(00:00:00) Alcoholic beverages are illegal and accepted part of American society. But when alcohol is abused its becomes a threat to health and safety family life and employment this month Minnesota Public Radio has been examining the price we pay for alcohol abuse and today here on. Midday. We're going to focus on how public policies affect the use of alcohol and so to state senator Allen Spear of Minneapolis has with us here in the studio and George hacker with the Center for Science in the public interest is joining us from Washington. We also hope to hear from you during the hour, but first of all before we get underway with our discussion, we thought it would be useful to take a look back at how Minnesota has historically dealt with alcohol and liquor regulation Mark style of our Main Street radio unit has a report. (00:00:46) An 80 mile segment of the Minnesota River Valley illustrates many of the issues which of influence liquor regulation in the state at New Ulm German settlers with their love of beer favored less strict regulation of alcohol than did the mainly Scandinavian settlements upriver like Granite Falls in Montevideo. So while the Brewing industry flourished around New Ulm in the early part of the century upriver residents were pushing for prohibition Mankato State University history Professor William last says the fight over regulating alcohol led to Landmark State legislation in 1915, which still influences liquor laws today last says lawmakers responded to differing cultural attitudes regarding alcohol by passing a law which gave local governments the right to decide whether liquor would be sold in their jurisdiction (00:01:31) they could argue what is more democratic than to let the people in a given County decide for themselves. And if one County wants to go dry and another one wants to stay wet fine (00:01:43) the local control option led to a patchwork. Of drying wet counties across the state in the years before Nationwide prohibition took effect after World War 1 93 year old Edna Johnson of clarkfield a member of the women's Christian Temperance Union remembers the effort to ban alcohol in yellow medicine County. We had a little temper and Society out entire row Township west of town. They tried to talk about the evils of liquor and And we thought firsthand. Among some of our neighbors and some of the people in town. What liquor was doing Johnson says it scared her and other children to see adults lose jobs homes and families to alcohol. She says one of the strongest voices against liquor was a US representative from nearby Granite Falls Andrew Volstead at name is forever linked with prohibition since he authored the legislation implementing the Nationwide alcohol ban prohibition failed. However, because law enforcement could not stop illicit alcohol production Bootleggers found a home in Minnesota most notably in areas, which oppose prohibition like the lower Minnesota River Valley Dino call sold newspapers as a young boy in Mankato. He remembers a cafe where famous Bootleggers like John Dillinger stopped when they were in town (00:03:01) last time I ever saw Dillinger. I went down I sold him a paper and they were ready to leave he put his hand on my shoulder nieces. Paper boy don't ever let anybody tread on your toes and that wasn't too long. After that is when he was shot in Chicago (00:03:19) after prohibition, Minnesota again gave local communities wide latitude in selling alcohol some remain dry years after prohibition ended even today in some communities 32 beers the strongest drink sold. There also was a movement after prohibition to control liquor sales by allowing city government to sell alcohol. They were interested in in (00:03:40) slowing down some of the bootlegging and as long as there was going to be alcohol available. They were going to try to make a profit off of it (00:03:48) Tom Ryman manages the municipal liquor store in Montevideo one of about 260 City stores still operating in the state. He says controlling alcohol sales is still an important function of city Liquor operations (00:03:59) Municipal stores are not able to pay their employees (00:04:03) a percentage of the (00:04:05) profits. So whether or not the store sells an A 12 pack or case of beer employees of a municipal store are not going to make any extra money. So therefore Municipal stores are probably more apt to take a look at a marginal sale, whether it be if to a minor or a person that's probably had a little bit too much to drink and are more apt to not make that sale. (00:04:29) Some people say it's wrong for cities to sell liquor Joel Simonson has a personal stake in the alcohol debate his father died of alcohol cause liver and kidney disease and his first wife was killed by a drunk driver Simonson lives in Granite Falls, which also has a municipal liquor store. He says it's wrong for the city to profit from something which can lead to Crime immoral. Yes is very immoral that they put it down. They put down the drunk drivers and they put down the Speeders. They put down the people to go out and kill the people but they won't own up to it that they're the ones that sell nothing. There's some of the darn stuff. I don't know how they can claim that is being right Simonson would like government to double or triple alcohol taxes as a way to reduce consumption. He claims they won't do it because reducing liquor sales will cut into their alcohol tax revenue one government, which is not worried about tax revenue is on the Red Lake reservation in northern Minnesota. It's the only area in the region where it's illegal to sell or possess alcohol despite the law though. There are still problems with alcohol Bill May coordinates a cross-cultural training project on the Red Lake reservation. We are aware in all of the Liquors in the liquor stores. No right on our boundaries like to three miles away