Alcopops and Underage Drinking

Underage drinking is one of the most pressing threats to the health and well-being of California's youth.  Underage drinking costs the citizens of California an estimated $7.5 billion each year in medical care, work loss, and pain and suffering - costs that stem from alcohol-related youth violence, traffic crashes, property crime, and other injuries.[1]

Underage drinkers consumed a staggering 17.5% of all alcohol sold in California. [2] With this in mind, the alcohol industry is developing new products designed for the youth palate.  Flavored alcoholic beverages, or "alcopops," are sugary, fruit-flavored drinks that look and taste like soda-pop.  The image below shows a bottle of Green Apple Vodka by Smirnoff, Smirnoff's Green Apple Alcopop product and a bottle of non-alcoholic Green Apple soda pop.  The similarily in the looks of the products are indicative of the marketing stratgies to appeal to underage drinkers.

If you have never tried an alcopop or you are unsure just what an alcopop is, chances are you're no spring chicken. Alcopops have been around for more than 20 years, but they have generally been marketed to a young audience as a way to introduce alcoholic beverages to new drinkers. But who exactly is this young audience?

Who's Drinking Alcopops?

The American Medical Association released the "Girlie Drinks" survey last year concluding that alcopops are the beverage most frequently consumed by teenage girls, but the least-favored alcoholic beverage for adult women. These results are especially disturbing given a recent status report on underage drinking released by the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth reporting that, according to three recent Federal surveys, girls are now binge drinking more than boys. 

A recent survey of youth in California supports these national findings.  The Center for Applied Research Solutions conducted a survey for the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs of 304 California youth in 41 groups from 16 counties.  The results demonstrate that youth are attracted to the colorful, hip packaging of alcopops, that they underestimate their alcoholic content, and that these drinks are, in fact, very popular with California teens.

The Great Alcopops Debate

Alcopops are labeled as "malt beverages", but the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury has determined that these beverages derive their alcoholic content primarily from the distilled spirits component of alcopops. The Bureau found that alcopops producers start with a beer base, but then strip the base of its key characteristics, including flavor, color, and alcohol. Then they add distilled spirits, large quantities of sugar, and other ingredients.  The producers represent to regulators that the final product is beer, not distilled spirits. See IIAA Policy Brief , "Flavored Alcoholic Beverages: The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing"

CSLEP's research has demonstrated that classifying alcopops as beer violates the laws of at least 29 states, including California.  CSLEP submitted its findings in a report submitted to the National Association of Attorneys General's Task Force on Youth Access to Alcohol.   The report prompted Maine to reclassify alcopops as distilled spirits in that state.  The California Attorney's office also reviewed CSLEP's research and, in May 2005, issued an opinion sent to California Board of Equalization stating that alcopops are distilled spirits under California law.  In response, industry representatives supported legislation (AB 417) that would have redefined "beer" to include alcopops.  In October of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 417 , yet, California's state agencies continue to treat alcopops as a beer for taxation and regulatory purposes. 

Misclassification of Alcopops Promotes Marketing to Young People

By classifying alcopops as beer rather than distilled spirits, marketers can make the products cheaper and more available, critical factors in marketing to young people. In California, beer is taxed at much lower rates than distilled spirits - 20 cents a gallon for beer compared to $3.30 a gallon for distilled spirits.  Experts believe that imposing the proper tax rate would raise the price substantially and, thereby, reduce alcopops' appeal to young people.  This beer classification is also costing California tax payers an estimated $40 million in state taxes each year.[3]

Lower taxes are just one benefit of alcopops' marketing.  The beer classification also allows alcopops to be made available in approximately 15,000 additional retail outlets statewide.  These are mostly convenience stores often located in residential neighborhoods where young people have ready access.

See CSLEP Background Briefing Paper

See "Which One is Beer"  Powerpoint Presentation on Alcopops

Efforts Underway in California

CSLEP has joined with various public agencies and community organizations to form the Coalition on Alcopops and Youth.  CSLEP's work with this Coalition is funded in part by a grant from the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY).  The following includes descriptions of some of the efforts and accomplishments of the Coalition and its partners:

Litigation

With the assistance of the law firm of Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai, Public Law Group, the Coalition has developed a legal strategy to compel the State of California to reclassify alcopops as distilled spirits.  The Public Law Group agreed to represent members of the Coalition on a pro bono basis and has filed a Writ of Mandate in the California courts seeking to direct the California ABC Department to reclassify the products. Materials on this subject are available below.

