Sarah Longwell, the American Beverage Institute's spokesperson in this Fox News story about mandatory interlock devices for persons convicted of drunk driving, certainly makes a donkey of herself as she tries to justify impaired driving, dismisses the proven effectiveness of such devices to save lives, and then boorishly goes after Nebraska State Senator Tony Fulton for using a study conducted by "activists" like Mothers Against Drunk Driving and...ahem...the federal government.Fulton, the sponsor of the legislation passed in the Unicameral (see this post), does a good job in explaining the law's purpose. And his calm, reasoned commentary makes Ms. Longwell look even worse.
FYI -- the American Beverage Institute is no stranger to the fight against drunk driving -- it's just that they continue to take the wrong side.
SourceWatch explains that the ABI's mission is to "promote responsible alcohol consumption."[1] Actually, its primary focus is opposing any lowering of the legal blood alcohol limit for drivers, and fighting smoking bans in bars. The organization is run by lobbyist Rick Berman, whose company, Berman & Co., represents the restaurant, alcoholic beverage and tobacco industries. Berman is quoted in numerous articles as the legislative counsel for the group. He consistently defends "social drinkers" and speaks out against any laws or media coverage that negatively affects the industry. In this capacity he has been a longtime foe of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD).
The American Beverage Institute's recent propaganda includes their "Drink Responsibly: Drive Responsibly" campaign. The group refuses to accept the fact that "responsible" means different things to different people. They call MADD and others who work to reform alcohol policies "Neo-prohibitionists" to suggest that they want to infringe upon the average American's right to enjoy the alcoholic beverage of their choice, and to paint them as "Carrie Nations" to be feared...
In January 2009, the ABI opposed new laws that became effective in six states that required the installation of ignition interlock devices in vehicles belonging to people convicted of their first drunk driving offense. ABI Managing Director Sarah Longwell argued, "We foresee is a country in which you're no longer able to have a glass of wine, drink a beer at a ball game or enjoy a champagne toast at a wedding." She added, "There will be a de facto zero tolerance policy imposed on people by their cars." Longwell argued that Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), who supported passage of the laws, put too much emphasis on alcohol as a cause of traffic deaths, and disregarded the roles excessive speed and driver cell-phone use in deadly accidents.[5] Shifting the focus of the debate away from the embattled substance/product is a public relations strategy first practiced by the tobacco industry."
