I have to agree with the opponents of this proposal. There's tons of ads out there for alcohol that target underage drinkers. Think of Budweiser's longstanding tradition of advertising with sex or crude jokes. And, let's not forget the sweet, cheap, alcoholic wine products like Boone's, or sweet liquors like 99 Apples, that are also popular with younger folks.

Reply

Oh, how surprising that it's a pair of democrats behind this. This is simply ridiculous. We don't need MORE laws and rules and regulations and taxes. You want kids to stop drinking? Good luck. But making the booze more expensive isn't going to do it. That was the rationale behind raising the taxes on cigarettes, and that didn't do much to curb "underage" smoking, did it?

I don't even DRINK this crap, and I'm completely outraged by this. The fact is this is just another new tax which they couldn't get passed any other way. They'll come on with cries of, "Won't somebody PLEASE think of the chillllllldren???" and act as if this makes them morally superior to their opponents-most of whom, like me, are simply opposed to new taxes which will have a punitive effect not on the alleged target but on people who are legally able to purchase the product in question. But they're just trying to separate you from more of your hard-earned money.

Reply

I agree it's a load of crap. Especially bothersome that it's yet another money grab under the guise of "for the children".

Cigarettes, Alcohol targeting children is crap as well. For the same reason as aiming advertising at 90 year olds doesn't have a great payoff, aiming their advertising at 15 year olds isn't worth it either.

But.. aiming at 21 year olds, that's worth it. Get them them to prefer your product during their first (legal) drinking years. But the morons who come up with these laws seem to presume that targeting age 21 magically excludes any interest by those whoe are age 18. They'd probably whine about tying in advertising with videogames, even when the average age for a videogame player is in their 30's, a decade higher than what would be their target demographic. Just because kids might be attracted to advertising does not mean the makers are trying to get kids to drink it. If they made the advertising UN-attractive to kids they would likely miss 90% of their target market as well. I'd challenge someone to come up with an advertising campaign for any product that would hook the 21-25 year olds and be completely uninteresting to the 16-20 year olds.

What's a little funny is the stuff is just crap to drink anyway. It would be a better arguement that only kids who didn't know any better would drink it. Also humorous that Smirnoff, Bacardi who's well known products are distilled spirits make these fake knockoffs from what's essentially beer. Why? Less taxes and able to get their product name into places with beer/wine only licenses.

Reply

Big surprise. Another tax proposed, another step away from freedom & personal choice. This country is going to such $#!t. The minute a revolution springs up in an effort to bring this country back to its roots of freedom and lezzais fare capitalism, I'll be on the front lines. Socialist bastards.

Reply

My my, you'd think the bill actually said something. As it is, it's got a single change in the law that reads more like an election year sop to some constituency or another.

Nick, the law does NOT address the tax issue at all, that's apparently a separate lawsuit, not a bill at all. The bill simply strips the requirement of "intent" from the ads aimed at people under the legal drinking age. That's it. Which makes it pretty much a non-issue. Intent is legally fuzzy to begin with so it takes away the need to read a corporation's "mind" and focuses on effect of the ad.

Big. Fracking. Deal.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of them wasting their time on this, especally since the bill seems t be just another 'feel good' measure they can campaign on, but it's not a major issue. (although I am amused by the comments re: Democrats...as if they are the puritans shutting down your world to protect the children...searched for anything on the Internet lately? want the federal gov't to see those records? they want to--"for the children" of course, and only Republicans this time... so can we talk food not parties?)

Reply

I wrote my Master's thesis on alcohol taxation and no, alcohol taxes are not perfect public policy. They are regressive and create deadweight loss in the market. But they DO reduce alcohol consumption - this is a fact. It is also a fact that kids are more price-sensitive than adults because of their lesser earning power.

Lets face it, very few adults drink these things, so if they're going to use taxation to reduce underage drinking, targeting these drinks hurts of-age drinkers the least.

For those of you who claim to be "morally" opposed to taxes, please take an economics class. And until you do, please stay off our public (tax-funded) roads and highways.

Reply