Reporter’s note: Follow us on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stljmac.

Brewers have been watching - with various levels of concern - the machinations on Capitol Hill over ways to finance possible health care reform. In recent weeks, there has been some brainstorming - but not official proposals - about drastically raising the federal excise tax on beer. That is worrisome for the beer industry.

Can brewers rest a little easier now? Maybe.

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who chairs the Senate’s Finance Committee, recently said proposed federal tax hikes on alcohol “are on life support.” Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), one of the Republicans‘ top finance guys, also chimed in to the same effect.

(Tip of the hat to Stifel Nicolaus analysts Mark Swartzberg and Tom Carroll. They brought Baucus‘ and Grassley’s June 4 interview with CNBC’s John Harwood to our attention. Transcript here.) Check out this exchange:

HARWOOD: Well, speaking of health related, there’s been a lot of talk about alcohol excise taxes and potential soda tax or sweetened drink taxes. Are those dead or are those real-life possibilities for being part of a bill that you would…

Sen. GRASSLEY: I think those are nuisance taxes.

HARWOOD: Not health taxes?

Sen. GRASSLEY: Not health taxes.

Sen. BAUCUS: And I might say they’re on life support.

HARWOOD: Yeah. They’re not likely?

Sen. BAUCUS: They’re not–they’re not head of the list.

This is interesting, and could be a sign that a big tax hike on beer was a false alarm. But then again, massive deficits and large expansions of government programs will have to be paid for somehow. At some point, the books must balance. (At least if you believe Ben Bernanke, which in this case Lager Heads does.)

Our point: Just because a tax is not “head of the list” does not mean it will not happen. Brewers - and everybody else in the beer industry - would be well-advised to stay tuned.

The Associated Press has an interesting story here about how alcohol lobbyists have snapped into action over the possible taxes. So far, the AP reports, their campaigns “have been quiet compared to the blaring, multimillion-dollar battles that typify major showdowns.” From the story:

Their low-key approach is due partly to committee leaders’ warnings to refrain from public attacks or be accused of sabotaging health care overhaul. They’ve also held back because they have faced only modest lobbying from tax proponents, and because they think the proposal may prove so unpopular that it ultimately won’t threaten their businesses.

Chicago Business notes, accurately, that any federal tax bump would give Anheuser-Busch InBev the opportunity to slash costs. As a condition to Belgium-based InBev’s acquisition of Anheuser-Busch last year, it agreed not to close any of its 12 U.S. breweries - as long as there were no increased federal or state excise taxes or “other unforeseen extraordinary events” that hurt Anheuser-Busch’s business. (That comes from the official merger document.)

We’ll soon see if that provision is worth worrying about. A lot will depend on folks like Baucus and Grassley.