from our boundaries. And we are aware of liquor coming onto our reservation despite problems keeping alcohol out. May says no one has proposed legalizing Liquor on the reservation. He believes community-wide education efforts are reducing the use of alcohol, especially among young people wctu member Edna Johnson of clarkfield says she'd like to see more alcohol prevention work done with the young people in her area. It's terrible when the they school kids still get it. I don't know why they're not supposed to but they do. And we all know that even as old as I am. I know that Johnson says she's not interested in refighting the prohibition battle, but believes more needs to be done to control liquor sales. She says Society pays too high a price in alcohol related crimes and accidents to not pay attention. This is Mark Style Main Street. Radio. (00:06:38) Well during the rest of the hour. We'd like to hear your thoughts on Current public policies that affect alcohol things like advertising taxes Municipal sales education and prevention the drinking age. When you call in you'll have a chance to talk to our guests Minneapolis state senator. Allen spear is here in the studios. He is the chair of the state senate crime prevention committee and a former longtime member of the Senate's Commerce Committee which oversees liquor regulations and joining us from Washington is George hacker the director of the washington-based national alcohol policies project for the National Consumer organization the Center for Science in the public interest tracker glad you could join us. (00:07:16) Thank you. (00:07:17) Now. I know your organization has talked about the need to raise the federal tax on liquor. Why is (00:07:24) that? Well number one taxes on alcoholic beverages have remained relatively static since 1951 resulting. in the reduction enormous reduction in potential revenues gained by the United States Treasury as well as in Excuse me. Just a second. I have a crick in my throat. As well as in the the static - of the price of alcohol resulting in its ease of purchase particularly by young people at lower prices, encourage the sales and encourage the purchase of of alcoholic beverages, (00:08:10) but as I mean drinking is illegal for kids. Anyway, what difference does it make what the price is? (00:08:15) Well, actually there are a number of studies that show exactly that that if because young people have limited disposable income. They're unlikely to purchase as much or purchase alcohol is frequently if the price is higher, it's just like the price of cigarettes if the price of cigarettes is high enough kids won't start won't start smoking it all with regard to alcohol. It will result in deferred usage, you know, kids might not start drinking as early as age 12 as Do in this country but to further usage some or they will drink less and and the studies definitely show that and particularly binge drinking goes down when when prices go up (00:09:05) Senator spirit and I think there's a need to raise the state liquor tax as well. (00:09:09) Well, I advocate and have advocated for several years now and increase in the state liquor tax, but not quite for the same reasons that mr. Hacker has said the major reason. I'd like to see a an additional tax imposed on liquor is not so much to decrease consumption as to help pay for the cost that liquor exacts on our society. We need money for the enforcement of DWI laws. We need money for the treatment programs for people who are convicted for DWI and who are chemically dependent and I think that the liquor ought to pay Or at least help pay for the enormous cost of the exact science Society. So we have for some last couple of years now been talking about a surtax on the sale of alcoholic beverages both on sale and off sale to be earmarked specifically for alcohol related programs. I would certainly agree with the senator that that's a very important rationale for raising alcohol excise taxes and and point out that in this country at the federal level. We collect seven point nine billion dollars in alcohol excise taxes each year now and the costs related to alcohol total over a hundred billion dollars. So that for sure alcohol is not paying its its way in (00:10:40) society since if alcohol causes so many problems. Why is it that we don't go back to Prohibition. (00:10:49) Well, it doesn't work now I think when once Prohibition didn't work. You have to be a little careful about that because recent studies indicate the prohibition actually did decrease the consumption of alcoholic beverages in this country. But at what cost by making many people criminals by reading disrespect for the law and by allowing illegal elements, notably the mob to get involved in the in the liquor business. So I don't think that I think the cost of absolute prohibition far outweighs its benefits a second reason is that alcohol has been very much a part of western civilization since its very beginnings. And the notion that you are going to completely eliminate the use of alcoholic beverages is pretty naive and alcohol is also unlike some other addictive substances alcohol used in moderation is not We bad I drink moderately many people. I know drink moderately. I don't make any apologies for that. I enjoy it and many people enjoy wine and liqueurs and things of that sort for The Taste not for its intoxicating effect. So I'm not I don't favor the Banning of alcohol and I've always tried to make a distinction in my own mind between being very tough on the abuse of alcohol and trying to ban alcohol. I'm not a prohibitionist. (00:12:19) Mr. Hacker nationally, are there any dry States (00:12:23) now? There are no entirely dry states. There are number of dry counties throughout many states particularly in the Midwest and the South and you know, we don't support prohibition either because it it's not a practical