Department of Health and Human Services 

OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

YOUTH AND ALCOHOL: 

LAWS AND ENFORCEMENT 

IS THE 21-YEAR-OLD DRINKING AGE A MYTH? 

Richard P. Kusserow 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

OEI-09-91-00650 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

PURPOSE 

This inspection examined (1) current State laws and regulations governing youth 

accessto alcohol and (2) how these laws are enforced. 

I BACKGROUND 

In response to public health concerns and the adverse health consequences of alcohol 

abuse, Surgeon General Antonia Novello requested that the Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) provide information on State alcohol laws and enforcement. These 

concerns mirror one of Department of Health and Human Services (HI-IS) Secretary 

Louis Sullivan’s goals which is to reduce the prevalence of alcohol problems among 

children and youth. This report is one in a series prepared by the OIG related to 

youth and alcohol. It describes the State laws about youth and alcohol and how State 

alcoholic beverage control agencies enforce the laws. 

At the Federal level, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all 

States to raise their minimum purchase and public possession age to 21. States that 

did not comply faced a reduction in highway funds under the Federal Highway Aid 

Act. The Department of Transportation has determined that all States are in 

compliance with this Act. 

During June and July 1991, we conducted interviews with State alcoholic beverage 

control (ABC) and/or State enforcement agency officials from all 50 States and the 

District of Columbia. Concurrently, we reviewed all State alcohol control laws and 

regulations pertaining to youth. 

FINDINGS 

State laws contain roopholes that permit underage drinking. 

Although it is illegal to sell alcoholic beverages to minors, minors in many States can 

legally purchase, attempt to purchase, possess,consume, and sell alcohol and enter 

drinking establishments. 

State and local agencies have dificulty enforcing youth alcohol laws. 

States are hindered by (1) budget and staff reductions, (2) low priority of youth 

alcohol enforcement, and (3) lack of ABC jurisdiction over minors. 
i Nonzhzlpenalties againrt vend& and minors hit enforcemenl!s ef/ectivents. 

While vendors who sell to minors often are fined or have their licenses suspended, 

license revocations are rare. Penalties against youth who violate the laws often are 

not deterrents. Even when strict penalties exist, courts are lenient and do not apply 

them. 

States have di#ie preventing farSe i&nt$cation ue. I 

False identification is easy to obtain. Laws and penalties against minors’ 

misrepresenting their age do not deter youth from using false identification to buy 

alcohol. 

Some States have developed creative metho& to enforce alcohol laws and penalize 

Ojpl-&~~ 

Some of the more popular ideas include suspending driver’s licenses, establishing 

alternative penalties, allowing vendors to obtain signed statements from suspected 

minors, conducting decoy operations, educating vendors, and enacting stringent “dram 

shop” laws. 

Enforcement is inhibited by public amludk and dejiciencks in education. 

Public indifference prevents changes in youth attitudes toward alcohol. State officials 

described techniques to improve education’s effectiveness. 

CHECKLIST FOR STATES 

We encourage States to examine their laws and policies concerning youth access to 

alcohol and provide a checklist for States in the report. 

ii 
TABLEOFCONTENTS 

ExEclxrlwESuMMARY 

INTRODUCI’ION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..~......... 1 

FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

State laws contain loopholes that permit underage drinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

State and local agencies have difficulty enforcing youth 

alcohol laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Nominal penalties against vendors and minors limit 

enforcement’s effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

States have difficulty preventing false ID use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

Some States have developed creative methods to enforce alcohol 

laws and penalize offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Enforcement is inhibited by public attitude and deficiencies 

in education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

CHECKLIST FOR STATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 
INTRODUCTION 

PURPOSE 

This inspection examined (1) current State laws and regulations governing youth 

accessto alcohol and (2) how these laws are enforced. , 

BACKGROUND 

In response to public health concerns and the adverse health consequences of alcohol 

abuse, Surgeon General Antonia Novello requested that the Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) provide information on State alcohol laws and enforcement. These 

concerns mirror one of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary 

Louis Sullivan’s goals which is to reduce the prevalence of alcohol problems among 

children and youth. This report is one in a series prepared by the OIG related to 

youth and alcohol. 

Youth Alcohol Use 

As reported in recent surveys, youth under the legal drinking age of 21 drink alcohol. 

In a June 1991 report, the OIG reported that 51 percent of the nation’s 20.7 million 

junior and senior high school students have had at least 1 drink within the past year. 

