A sweet deal for the booze boys

GIRLS AND BOYS in the eighth through 12th grades are drinking flavored alcohol beverages at an alarming rate -- about 25% of teenage respondents consumed them, according to a 2004 national study by the University of Michigan. That’s not surprising, considering the alcohol industry is pursuing a marketing campaign that makes these fruity, sweet drinks attractive to young people. Bacardi Silver, Smirnoff Ice, Mike’s Hard Lemonade and other brands go down much easier than beer.

Now, two California assemblymen are trying to help the alcohol industry sell these bottled mixed drinks -- often referred to as “alcopops” because they look like soda pop -- through Sacramento shenanigans. An amended bill (AB 417) quickly making its way through the Legislature would reclassify these drinks as malt beverages, similar to beer. Most of these drinks contain little or no brewed alcohol, as beer does. They contain distilled spirits, added as “flavoring,” and have 5% to 6% alcohol content, a little more than most beers.

The measure’s sponsors, Assembly members Greg Aghazarian (R-Stockton) and Ed Chavez (D-La Puente), put it on the fast track Aug. 22 by using a procedure in which they gutted the language of an existing, unrelated bill that had made it through most of the legislative process and replaced it with the alcopops reclassification language. They are trying to move this version through the Legislature quickly to avoid any scrutiny. With this lobbyist-friendly tactic, controversial bills that favor special interests can make it through the Legislature in 10 days or less, before opposition can be mobilized.

But Californians really must pay attention. As state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said in opposing the measure, it “has major implications with respect to teenage alcohol abuse.” Lockyer has called on the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and the California Board of Equalization to enforce current law and end the alcopop marketers’ deceptive practices. In response, the marketers are seeking the legislative relief offered by Aghazarian and Chavez.

The current classification of these drinks as distilled spirits forbids advertising them on television, imposes substantially higher taxes and makes it illegal to sell them in about 15,000 retail outlets, making them much less accessible to kids. But the drink companies have been flouting this law for years.

The industry calls these drinks malt beverages because the manufacturing process begins with a beer base. But then that taste, color, odor and brewed alcohol is removed and distilled alcohol is injected. Why? Because the distilled alcohol is not bitter like beer and is more agreeable to young palates.

The main issue here is not the lost tax revenue, though that is substantial. The beer excise tax rate is 20 cents a gallon in California, which is minuscule compared with the distilled spirits rate of $3.30 a gallon. By disguising these drinks as malt beverages, producers are saving an estimated $40 million in state taxes each year, according to the Board of Equalization.

The real issue is the production and marketing of a product that targets the illegal underage market. Not only are alcopops sweet with pretty colors, their television and radio ads broadcast that appeal to a high percentage of young people. It’s about securing a share of the new drinking market by establishing brand loyalty among young drinkers, especially young girls. More than 16% of eighth-grade girls, 25% of 10th-grade girls and 33% of 12th-grade girls reported drinking flavored alcoholic beverages, according to the Michigan study.

Researchers estimate underage drinking costs Californians $7.5 billion a year through alcohol-related violence, trauma, high-risk sex, crime and other health and safety problems. It’s a leading cause of injuries and deaths, car crashes and sexual violence involving young people. A couple of California legislators have decided that helping the alcohol industry sell alcopops to kids is more important than protecting them.