political alternative at this point, but there are a number of measures policy measures that are available to provide more information to the public about To provide disincentives and to ensure that we treat alcohol as the serious drug that that it is (00:13:02) our guests today are George hacker who is with the center for the Center for Science in the public interest. He is the with the national alcohol policies project for the CSP. I also Allen spear who is Minneapolis state senator dfl are from Minneapolis and the chair of the Minnesota state senate crime prevention committee. We've got a caller on the line who has some thoughts questions. Hi. Oh, actually this could be for both. Your guests one is is Minnesota considering the reduction of legal intoxication level 2.08. And if not, why not? And it should this also be National norm and secondly is, Minnesota. During the use of the device as Massachusetts does which once convicted for one year the person has to blow into a device before they can start their car and as I understand this has been real effective particularly with adolescents and those in the early 20s who have been convicted of DWI and I can hang up and listen to your response. Okay, before we get to the the official question, how much is how much would that be a .08 (00:14:27) limit? It's currently .10. So that would be a reduction of you know, a point to percentiles to go 2.08. (00:14:36) Can you give us an idea of how many drinks that would represent 40 (00:14:39) perhaps mr. Hacker knows that offhand. I've seen the charts on that. It's very hard to say because it depends on a person size and weight is that and a heavy large heavy man can be considerably more. In a very, you know, a small petite woman can and so it there are charts that you can you can look at that tells you for your weight and you know how long it would take you to reach that point how many drinks but I don't know that I've had the rationale for lowering the permissible BAC level 2.08 from from point 1 or even lower is is really based on a fairly firm evidence that at low levels of blood alcohol content of alcohol in a body ones motor and physical and mental reactions are dimmed by the alcohol that it has low levels of as .04. There's a measurable impact that the alcohol has and at Point at levels of .05 and higher that's when we see the And Chip of the risk of drinking driving crashes and the drinking start going up and astronomical proportions and at .10. That's really probably people are really beyond the point of intoxication at that point many of them and not capable of driving so we should seek a safer level and .08 is a good start we're going in that direction. So well, we have considered that we had a bill several years ago to go to go 2.08. We didn't pass it at that time. I suspect that that issue will be back before us I think three or four states have now gone 10 stands now, it's okay have gone last I looked when it was real fear for so that's 10 states have so I think we can see where the trend is going at the time we considered that there were a number of people who have expertise in the field who do not did not think that was the highest priority and there were some fears expressed that we would be we would be spending. A lot of our enforcement resources on marginally intoxicated people and given the scarcity of those resources. We might be better off trying to you know, focus on the people with the higher blood alcohol content. I'm not sure that that argument is necessarily valid or not. But that's what I think influence some of us at the time not to go to point 108 but I suspect that that issue will be back before us now the second part of the question involves the devices that people blow into and yes, I believe those are used in some jurisdictions in Minnesota. I believe that the courts can impose those as a condition of probation when someone has a DWI, there's also another device that we just saw this past week. Some people came into our committee and and and demonstrated its use it's used for situations where a person that's can been convicted of a DWI is confined to a Kind of house arrest or intensive supervision and this enables these people to be test to be tested at home and for the results of the test to be transmitted over telephone wires to a central place so you can sit the monitors consent and there are all these people out there at home and they call can call them anytime a day 24 hours a day and there's a little camera that they have to look into so you can see that this is the right person that is that's blowing into it and then they blow and that that test will be transmitted over the wires and you can see whether the person's been drinking. So these are you know, there are there is a lot of Technology now that can be used to monitor people who have been convicted of DWI is you know, I real problem are the repeat offenders we so much of the so many so many of the casualties that come out of Guys come from the people that you read about who this is four five six times and their licenses have been suspended in some cases. Their their license plates have been impounded and yet they still continue drinking and they continue finding a way to drive somehow and these are the people we really need to we really need to do something ultimately about their drinking problem (00:19:16) nationally a mr. Hacker same kind of a situation where the real problem is with the with the person who continually violates the law or are many states still focused on the person the so-called social Drinker who might have a couple too many and be a problem. (00:19:35) Well, actually I think you need to look at both sure. There are core problems among those people who were alcoholic and who have serious drinking problems. However, on the other hand, there's a vast number of drink. Adults and minors who cause alcohol