enough to cripple the justice system. Prisons grew crowded, and judges tried to incentivize quick "guilty" pleas by promising very small fines. And if a liquor seller did wind up on trial, juries filled with liquor drinkers were often reluctant to find the defendants guilty; only about 60 percent of cases ended with a conviction.

The persistent problems wrought by poor law enforcement inspired Americans not only to ignore the Eighteenth Amendment, but to overturn it. The Association Against the Prohibition Amendment (AAPA) and the National Organization of Women for Prohibition Reform (NOWPR) were single-issue pressure groups that opposed Prohibition upon the grounds that it provoked lawlessness; members of these organizations were business-minded elites suspicious of expanding federal power, and they put a respectable face on repeal. By 1928 the Democratic Party's presidential candidate, Al Smith, spoke openly of the need to repeal the prohibition amendment. In 1931 the Wickersham Commission reported to President Herbert Hoover that the costs of prohibition were greater than its benefits, giving the amendment's opponents an additional source of support and authority. Hoover grudgingly announced his support for repeal in 1932.

The Twenty-First Amendment repealing the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified in 1933.

Most Americans greeted the end of the Prohibition era with relief. While the end of the conflict and lawlessness was a relief there was also a clear benefit that Americans could recognize. The legalization of alcohol meant that alcohol could be taxed by government; the United States was in the midst of the Great Depression and state and federal governments needed revenue to create relief programs.

Lisa Andersen teaches in the Liberal Arts Department at the Juilliard School in New York City and is working on Politics Distilled: The Prohibition Party and American Governance, 1869-1933 for publication.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in January 1919 and enacted in January 1920, outlawed the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors." This amendment was the culmination of decades of effort by organizations such as the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, and built upon the dry laws of eighteen states.

# data[].attributes.body
Individuals in the 1920s who were considered "Dry" were those who were in support of the 18th Amendment as they believed that the banning of alcohol allowed for a better community. Unlike the "Wets" as they saw alcohol for all of the damage that caused and could possibly do for all the families and citizens who were continually buying into it. Ultimately yearning for a better society their goal was to clean the streets up and purify the lives of many as they associated alcohol with the high crime rates and immorality in their day and age; They saw the problem and found their solution. As in the article The 1920’s
Section 4 - Wets and Drys Clash over Prohibition it states " Traditionalists and progressive reformers saw passage
of the Eighteenth Amendment, which prohibited the manufacture, sale, or transport of alcoholic beverages, as a
great victory. They pointed to evidence that alcoholism caused crime, violence, and the breakup of
families. "Drys," as backers of prohibition were known, believed that stopping people from drinking would result
in a healthier, happier society.
Drys also saw prohibition as a way of taming city life." (The 1920’s
Section\ 4 - Wets and Drys Clash over Prohibition, 2023, para. 2 &3) Drys were trying to live the best life they could apart from the social norms that included the abusive and deceptive power that alcohol put on others.

# data[].attributes.body
Wets were those who stood against the law, as they believed that drinking alcohol has nothing to do with being sinful but just enjoying the pleasures that were given to them. Due to this ban many normal civilians who enjoyed their wine or gin were now being associated with criminal activity as they now had to rely on confidential clubs that sold alcohol better known as Speakeasies and bootleggers basically the drug dealers of alcohol just to be able to celebrate. The 1920’s
Section 4 - Wets and Drys Clash over Prohibition article speaks on this as it states, " The growing demand for liquor created a golden opportunity for crooks like Al
Capone. Bootlegging [bootlegging: the production, transport, and sale of illegal alcohol] was a multibillion dollar
business by the mid-1920s. Chicago bootlegger Capone exhibited his wealth by driving around in a $30,000
Cadillac while flashing an 11 1/2-carat diamond ring. To keep his profits flowing without government
interference, he bribed politicians, judges, and police officers. He also eliminated rival bootleggers. His
thousand-member gang was blamed for hundreds of murders. In 1931, Capone finally went to jail—not for
bootlegging or murder, but for tax evasion.
As lawlessness, violence, and corruption increased, support for prohibition dwindled. By the late 1920s,
many Americans believed that prohibition had caused more harm than good. " (The 1920’s
Section\ 4 - Wets and Drys Clash over Prohibition, 2023, para. 9 & 10)  It seem as though the 18th amendments control in all the Wets life caused the exact same thing they were trying to prevent corruption.

# data[].attributes.headline
Did the 21st make it more difficult to buy alcohol?

# data[].attributes.subject
Did the 21st make it more difficult to buy alcohol?

# data[].attributes.body
Author Daniel Okrent notes in “Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition” that the 21st Amendment “made it harder, not easier, to get a drink” because along with legalization came regulations on closing hours, age limits and Sunday service (Klein, 2023, para. 11). This led to congressional acts being made in order for alcohol to be a controlled substance. The 21st amendment specifically led to The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984.

# data[].attributes.headline
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984

# data[].attributes.subject
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984

# data[].attributes.body
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 is a federal law signed by President Ronald Reagan (R) on July 17, 1984, that prohibited the purchase and possession of alcoholic beverages for individuals under the age of 21. The concept that a person becomes a full adult at age 21 dates back centuries in English common law; 21 was the age at which a person could, among other things, vote and become independent. It was first regulated that it was legal to drink at the age of 18 years of age after the 21st amendment was administered but later proven that teenagers at the age of 18 years were irresponsibly driving from state to state. Critics of the change decried rises in alcohol-related traffic fatalities among 18- to 20-year-old drivers in areas where the drinking age had been lowered. Teenagers from the more restrictive state would drive into the one where they could buy booze, drink, and then drive home, which created a perfect storm for traffic fatalities (Trex, 2023, para. 4).