Classification of Flavored Alcoholic Beverages: California Writ of Mandate

Classification of Flavored Alcoholic Beverages: California Writ of Mandate
    Declaration of James F. Mosher

Marin Institute: Alcohol Industry Loses Alcopop Tax Battle in California

California Alcoholic Beverage Control Department's Answer to Petition for Writ of Mandate

Petitioner's Response to ABC Department's Answer to Writ

FMB Coalition's Amicus Curiae Brief

Espinoza Declaration in Opposition to Writ

Presentation to the Governmental Organization Committee, February 14, 2006

Petitioner's Answer to Amicus Brief (First of Four Parts)

Petitioner's Answer to Amicus Brief (Second of Four Parts)

Petitioner's Answer to Amicus Brief (Third of Four Parts)

Petitioner's Answer to Amicus Brief (Fourth of Four Parts)

Writ filed with the California Supreme Court

Legislation

Several members of the California Legislature, including Senators Migden and Figueroa and Assemblywoman Saldaña, are leading a legislative effort to address marketing alcopops to minors.  Senator Migden introduced SB 1180, which will require the Secretary of Health Services to issue a report to the Legislature on youth alcohol problems and alcohol marketing.  Additionally, Senator Figueroa has organized two informational hearings on alcohol advertising, alcopops, and adolescent health before the Senate Select Committee on Youth, Families, and Health.

Youth Empowerment

A key objective in the campaign is to develop youth leadership, ensuring that young people play a central role in all of the activities of the Coalition. The Coalition coordinated with the California Friday Night Live Partnership (CFNLP), a state-wide youth program that promotes healthy lifestyles free of alcohol, tobacco, or other substance abuse among youth.  CFNLP created an 8-minute, youth-produced video on alcopops, funded by The California Wellness Foundation.  The video has been distributed throughout the state and serves as a critical resource in promoting the Coalition's policy agendas.

Media Advocacy

The Coalition's campaign has generated media coverage throughout the state of California.  Below are citations to some of the media generated by the alcopops debate:

"Brewers scramble on taxes, marketing," Sacramento Bee, August 23, 2005

"Kiddie booze? Tax alcopops as hard liquor," Sacramento Bee, August 27, 2005   

"Sweet Deal for the Booze Boys," Los Angeles Times, September 1, 2005

"Hard to swallow," San Diego Union Tribune, September 3, 2005

"Don't swallow the spin," San Francisco Chronicle, September 6, 2005

"Bill aims to retain low tax on drinks," Los Angeles Times, September 6, 2005

"Alcopops Bill Merits Veto," Pasadena Star-News, September 20, 2005

"Governor faces sticky decision", Sacramento Bee, October 3, 2005

"Veto Stirs up Taxing Debate," Sacramento Bee, October 23, 2005

"Groups will go after State for booze targeting kids," Oakland Tribune, January 14, 2006

"Flavored Malt Drinks Under Fire," Sacramento Bee, January 18, 2006

"State sued over alcopops," San Jose Mercury News, January 18, 2006

"Groups Sue State to Re-label Sweet Malt Beverages", The Daily Californian, January 20, 2006

"Senate Debates Reclassification of Alcopops," One Bakersfield, February 14, 2006

"Senator Florez Holding Hearing on Alcopops," ABC30.com, February 14, 2006

"Alcopops become center of debate at Capitol," News10.net, February 14, 2006

"Legislation, Lawsuit, aim to curb teen consumption of alcopops," Petaluma Argus Courier, February 15, 2006

"Drinks look like soda but they are adult beverages" San Diego Union Tribune, March 11, 2006

"Students' alcohol video goes statewide" Fresno Bee, April 16, 2006

Please refer to Marin's Institute's website for more information on the Coalition on Alcopops and Youth

__________________________________________________________________________________

 

Endnotes:

[1] Levy, D.T., Miller, T.R., & Cox, K.C. (2003). Underage drinking: societal costs and seller profits. Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation Working Paper. Calverton, MD: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation.

[2] The International Institute for Alcohol Awareness (IIAA), a Project of the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE). www.beawarenow.org.

[3] Board of Equalization, Revenue Estimate, Flavored Malt Beverages, August 26, 2005.