related problems in this Society. If you look at the distribution of drinking you find that that approximate 10% of drinkers whom we might consider alcoholic consume about 50% to 60% of the alcohol. The remainder is consumed by that 90% of of drinkers many of whom go into periodic stages of binge drinking or unwise drinking and get into problems the the basis of the distribution of consumption theory that that is a is really the Crux of all our work here in Washington is that alcohol problems cut across all bounds in society and within all populations so that if one imposes policies designed to reduce per capita consumption across the board Then that also has a measurable effect on drinking by those heavy drinkers who are most susceptible to problems so that as per capita consumption comes down. So do the number of Alcoholics in society as you create or make marginal movement toward creating a society that's less dependent on alcohol. You make it easier for people who are heavy drinkers to stop you make it easier for people to be identified for treatment you make it less normative in society for heavy drinking Behavior. (00:21:35) But in terms of public policy should government's be concerned with how much people drink or what people do when they when they do drink in other words. It doesn't matter to the government how much I have had to drink as long as I don't get my car and drive around and run into somebody. (00:21:49) I don't think it does but I think the government has a responsibility. Bility to ensure that the public has adequate and accurate information and a balanced a balance of information about alcohol to make informed judgments that that individuals ought to be ought to have warnings about the potential risks that they run when they drink and that certainly when it comes to people under the legal drinking age. We need to take stronger measures to ensure that those kids who are not legally capable of making decisions are protected. I think heavy drinking is is a is a concern a legitimate concern of government just as heavy smoking is in that it is a health risk that increases the costs to all of us in terms of medical assistance and insurance rates and and everything else. So that we should indeed I don't think be telling people through the criminal law how much they can drink but I certainly think we should be doing is mr. Hacker says a lot of educating of people in order to prevent drinking that's injurious to one's health. I think I missed your hackers points about the social Drinkers and the heavy drinkers. I guess. The only thing I would say on that is I think we've made a lot more progress in terms of particularly in the area of DWI with the social drinkers over the last few years than we have with the with the chemically dependent Drinker the there's there's a survey that I have with me here that was done by the house research Department that shows that over the years in the 80s particular public attitudes toward DWI have changed very significantly and the social pressures. The peer pressure's the individual controls the people have Were DWIs far greater than it once was it's no it's in many circles. You just don't go out and drive after you've been at a party and have been doing a lot of drinking. And so I think we have made some progress there. I think it's with the p person who has no control over there drinking that we still have the greatest problems (00:24:12) left our guests here in our st. Paul studio is state. Senator Allen spear who is the chair of the state Senate's crime prevention committee. Also a longtime member of the Senate Commerce Committee and joining us from Washington George hacker who's the director of the washington-based national alcohol policies project for the Center for Science in the public interest. Love to hear from you today your thoughts on public policies as they affect alcohol alcohol abuse. Let's go back to the phones and other callers on the line. Hi. Go ahead. Hello. Why don't they put a special fluorescent plate on someone who's been convicted of drunk driving? Sometimes you can just be careful of them while they weave around I'll hang up and listen. (00:25:00) Well, that's sort of The Scarlet Letter approach. I guess actually there is a special plate if a person has had their license suspended and they get a temporary they get a what a temporary permit to drive to work or for other family members. There is a special plate that can be recognized by law enforcement officials as a set of numbers that Lon I forget what they are but a set of numbers on the place the law enforcement person can know to stop them to make sure that it is not the prohibited person that's driving a lot of driving the car but the notion of a of a recognizable played for everyone. I think there's some problems with that. I think for example, if another family member is driving the car there then stigmatized as a drunk. I'm not sure. I want to go back to the Scarlet Letter approach to this problem. (00:26:00) So let's hear from another caller question here. Hi. Hello, go ahead. Well, I guess we don't (00:26:10) let's wonder if I can go ahead and just make the comment about her that I think that the the point that coming that's coming through is that drinking and driving is a serious problem in our society and we've made some some gains against that and that there's this social Norm that's developing that disassociates the to but we need to recognize that drinking driving crash deaths in this country account for only about 16 or 17 percent of all alcohol related deaths in this country so that we may need to look much more broadly at alcohol problems that that affect almost everyone in One Way or Another and what we really have in this country is a drinking problem or a set of norms that have developed that in some way glamorize and accept drunkenness accept. Stupid behavior