Eight million students drink weekly and 454,000 binge weekly. In addition, students 

reported that alcohol is easy to obtain. Nearly 7 million students purchase their own 

alcohol from stores.’ In addition to the OIG survey, the 1990 National High School 

Senior Survey found that 89.5 percent of high school seniors have drunk alcohol at 

least once, and 32.2 percent have experienced a “binge” of five or more drinks in a 

row within the previous 2 weeks.2 

Govemment and public Interest Repme 

At the Federal level, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all 

States to raise their minimum purchase and public possession age to 21. States that 

did not comply faced a reduction in highway funds under the Federal Highway Aid 

‘Office of Inspector General, Youth and Alcohol: A National Survev--Drinking Habits, 

Access, Attitudes, and Knowledge, June 1991, p. 3. 

‘University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research,“Monitoring the Future: A 

Continuing Study of the Lifestyles and Values of Youth,” January 1991. 

1 
F 

‘.I 

i -’ 

i 

Act.3 The Department of Transportation has determined that all States are in 

compliance with this Act. 

The National Minimum Drinking Age Act specifically prohibits purchase and public 

possession of alcoholic beverages. It does not prohibit persons under 21 (also called 

youth or minors) from drinking. The term “public possession” is strictly defined and 

does not apply to possession: 

b for an established religious purpose; 

b when accompanied by a parent, spouse, or legal guardian age 21 or older; 

b for medical purposes when prescribed or administered by a licensed physician, 

pharmacist, dentist, nurse, hospital, or medical institution; 

b in private clubs or establishments; and 

b in the course of lawful employment by a duly licensed manufacturer, 

wholesaler, or retailer. 

Article XXI of the United States Constitution, which repealed prohibition, grants 

States the right to regulate alcohol distribution and sale. State laws are unique, but 

each allows local communities to regulate youth accessto alcohol through local 

ordinances and law enforcement. 

Private organizations, including alcohol industry and public-interest groups, are 

becoming more involved in identifying ways to decrease or eliminate youth access to 

alcohol. Some organizations, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and 

the newly-created Century Council, work to reduce alcohol abuse throughout the 

country by educating the public and lobbying for legislation. 

Controlling Alcoholic BeverageSale and Dihbution 

Each State decides how it will license and operate the alcoholic beverage industry-­

either through a control or license structure. Eighteen “control” States have partial or 

total responsibility to distribute and sell alcohol. Thirty-three “license” States issue 

permits or licenses to individuals or companies to sell alcohol. 

All States have either State or local administrative agencies that issue liquor licenses 

and/or enforce the laws against vendors and youth. State agencies, usually called 

alcoholic beverage control (ABC) agencies, regulate the manufacture, distribution, and 

sale of alcoholic beverages within the State. Forty-nine States have ABCs while 

‘Kevin Kadlec, “National Minimum Drinking Age,” ClevelandState Law Review (34), 

1986, p. 637. 

2 
Hawaii and Nevada rely on local agencies to oversee State alcohol laws. These 

agencies monitor all vendors (also called licensees or permit holders). 

Thirty-nine States have “local option” provisions, which allow communities to limit or 

ban the sale of alcohol. These communities also have the power to regulate where 

and when alcohol is sold. 

States require vendors to obtain State and/or local licenses. Licenses are renewed 

usually on an annual basis after a renewal fee is paid and other requirements are met. 

As of July 1991, there were approximately 560,000 retail licenses issued in the United 

States. 

Laws 

State laws address separately youth-related violations. These include: 

b Sales to minors. Prohibits vendors or any other persons from selling, giving, or 

otherwise providing alcohol to minors. 

Purchase. Prohibits or limits minors from obtaining alcohol from vendors or 

other sources. 

b Possession. Generally prohibits or limits minors from carrying or handling 

alcohol. All State laws contain various exemptions, such as handling alcohol in 

the course of employment and possession with parental permission. 

b Consumption. Prohibits or limits minors’ actual drinking of alcoholic beverages. 

k Misrepresentation of age. Provides for penalties against minors who present 

false identification or otherwise represent themselves as being of the legal 

purchase age. 

State and local enforcement agencies may use administrative and/or criminal penalties 

against alcohol law violators. Administrative penalties are assessedagainst vendors 

through licensing agencies. Administrative penalties include fines and license 

suspensions and revocations. Criminal penalties are assessedagainst vendors or 

minors through State or local criminal courts. Criminal penalties include fines, jail 

sentences, and diversionary programs, such as community service. 

3 

c 
METHODOIDGY 

During June and July 1991, we conducted interviews with ARC and/or State 

enforcement agency officials from 48 States and the District of Columbia. For Hawaii 

and Nevada, we interviewed officials from appropriate local enforcement agencies. 

We used structured discussion guides to obtain information about State laws and 

enforcement practices, effectiveness, and interagency cooperation. 

