Just a point of order: As described in the article, the "wet vote" supporters can repeatedly attempt to bring alcohol into a dry territory by forcing a vote on the matter every three-years until finally successful in their endeavor; is the inverse not also true, once a territory goes "wet/moist" those opposed can repeatedly attempt to have alcohol permit licensing repealed and return to a dry territory? Reminds me of an old saying, "the lawless need ever be always perfect in crime; the lawman, no matter how aloof, need only be successful once to imprison the former. Twenty-five years of perfection in a life of crime versus a twenty-five year mediocre career as a lawman redeemed with a big-case crime being solved- the choice is yours young man." --Ed Pipalski