and binge drinking for young people that we need to go about changing and it and it requires more effort than just combating the the individual criminal activity of drinking drivers. One of the things that we're doing in Washington to at least make some Headway toward that is pushing legislation that would require health and safety messages and all alcohol advertising now, we don't think that's the most powerful or the most effective means of providing that kind of information but it's the only politically practical no-cost or low-cost means of doing so at this point and we'd provide a broad range of seven rotating health and safety messages reminiscent of those messages in tobacco advertising on and on Tobacco packages cigarette packages, that would be part of the alcohol add and at least provide some balance and start Thinking about a broad range of problems that they might have might have with that substance, which to a great extent is covered up by the advertising that tells an entirely different story. (00:28:24) You don't think people know that they're that booze can cause problems. (00:28:27) Well, I think that intuitively most of us do know that but most of us also know that Budweiser is available at the Corner Grocery or the liquor store. The object of these messages is to repeat repeat repeat. It's like seeing stop signs or state of the right signs as you drive along the highway, we all know that we learn that in driver education, but those reminders are necessary for ultimately attitudinal and then Behavior change to sink in over time. And that's a this is not an easy proposition there no magic or silver bullets to alcohol problems in this country. But this is one means of providing a balanced for alcohol advertising the Tells our kids a very sanitized and very dangerous message about alcohol that it's associated with only the good (00:29:25) line. Let's bring another listener into the conversation. Hi. Hello. I was just I agree entirely with the idea about education, but I think for a lot of people that unless it carries consequences. It really doesn't carry weight. My question is why don't we cracked on a lot harder on drunk drivers in Scandinavian countries. They get pretty tough on this if you are driving drunk the first time and you lose your license the second time you go to jail and I'm not exactly sure about the terms but that's it's pretty tough on it. My question is why don't we do that here? Who are we protecting? I agree. We need to help the drinkers, but the innocent have to be protected whether you get them off the road or take away the license put him in jail cetera people in Scandinavian countries realize even when they're drunk they Lies I shouldn't be drinking and driving and when they take off for the evening or even when they're drunk and thinking about going home. They know somebody else should drive or I got to get a cab or I'm a criminal (00:30:20) Senator spell we have we have cracked on in tunk drivers in Minnesota. I mean we have over the last 20 years each year. We have we have increased penalties. We have provided various kinds of administrative remedies like the loss of driver's license the loss of license plates the impoundment of cars, we now do on foreign repeat offenses. So I think we do have a tough DWI laws. I do think that there's at some point it it you reach a point of diminishing returns. I think there is a question you have to ask as to how many of society's resources you want to put into keeping drunk drivers in jail or in prison for long periods of time and whether that's really going to work, you know, I think the Actions work best for the people who have you know, who are not problem drinkers. I think a person that is arrested for DWI, but the first time spent a couple days in jail as they do in some parts of the State loses their drivers license for a period of time that person is going to think very very hard about doing it. Again people that are on the other hand as I mentioned earlier. We have people that we do impose supremely severe penalties on but as soon as they get out of the programmer where we put them there back drinking again, I think in those kinds of cases the the trying to get at the root of their drinking problem is the most effective thing we can do it's not just a matter of being you know soft on criminals. It's a matter of what will protect Society most in the long run and if you can do something about the person's alcoholism, I think you're going to have a longer term solution and even if you put them in prison for a year you're not Keep anybody in prison for the rest of their life or DWI. So unless if you just put them in prison don't do anything about their they're drinking problem. They're going to come back and and and repeat. (00:32:21) Let's hear from another listener. Hi, good afternoon. I'm calling from Clayton, Wisconsin. Yes, and I have a problem with your month-long Hatchet job on the license beverage industry. I mean every what Monday Wednesday Friday and plus so whenever you could throw it in in the middle, you've been doing nothing but talking about the evils of demon rum and it's like you don't have there's no equal time for people from the industry. You got a little thing from this is how we make Burek horse. But I mean, you know, give me a break that's where that's nice. First thing had the the aspect about a DWI legislation is one that particularly irks me the The lowering limits if you look at the statistics people who are involved in serious fatal and bodily injury accidents are virtually always way over the current limit. I think the average Minnesota runs about .16, which is nearly double the current limit. So and there's not a big correlation on the other end. Mmm. So what and those are my complaints there and one other question I have for the from Washington is this a government agency that he works