"The Partnership is
comprised primarily of advertising professionals,
who work for the very ad firms that produce the alcohol advertising
that the drug czars media campaign would counterbalance, if it included alcohol
counter-ads.
The partnership was founded on alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical money."
(Marijuananews
note: This Op-ed is remarkable for describing the conflict of interest at the Partnership.
This conflict would not be tolerated in any other context.)
From
The San Francisco Chronicle
chronletters@sfgate.com
http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
By Diana Conti
Executive Director of The Marin Institute for the Prevention of
Alcohol and Other Drug Problems in San Rafael.
June 8, 1999
DRUG WAR ISNT ON TARGET
Alcohol lobby derails any efforts to dissuade teens
IN HIS WAR AGAINST DRUGS, General Barry McCaffrey is outgunned by the political
influence of special interest money that diverts attention from the gateway to teen drug
problems, the drug most used and abused by adolescentsalcohol. McCaffrey has
repeatedly gone on record saying that alcohol is the primary drug abused in this country
and he has lamented his inability to make alcohol the centerpiece of his current $195
million anti-drug media campaign.
Coming to his rescue, U.S. Representatives Lucille Roybal-Allard, D Calif., Frank
Wolf, R-Va., have authored an amendment to the Treasury, Postal Service and Government
Appropriations bill that would add alcohol to the media campaign. McCaffreys lament
apparently wasnt sincere. When the Roybal-Allard Wolf amendment was announced, the
drug czar and the White House came out in opposition to alcohol being included in the
campaign to unsell drugs to Americas youth. The reason: the powerful alcohol and
advertising lobbies.
The two major opponents of the Roybal- Allard/Wolf amendment are the politically
influential and well-connected National Beer Wholesalers Association and the San
Francisco-based Wine Institute.
Another opponent is the Partnership for a Drug Free America, a
nonprofit organization comprised primarily of advertising professionals. Many of them work
for the very ad firms that produce the alcohol advertising that the drug czars media
campaign would counterbalance, if it included alcohol counter-ads.
The partnership, which was founded on alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical money,
provides volunteers to produce the current ads on illegal drug use by teens.
It
claims that it would not be productive to produce a campaign that includes alcohol because
alcohol is "deeply ingrained in our culture" and "alcohol use is widely
glamorized in movies, television and music." And, the alcohol
industry spends as much as $3 billion a year putting positive alcohol messages in front of
kids faces. The partnerships position mirrors that of beer companies
who hypocritically claim their ads have no effect on underage drinking. Its position
conveniently ignores how effectively tobacco counter-ads have worked using hard-hitting
messages that expose the tobacco industry and debunk its advertising images.
Its predictable that the National Beer Wholesalers Association would oppose
public health efforts to counteract youth- oriented beer ads that glorify alcohol. Wine ads on the other hand are, for the most part, responsible and not
inviting to children. The Wine Institutes opposition is strange and unnecessary.
Alcohol is a leading cause of death among young people. Thirty percent of twelfth
graders report hazardous drinking, and youth who start drinking before age 15 are four
times more likely to become addicted than those who begin at 21. Every day on average,
11,318 kids try alcohol for the first time, compared with 6,488 for marijuana; 2,786 for
cocaine; and 386 for heroin.
Our children will be the losers if corporate lobbies continue to undermine efforts to
protect their health and safety. Lawmakers should just say no to special interests and
make the well-being of the next generation their top priority.
The first step should be to pass legislation that allows the war on teen drug use to
combat its biggest enemyalcohol.