Concurrently, we reviewed all State alcohol control laws and regulations pertaining to 

youth. We used the Commerce Clearing House Licmor Control Law Reoorter, which 

continually tracks and updates State liquor control laws. We also used the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration Digest of State Alcohol-Highwav Safetv 

Related Legislation, which provides an overview of drunk driving-related laws. When 

necessary, we contacted State officials to clarify provisions. 
FINDINGS 

STATE LAWS CONTAIN LOOPHOLES THAT PERMIT UNDERAGE 

DRINKING 

Ahhough it ir illegal to sell alcoholic bevemgesto rnhoq nzikots can legally pwchuse, 

possg and consume aikohol I 

The chart below illustrates the number of States that permit minors to legally obtain 

and use alcohol and sell or sexve alcoholic beverages. 

SALE, PURCHASE, POSSESSION, ANDCONSUMPTION 

ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY INSTATELAWS 

BUT 

MINGRS IN LKXiNSED DRINKING ESTAFXJS- EMPLOYMENT OF MINORS BY VENDORS 

lJsALPRovlDEDK)LOCALoRDINANCEINQsrAlEs LEGALMALL5lsrArEs 

WITHOUTPARENTSORSPOUSEPRESENT SELL WITHOUT SUPERVISION 

uG&F5tovmDM3~~#3omm 44srms 

RlRCIL4SFi BY MINORS POSSESSION BY h4lNORS 

PARTLULYLWALIN6SMES LFG&lHR~Ex~IN31srAm 

lswEsUi!X -lAws 

I I I 

5 
Although no Statespennit vendon to sell to minon, six States do not prohibit minors i from pwdzaskg alcohol 

Six States do not have laws which prohibit minors from purchasing or attempting to 

purchase alcohol. However, these States prohibit minors from using false 

identification or misrepresenting their age. Recently, the Insurance Institute for 

Highway Safety conducted a study in New York and Washington, D.C. of alcohol 

vendors selling to minors. Minors purchased beer successful11in 44 to 80 percent of 

New York stores and 97 percent of Washington, D.C. stores. The Insurance 

Institute chose these States because no legal impediments existed for minors 

purchasing or attempting to purchase alcohol. 

States allow minors to po333s alcohol 

Under certain conditions, it is legal for minors to possessalcohol in many States. 

Minors can possessalcohol with parental consent, for religious purposes, in private 

residences, in public establishments with a parent or spouse of legal drinking age 

present, and for medicinal purposes. State officials mainly complained about the 

private residence exception because often no parental supenision is required. “Most 

drinking has gone into homes, rather than parking lots,” said one official. Another 

official added, “Our statute that makes it a crime for minors to consume in a public 

place is fine, but this does not cover private places. An example is a keg party at a 

private home. The police cannot arrest minors nor can they confiscate the keg of 

beer.” 

Some States have attempted to address this issue legislatively. For example, California 

enacted a “Kegger Statute” that allows authorities with probable cause to enter private 

establishments to investigate potential youth alcohol violations. Police are then 

allowed to “seize any alcoholic beverages in plain view at social gatherings, when those 

gatherings are open to the public, 10 or more persons under the age of 21 are 

participating, persons under the age of 21 are consuming alcoholic beverages, and 

there is no supervision of the social gathering by a parent or guardian of one or more 

of the participants.“’ 

Five States prohibit minors from possessing alcohol only if they intend to consume it. 

Because they must prove “intent to consume,” law enforcement officials in these States 

are reluctant to arrest minors for possession of alcoholic beverages. 

‘David F. Preusser and Allan F. Williams, Insurance Institute For Highway Safety, Sales of 

Alcohol to Underaee Purchasers in Three New York Counties and Washington, D.C., March 

1991, pp. 2 and 4. 

‘California Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, Business and Professions Code, Section 

25662(b), p. 194. 

6 
lknty+ne States do not specijZal@ prohibit consumption by minors 

Officials from these States stressed that minors who consume alcohol can be 

prosecuted under possession laws. However, one State’s law specifically contains a 

loophole. Arkansas has no consumption law, and its possession law states that 

“intoxicating liquor, wine, or beer in the body of a minor shall not be deemed to be in 

his possession.” 

State laws that alIow mikors to sell or seme alcohol without addt supenkion may result 

in easieryouth accessto akohl 

Forty-four States allow minors to sell alcohol without adult supervision in stores or 

restaurants. According to an OIG survey of junior and senior high school students, 

more than 3.5 million students purchase alcohol from stores with young clerks and 

almost 3 million students purchase alcohol from stores where they know the clerk.6 

State officials expressed concern about youth employment laws. “Store owners need to 

know that youth are under a lot of pressure to sell to other youth,” said one State 

official. Another State official said allowing unsupervised youth to sell alcohol was 

“ridiculous.” Kentucky currently is considering revising youth employment laws to 

change the age for serving alcohol from 20 to 21. 