for? (00:33:46) No, not at all. In fact we've seen worse. We neither accept nor receive money from government or any corporate body. (00:33:54) Okay, you are in the name of your organization is Center for Science in the public (00:33:57) interest and we're a private nonprofit organization. (00:34:02) Well, I might suggest that your what you are preaching is neither science nor in the public interest. Well, mr. Hacker was Why don't you respond to the to the gentleman's Point here that that we would be wasting a lot of time and effort by trying to reduce the or lower the blood alcohol limit for DWI since most of the people who get nailed for it our way way past the existing limit. (00:34:27) Well, surely the risk goes up as your alcohol blood alcohol content goes up. So that naturally going to find more people at the high end in trouble either crash fatality fatalities are other statistics on the other hand. If you talking about setting a reasonable and as safe as practicable standard in this country for driving under the influence of alcohol when in fact the message that we are now conveying to the public is don't drink and drive. You can't have both that message and something that says That you can drive until you're you're pretty inebriated. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. So what we're saying is that in the context of helping to change Norms to get people to seriously consider the disassociation of drinking and driving that you have to have to ratchet the standards down and .08 compared to many other countries, you know, the Scandinavian countries for example is still quite liberal and allows people to drink their fair share before driving not that I would recommend it. I'd like to I'd like to just say something about the first part of that caller's question and idea about bashing the license beverage industry. I don't consider myself a Basher of the license beverage industry and I think if you asked lobbyists for that industry over at the Capitol they would agree with you or they would agree with what I said on that. I take a somewhat different approach I think for mr. Hacker and that I have never taken the position that we should be trying to limit access to alcohol for everybody. I think we should be tough on the abuse of alcohol but I've carried legislation that actually increases alch access to alcohol for people who don't abuse it. I have I've sponsored legislation to increase hours for four bars. I've sponsored legislation some years ago to encourage the development of a wine industry and the state of Minnesota. I'm not against the liquor industry. I think that liquor as I said earlier has alcoholic beverages have always been part of our society. They will continue to be part of our society. I see nothing wrong with the consumption of alcoholic beverages in moderation. I like wine. I think that the depreciation of wine is a is something that As an asset to a civilized society. So I am not I'm not against the the industry. I think the industry has a legitimate role to play. And in fact, the industry has been very Cooperative in a lot of the things that I've been pushing at the legislature things like server training and some of the other kinds of programs of that sort that involves the participation of the industry. I'm concerned about being tough on people who abuse alcohol and present dangers both to themselves and to other people but I'm not against the the legal sale of alcoholic beverages. I don't want it to appear as if cspri or myself personally are against illegal sale of alcohol in this country. We're certainly not and I drink myself and I happen to enjoy moderately probably the same amount of wine or beer that Senator spear consumes, but I think we have to look at this from two sides on the one hand. We do need to have stricter standards for individuals and hold individuals to those standards, but on the other hand, I think we need to promote messages and try to establish a different societal Norm for drinking in this country that then helps to allow those individual individuals to make better choices for themselves. (00:38:40) Let's hear from another listener, huh? Your turn. Yes. This question is addressed to the senator and my concern is that we have children that are learning how to drive putting driver's licenses into the hands of 16 years year old just at the time when they are in the throes of the mythology of liquor consumption, they get an education presumably and how to drive but under but they don't really get an education in how to drink in a nutshell. Why don't we reverse the drinking laws in the driving laws with respect to to youth? Why don't we let them drink when they're 16 or 18 or whatever and allow them to learn how to drink before we put a car in their hands doesn't this just make (00:39:34) well I did not support the increase in the raising of the drinking age in Minnesota from 18 to 21 and in fact State of Minnesota did that only under the gun of the federal government when we would lose a significant amount of Federal Highway money. If we didn't raise the age to 21, I never thought that that was the best approach. I thought that and still think that we should be teaching young adults. I'm not talking about you and I was I wouldn't favor reason lowering it to 16, but I think it was since 1818 is the age of majority in the state of Minnesota that we should be trying to encourage young adults drink responsibly rather than barring them from liquor. I still believe that I but that's kind of a dead issue now because the federal government has essentially imposed an age 21 drinking on all of the states through through the use of the purse strings. I think the caller does make a good point about the driving age. I in fact have been giving that some thought to about whether 16 is too young to let kids drive. We would be very very difficult. I