BEER LOBBY KEEPS ANTI-DRUG DRIVE ALCOHOL-FREE

In Battle Over Ads, Big Brewers Tapped Political Leverage

Having lobbied aggressively against a plan to put anti-drinking messages in
the government's ad campaign against illegal drugs, the beer industry's top
lobbyist in Washington was still nervous. On the eve of a critical Senate
vote, David Rehr sat up in bed and thought to himself: "What else can I do
to kill this thing?"

Rehr's wife told him to go back to sleep, and for good reason: Despite
emotional appeals by anti-drinking advocates, the Senate easily swatted
back the proposal. The victory, followed by a similar result in the House
Appropriations Committee last week, showed the tremendous political
leverage the alcohol lobby can exert in a short period of time.

In a little-noticed battle, the deep-pocketed beer industry trumped Mothers
Against Drunk Driving, its allies and a seemingly sympathetic cause with a
relentless, sophisticated lobbying campaign.

"I guess this was a real experience in how powerful outside interests can
be, regardless of the merits of the case," said Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard
(D-Calif.), sponsor of the unsuccessful campaign to target underage drinking.

Rehr, senior vice president of government affairs for the National Beer
Wholesalers Association, who did not want beer identified in the public's
mind with illegal drugs, preferred to trumpet a different lesson: "My
bottom line on this is that good policy prevails."

Whatever the merits, the battle highlighted the kinds of policy battles now
raging in Congress, as both chambers work through the 13 spending bills
that finance the daily operations of the federal government. These
must-pass bills frequently serve as the vehicle for legislative initiatives
that would not otherwise see the light of day.

Certainly Roybal-Allard, who had studied heroin addiction and counseled
drunk drivers before entering politics, saw an opening to make an impact
this summer as the House Appropriations Committee considered an annual bill
to fund the Treasury Department and Postal Service.

Although Roybal-Allard is new to the appropriations process--she just won a
coveted seat on the panel this year--she is far from a political novice.
The daughter of a former congressman, Roybal-Allard served six years in the
California legislature before coming to Congress in 1995.

She was intrigued by testimony this spring about a $1 billion, five-year
advertising campaign by the Office of National Drug Control Policy against
illegal drug use. During a routine oversight hearing, President Clinton's
national drug policy director, Barry R. McCaffrey, told lawmakers he lacked
the statutory authority to include anti-drinking messages as part of this
campaign.

But anti-drinking advocates see alcohol as a "gateway" to more serious
drugs and some believe it poses a greater health risk to teenagers than
illegal drugs. Roybal-Allard resolved to use the Treasury-Postal Service
bill as a vehicle to give McCaffrey the legal authority he said he lacked.
"This was an opportunity," she said in an interview.

But to Rehr, a sunny and tireless promoter, the prospect of inserting the
topic of beer into the nation's anti-drug drive was devastating.

"Our adversaries want to paint a vision of the business to give people the
idea that sipping a beer is like injecting yourself with heroin, which it's
not," said Rehr, who conceded that widespread concern over teen drinking
made his task more difficult. "Policy-wise, it was a stupid idea. Nobody
wanted to say this was a stupid idea."

The political clout of Rehr's group and its allies is immense: Beer and
wine interests are among the most aggressive and well-funded lobbies on the
Hill. Overall, political action committees associated with the industry
gave more than $2.3 million to congressional candidates last election and
the National Beer Wholesalers Association gave $1.3 million alone,
according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Perhaps as significant are the close ties that Rehr, a fundraiser for
Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), has to the House leadership. He is one of
a handful of lobbyists who meets with DeLay each Wednesday morning to plot
legislative strategy.

And Rehr had crucial allies on this particular issue. Another appropriator,
Rep. Anne M.Northup (R-Ky.), thought the proposal to include underage
drinking as a target could undermine the effectiveness of the federal
government's battle against illegal drugs. Northup bows to nobody in her
opposition to underage drinking--she recounts how she yanked her
20-year-old daughter out of a line for drinks at a wedding reception this
month because she wasn't technically legal--but added: "They are two very
different substances. Drugs are illegal. They are bad for you at any time."

Roybal-Allard at first seized the upper hand in the debate through a fluke.
The chairman of the House Appropriations Treasury-Postal subcommittee, Jim
Kolbe (R-Ariz.), was forced to postpone the panel's markup until the
morning of May 15, when Northup was scheduled to fly to her son's
graduation. Neither Northup nor Rehr thought the provision was going to be
offered then, so when Roybal-Allard proposed language calling for underage
drinking to be included in the ad campaign, the chief opponent on the
subcommittee was absent. The panel adopted the amendment by voice vote.

As both sides prepared for a battle in the full Appropriations Committee,
Roybal-Allard's allies intensified their attacks on the alcohol industry.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest published a study of the
industry's contributions to panel members during the last election, noting
that Northup "received by far the most" money from beer and liquor
interests, with more than $38,000 in donations.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving president Karolyn Nunnallee even took the
unusual step of directly attacking Rehr at a news conference. She cited a
Los Angeles Times article in which he was quoted as saying that each
lawmaker should look in the mirror and say, "It's not worth messing with
the beer wholesalers."

Nunnallee said: "In the days ahead, we will learn whether the members of
the House Appropriations Committee see Mr. Rehr's face when they look in
the mirror or the faces of thousands of young people who die each year as a
result of alcohol."

But the bill stalled in the House, so the battle shifted to the Senate.
Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) announced in late June that he planned to
offer a similar provision to Roybal-Allard's when the bill came to the
floor, giving advocates on both sides roughly a week to advance their cause.

"We worked it about as hard as any other issue I've been involved in," said
Tom Howarth, a MADD lobbyist.

But the beer wholesalers also worked the issue hard. They blanketed the
Senate with faxes, with Rehr instructing his receptionists to call members'
officers to make sure the group's missives had been safely delivered. The
beer wholesalers also enlisted the support of two senators who could make a
compelling case: Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.), whose sister died
from alcohol-related abuse, and Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), whose mother
was killed by a drunk driver.

The beer industry's position was also bolstered by McCaffrey and the
chairmen of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America, former New York
governor Mario Cuomo (D) and one-time drug czar William J. Bennett, coming
out against the anti-drinking language. They argued that the proposed rule
might muddy the message of the anti-drug efforts. The Lautenberg amendment
failed, 58 to 40.

MADD continued to press House appropriators, flying in a group of Oklahoma
mothers to meet with Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr. (R-Okla.), while other
members lobbied Northup and Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.).

Wholesalers and other alcohol representatives also trooped into members'
offices.

Democrat Sam Farr, whose district includes part of California's wine
country, said producers in his district convinced him the anti-drug
campaign was the wrong vehicle for alcohol awareness efforts.

House appropriators on July 13 hotly debated whether to strike
Roybal-Allard's provision. DeLay argued that an anti-drinking initiative
belonged elsewhere in the federal government, while Rep. Frank R. Wolf
(R-Va.), who supported the measure, yelled at his colleagues for abandoning
the nation's youth.

In the end, the beer industry carried the day: The full committee voted 32
to 23 to kill the underage drinking language.