Supporters of the referendum said eliminating mini bottles would reduce drunk-driving rates because the 1.7 ounce bottles have about 50 percent more alcohol than the average free-pour drink.

But opponents said eliminating mini bottles would cut into funding for alcohol treatment and prevention programs, since a portion of the mini-bottle tax pays for these programs. "Now that they've got the referendum, what's the incentive to make sure the revenue is there for the programs?" asked South Carolina House of Representatives Minority Leader James Smith (D-Richland).

If the referendum is approved by voters, establishments would be able to sell liquor from full-sized bottles.

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Your Turn! Post a public comment (read guidelines):

Name:
Comment: (limit 200 words)
Enter this word (help):	Change

GUIDELINES: 
To keep this feature useful for all, please:

1. Keep it clean, courteous, and on-topic. Comments are meant for thoughtful discussion of the article published above.
   
   
2. Do not post promotional links to organizations, products or services, or personal requests for assistance (get help).
   
   
3. Proof your comments carefully, use good spelling and punctuation, and don't use ALL CAPS. Comments are published immediately and cannot be edited.

Deceptive, slanderous and commercially-motivated posts are prohibited. We reserve the right to remove comments not conforming to these guidelines. (Report a comment).

Have questions or feedback? Contact us.