think politically to raise the driving age from 16 to 18 because teenage driving driving in the latter years of high school has become so much part of our culture, but I think there's a you know, I think there is some Merit to the notion of asking ourselves whether 16 is too young to entrust kids with an automobile. (00:41:06) Mr. Hacker nationally. Is there any thought at all being given to changing that that 21 drinking age? (00:41:13) I don't think so. I there have been some efforts in a think at least one state at the committee level to reverse the 21 drinking age and talked about it in Wisconsin. That's right. Yeah, that's the state that I'm familiar with. I don't think there's been action anywhere else the one point on that 21 drinking age CSP. I never had a position on raising the 21 drinking age. However, since that time we've noticed that the research does demonstrate that age 21 has done as much as Anything so far to reduce drinking driving crash deaths among young people and also among those in the age following to age 21 so that it's affected the behavior of of 18 year olds as well as 21 and 22 year olds as well (00:42:05) other callers on the line with a question High afternoon. I like to find out why the education system that we have refuses to teach our kids in grade school starting with first grade kindergarten at an age when they're vulnerable more vulnerable to the input of abusive behavior that the rest of our society exhibits and why we don't educate our children at an age when they are vulnerable more vulnerable to a rather than waiting until they're in junior high or high school. (00:42:41) Well, I think we should I don't know exactly Going on out there in the elementary schools in terms of alcohol education curricula, but I think that the color makes a good point (00:42:53) do we get to mr. Hacker to we get to the kids young enough? You (00:42:56) think I don't think we do. There there been some models out there for k 2 K through 12 kindergarten through 12 curriculum, but I don't think that they're widely enough used and probably we haven't put enough resources in that in that area, but I'm not entirely familiar with with those with those (00:43:16) curriculum. Let's take another question. Hi. Hello. It's more of a comet the how can I say this? I think the really responsible parties here in the beer and wine industry. I wish they would take the same attitude that the hard liquor industry does and get their advertising in their marketing off radio and television. They spend the cool. They come out with a real one of the manufacturers comes out with a real lame pamphlet, you know, let's stop underage drinking, but you know, let's get Real let's stop. Let's stop a billion dollars worth of advertising using animated characters and cutesy animals and and you're just swamped with this stuff over the radio Airwaves and television and also, you know if they took the same if the beer and wine industry people took the same responsible attitude that the hard liquor industry does, you know use of in moderate enjoyment in moderate and use and enjoyment in moderation. I think a lot of this would be gone down and also the same message a message that they will never put out is that you know, a can of 32 beer has got the same alcohol content as a mixed drink or a glass of wine. That's that's something you will never hear once in there. I would say probably close to a billion dollars a year and advertising over over radio and television, you know, I just wish I wish I wish we could get them off the air and force them to put that message across that hey this stuff is powerful and it can You equally is drunk and cause all you know, this is not like, you know, just a little harder version of soda pop and you can just pound it down all day long. (00:44:52) Well, I think that I think that calling makes a good point and I think that you know are two tier beer system in Minnesota is really not helpful. It's something that goes back to the days of repeal right after prohibition. We're having the two kinds of beer that we to beer in the strong beer. I think we're one of only a handful of states that has that kind of a system and the the original idea was to 3/2 beer would be something that would be sold where you didn't want more intoxicating would be a beverage of moderation. But I think the caller is really right that that the problem with 32 beer is that people think it's like soda pop and actually the difference in alcoholic content. I think most beer has an alcoholic content of around 4 or a little over 4% So the difference between 32 beer and stronger is really not all that great and people are misled when they drink three to be R into thinking that they are they are doing Anon intoxicating beverage (00:45:46) mr. Hacker, I know correct me if I'm wrong about this but I think in Norway, there's like a total ban on all advertising of alcohol and yet it during the Olympics. It seemed like the Norwegians were were certainly enjoying their their alcohol. If we if we were to to ban all the advertising of alcohol beer wine and so on so forth would that in fact make much of a difference in terms of how much people drink? (00:46:15) I don't know and making comparisons to Norway or the Soviet Union former Soviet Union where advertising was banned. In other societies isn't an exact way of getting to the truth either. The Norwegians have a very different Society than we have. They have different climate patterns. They have different historical drinking patterns that result in different kinds of alcohol problems there. We're not pushing. A band because we believe that more information about alcohol would be more effective. But if you go to the if you look at the ban on cigarette advertising in the broadcast media that took effect in 1971 in this country, if it's done anything what it has done is allowed other