National Transportation Safety Board Washington, D.C. 20594 Information on Raising the Drinking Age On July 22, 1982, the National Transportation Safety During its post-election session, the U.S. Congress adopted "The Congress strongly encourages each State to prohibit the On January 6, 1983 President Reagan signed the bill into law. The Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving unanimously "States should immediately adopt 21 years as the minimum Among those supporting this recommendation were Frederick A. Raising the drinking age to 21 was included as a criterion The Secretary of Defense is also examining the feasibility of o Other important groups encouraging states to raise the drinking age to 21 include the Hotel Restaurant Employees and Employees International Union, AFL-CIO whose members serve alcoholic beverages; as well as the Transportation Association of America, the American Automobile Association, the National Safety Council, the National Council on Alcoholism, the National Association of Independent Insurers, the National Association of Governors Highway Safety Representatives, the National Parent and Teacher Association, Citizens for Safe Drivers, the American Medical Association, the College of Emergency Physicians, the American Association for Automotive Medicine and the International Association of Chiefs of Police. A large majority of the public also supports raising the drinking age to 21. A recent Gallup poll showed that 77 percent of all persons polled and 58 percent of the 18, 19 and 20 year olds agreed with the idea. But perhaps the most important developments are occurring in Legislative committees in a number of other states have either favorably reported such a bill or have one under serious consideration. Numerous Governors and State Task Forces have also endorsed this concept. It is becoming increasingly clear that the accepted solution to the problem of differing drinking age laws in neighboring states will be for all states to go to age 21. But the most compelling argument for raising the drinking age overinvolvement in alcohol related fatal accidents by drivers 35-289 0-84-32 -21 -23 MONDAY MORNING REPORT THE LEGAL DRINKING AGE...is now 21 in New Jersey, thanks to the tireless and persistent work of that state's Coalition for 21. In itself, perhaps raising the drinking age in New Jersey is not novel. After all, over the past seven years 20 states have boosted their legal drinking ages by from one to three years, reversing a trend which began in the early 1970's to lower the legal age for imbibing. What is different about the New Jersey expe rience involves the leaders responsible for the legal change, the manner in which the move was brought about, and the opposition their Coalition for 21 faced. In fact the whole experience was novel enough for the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to ask the group to write a book on their experiences and tactics, a primer for individuals and groups in other states who want to raise the legal drinking age there. Shown at the N.J. Senate in Trenton are Dr. Yeager, Phyllis Scheps, Earle Wallo and Peter Amico. This week, Phyllis Scheps, a prime mover in the New Jersey campaign, will be conducting a workshop in Washington, D.C., sharing with other PTA groups from across the U.S. how to conduct campaigns such as she has just been through in New Jersey. Volume 7, No. 1 February 21, 1983 One of the significant factors about New Jersey's experience is that the state's initial move was to raise the legal drinking age from 18 to 19. With the move to 19, alcohol-related traffic crashes among younger driver and problems with under age drinking in the schools appeared to be impacted very little. The move to 19 was actually a compromise by lawmakers to the initial drive for 21. The Coalition for 21 kept working, monitoring what was happening in the state with the change to 19, and then mounted a successful campaign to move the legal age the rest of the way to 21. The group who worked behind the scenes to change New Jersey's drinking age included 4 persons in particular who, at first glance, may have seemed to have been unlikely confederates...a housewife, a policeman, a dentist and a private investigator. Their budget was small change, operating on a shoestring, and some of those who might have been expected to have been helping the group turned up as their opposition, but some who would normally have been regarded as opposing their group turned out to be allies. The unlikely opposition came from leaders at Rutgers University, nationally known for its Center for Alcohol Studies, and the unlikely allies were members of the New Jersey Liquor Stores Association. When Governor Kean signed the age-21 bill into law on December 29, the New York Times ran a feature article on the "unlikely allies" of Dr. Arthur Yeager (the dentist), Phyllis Scheps (the housewife who is Safety Chairman of the N.J. PTA), Earle Wallo (the policeman) and Peter Amico (the private investigator). It is significant, not only what the New Jersey Coalition for 21 did, but how they were able to push aside all the obstacles and win the battle for a higher drinking age. That's why the "how-to-do-it" manual which is forthcoming will be so important. With 1983 barely getting started, already there is indication that in this year's legislative session, at least 20 states will be considering bills to take liquor out of the hands of 18, 19 and 20 year olds. Copyright 1983 by the Alcohol Research Information Service (ARIS), formerly the American Business Men's Research Foundation -24 PUBLIC SUPPORT...for increasing taxes on alcoholic beverages appears to be growing. The New York City affiliate of the National Council on Alcoholism recently released the results of a Gallup Poll which shows that 54 percent of the respondents favor doubling the tax rate on distilled spirits. The poll also revealed that 61 percent of the respondents favored a federal regulation requiring labels on alcoholic beverages which will disclose calories and ingredients. The poll was released as the kick-off for a drive by the group to obtain passage of a New York City ordinance that would require liquor stores and supermarkets to post the following information: "Warning: Consumption of Alcohol The New York City affiliate also said it was launching an educational effort to convince people to restrict drinking to no more than two drinks per occasion, and the promotion of a new nonalcoholic wine, one which is fully fermented and made in much the same way as regular wines, but then the alcohol is removed. FEDERAL TAXES...on beer, wine and distilled spirits have remained unchanged for more than 30 years, in spite of boosts in federal tax rates on a wide variety of products and services since 1951. Industry publications for several years have given indication that tax increases are a foregone conclusion, but liquor lobbyists have managed to fend off all attempts at raising taxes so far. But now with growing federal budget problems, the pressure for tax adjustments on alcoholic beverages is increasing. In order to solve the Social Security shortfall, four different groups have recommended a hike in federal excise taxes, including those on beer, wine and spirits. Liquor industry executives are fearful now that 1983 could be the year Congress finally moves to boost their tax rates. But they have determined that any tax, increase will not come without a battle. At a high level meeting in Washington January 27, industry leaders listened intently while repre sentatives of the tobacco lobby told how they were unable to block an increase in the federal tax rate on cigarettes last year because they were caught unaware and unprepared. As part of their preparation for the coming tax war, the liquor industry has determined to con vince all of their suppliers that they, too, must join in the fight against a tax increase. Glass and packaging industry leaders as well as labor unions are expected to be key supporters of the industry position. Another decision industry leaders have made is that they will stick together in resisting all tax measures, whether the proposals involve levies on beer, wine or distilled spirits. There has been a move to tax all alcoholic beverages on the basis of their alcoholic content, rather than on the basis of gallonage. At present, only distilled spirits taxes are com puted on the basis of the amount of alcohol they contain, while taxes on beer and wine do not reflect their alcoholic content. Federal tax collections from beer, wine and spir its last year amounted to just under $6 billion. UNIGATE DAIRIES... in London, England have been struggling to make ends meet with the current decline in the economy. As an experiment, dairy officials have attempted to fight the slump by enlarging the list of products delivered by their local "milkmen." Milkcarrier Tony Reynolds now leaves wine at the doorstep, along with milk and eggs for local housewives. Is such home delivery of wine encouraging more of the London housewives to imbibe more than usual? Definitely not, according to Reynolds. "We offer only a very high quality of wine," he said, "not just the kind you buy to get blasted." Whatever the case, business by Unigate Dairies in London is reported to be booming. The milk deliveries are still down, but the wine sales are reported to be "fantastic." Monday Morning Report is published twice monthly by the Alcohol Research Information Service (ARIS), formerly the American Business Men's Research Foundation-1120 East Oakland Avenue, Lansing, Michigan 48906. Some of the items initially reported in this publication will be covered more in detail in future issues of the ARIS quarterly journal, The Bottom Line on Alcohol in Society. Reproduction from Monday Morning Report, with credit to the Alcohol Research Information Service is granted to other editors and publishers. |