Lucille Roybal-Allard: “would not every Member of this House love to have a campaign in which they could run 93 TV ads for every TV ad run by…”

“would not every Member of this House love to have a campaign in which they could run 93 TV ads for every TV ad run by their opponent? There is no doubt which candidate would win. So it goes with the contest between alcohol commercials and responsible drinking ads purchased by the alcohol industry. As reported by the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth, in 2001 America's youth were 93 times more likely to see an ad promoting alcohol than an industry ad discouraging underage drinking. Although the liquor industry tells us their ads are not targeted at children, our children see plenty of them, and they have enormous impact on our young population. On average, in 2001, an American youngster saw 245 ads promoting alcohol products to only four ads discouraging underage drinking. The amount of money the liquor industry spends on advertising alcohol is also astounding; and compared to what the industry spends on warnings about underage drinking it is, at best, disappointing. For example, in the year 2001, the alcohol industry spent $811 million to air 208,000 alcohol ads, compared to $23 million for a mere 2,379 responsible drinking ads. In other words, the alcohol industry spent less than 3 percent of its total advertising dollars on responsible drinking. As a result, our youth saw more commercials for beer than for juice, gum, chips, sneakers or jeans, product ads that usually target a young audience. The power of liquor advertising has been effective.…”