voices to be heard. It has removed a major obstacle to getting the truth about tobacco out to the public both economically and in the in the public parlance in the media so that a band might have some beneficial effect and in freeing up an increasing the volume of other voices other information about alcohol, but we don't think it's the appropriate Approach at this point, although a number of governmental bodies. Recommended such a ban. But yeah, go ahead. Well, I was just gonna say I'm not sure that certain that I would support a ban either but I do think there needs to be some more self policing in the industry as to the kind of advertising they do and that's where I was agreeing with some of the things that last caller made a particularly beer. I think beer is the major culprit here in terms of the the the use of advertising images that so clearly appeal to kids. What was the Budweiser the party animal especially Kansas Spuds MacKenzie and that kind those kinds of campaigns which are which have their equivalent in the tobacco industry to with Joe Camel. I mean those kinds of campaigns that are Aim so clearly at teenagers. There's a good reason for that, of course because it's only kids Teenagers Who start drinking sure and that's where habits are are born and if kids wait until they're 25 or 21 to even Begin to drink. It's very unlikely that the get into a very heavy drinking pattern and the industry will lose their best customers. Are these evil people? Yeah. I don't think they want to make money. They want to make money exactly but they're the problem is that their business is in a dangerous drug in this society and I believe in see SBI has worked to ensure that the promoters of alcoholic beverages are regulated much more carefully and consistently with the problems that alcohol causes in (00:49:18) society. What about the counter-attack kind of their their the new ads they've been running, you know, when to say when that things like (00:49:25) that, you know, good make any difference maybe one step forward and three steps back. No one to say when is just a euphemism. It's a slogan it it really has no meaning and in fact, it assumes that one drinks. Maybe the message ought to be no one to say no or Before you drink rather than think when you drink but as the caller indicated the industry likes to leave a lot of ambiguity out there and and not give clear messages to the American public (00:49:57) we've got time for at least one more caller with a question. Hi, good morning going from Fergus Falls today. Yes. I wonder if your panel would consider the viability of may be issuing the general public license to drink and then instead of removing your right to drive remove your right to drink. I'll hang up and listen. Thank you. (00:50:19) I actually saw that proposal in Newsweek a couple of weeks ago. And what would you have to do to demonstrate confidence under know? I think that the proposal and Newsweek required that people who had a history of drinking problems or family drinking problems might be just not Courage but ineligible for a drinking license because of the potential problems. They may have a nice I put I have serious problems civil rights and Liberties problems with that kind of an approach in that it would stigmatize the status of alcoholism or even potential alcoholism. And I think that's too great a an intrusion in personal Liberties in this country. (00:51:12) Let's get one more caller on with a question. Hi. Hi, I work with high schoolers on a regular basis with a Youth Organization. And it seems to me that we the most importantly important thing we need to do is to offer underage kids any responsible Drinkers and alternative other than drinking and you know, we can tell kids it's not right and that's going to make them do it even more but let's show them some other things to do when is a community build other things for them to do other than drinking and stuff. Focusing on don't drink. It's not right to drink but start focusing on alternatives. (00:51:50) I agree wholeheartedly. I think we do need to change the environment for young kids in in this country on a great many levels and drinking is one of them. We need to show kids that not drinking can be part of a fun active successful. Lifestyle (00:52:10) Senator before we go. Do you think the state of Minnesota or the its local municipalities ought to get out of the business of selling liquor themselves the municipal liquor store. Is that as something (00:52:19) we should I think it's an anachronism. I think it goes back to an earlier period when it was assumed that somehow there would be greater control over alcoholic beverages at the state was in the business what it's really become now is simply a revenue source for for municipalities. It doesn't in any way. I don't think limit or controlled access to to alcohol or or the or the abuse of alcohol. So I think Politically it's not going to happen. But if I had my druthers, yes, I think that that governmental bodies ought not be in the business of selling liquor (00:52:58) very briefly. Mr. Hacker National level. Do you think the the excise tax is going up on liquor soon? (00:53:06) Well, I think it's going to boil down to whether or not revenues are needed to help fund Health Care reform and if if at the last moment the Congress needs money to pass a bill and provide the needed Services taxes on liquor beer and wine will go (00:53:24) up. Thank you so much for joining us George hacker who is the director of the washington-based national alcohol policies project for the Center for Science in the public interest joining us from Washington DC here in our Studios Minneapolis state. Senator Allen Spiro dfl our who is the chair of the state senate crime prevention committee longtime member of the Senate Commerce Committee which course overseas liquor regulations in the state of Minnesota.