Although strict local ordinances may app&, 42 States do not prohibit minors from entering 

d&king estoblidaments 

State officials stressed that communities often determine youth accessto drinking 

establishments. However, some officials complained that in communities with no 

regulation, stopping youth drinking is difficult. “Letting minors into clubs causes a lot 

of problems,” said one official. “It’s too easy for someone to buy a drink and then 

push it over to the person who is underage.” Another official was concerned that his 

State’s laws would become more relaxed. “One proposal would allow unaccompanied 

minors into licensed facilities. This is a regulator’s nightmare. Underage drinking laws 

would be unenforceable.” 

STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES HAVE DIFFICULTY ENFORCING YOUTH 

ALCOHOL LAWS 

The major obstacles to effective enforcement are (1) budget and staff reductions, 

(2) low priority of youth alcohol enforcement, and (3) the lack of ABC jurisdiction 

over minors. One official commented, “We do not have the mechanism or ability to 

enforce the laws. Local police have another priority-drugs. They ignore alcohol.” 

‘Office of Inspector General, the findings from the survey included in two reports, Youth 

and Alcohol: A National Survey: Drinking Habits, Access, Attitudes. and Knowledge, 

(OEI-09-91-00652) and Youth and Alcohol: A National Sut-vev: Do They Know What 

Thev’re Drinking? (OEI-09-91-00653). 

7 
. . . . 

Forty-three State officials argued that inadequate resources and manpower have i. hindered enforcement. Officials said: 

b “We are transferring all programs involving underage drinking to the local 

police. We have no personnel because of budget problems in this State. Since 

January, we have not done any enforcement. Two years ago, we had two 

investigators in the field; now we have no investigators.” 

“We have 10 field investigators for 9,000 to 10,000 licensees, whereas in 1969, 

we had 30 field investigators and 6,000 licensees.” 

b “Our enforcement staff has been cut from 72 to 40.” 

State officials stressed that other priorities and lack of public support prevent 

enforcement agencies from being effective. “It’s a no-win situation,” said one official. 

“Law enforcement does not get public support for busting kids. Parents don’t want 

their child arrested for something that every other child does. Alcohol enforcement is 

the opposite of illicit drug enforcement.” 

” Enforcing-youth alcohol laws is a low priority in some areas. One State 

;I official described how costly this can be: 

.’ 

....6p until 5 years ago, the average police oficer in New Hampshire didn’t do 

more than take the alcohol away from a youth found with alcohol. ‘About 

.‘I:Syears ago, there was a case in which several youth purchased alcohol in a 

.. small New Hampshire town. A police oficer stopped the vehicle and took the 

yI;,:al&h&, but he let the youth go. The police officer didn’t notify the parents. He 

..“.‘ihought he was doing the kia!s a favor by not taking them into custody. The 

,’ youth went to Massachusetts, bought more alcohol, and ended up in a car 

accident in which someone was killed. The parents of the person who was killed 

’ sued the town. The New Hampshire Supreme Court fbwtd the town liable. It 

::.was a vety expensive lawsuit. Since then, all police officers take youth into 

.:’ &stody until they can release them to their parents. The police are very :.. ~>;f”&&o~ about jjliy &sue now.” 

,_: .: 

Local enforcement agencies frequently experience similar resource and priority 

constraints. One official defended local agencies: ‘They give all of the time that they 

are capable of giving. Demands for their services and resources are very high. The 

communities are more interested in things like emergency response time.” 

Cooperation and communication among ABCs and State and local law enforcement 

agencies often is limited. Some officials complained that enforcement agencies do not 

share arrest and complaint data with licensing agencies. 

8 
NOMINAL PENALTIES AGAINST VENDORS AND MINORS LIMIT 

ENFORCEMENTS EJTEW 

??!hilevendor who sell to minors are ofien jibed or 3wipew revocations are rare 

Vendors who sell to minors are penalized by administrative and/or criminal sanctions. 

The charts below illustrate the range of administrative and criminal penalties. 

RANGES OFADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIESFORVENDORS 

(FORFIRSTOFFENSE) 

NOTHING $5,000OR

6-MONTHSUSPENSION 

RANGES OFCRIMINALPENALTIES FORVENDORS

$50 $10,000AND/OR

5YEARSINJAIL 

When applied, license suspensions and revocations are effective deterrents because 

vendors lose all alcohol revenues during the suspension period. However, State 

agencies often do not suspend licenses for first offenses. In addition, at least 

10 States allow vendors to pay increased fines in lieu of license suspensions. In one 

State, vendors may pay $100 per day during a suspension rather than seme the 

suspension. State officials say they rarely revoke licenses. Most States revoke licenses 

only when flagrant violations--such as multiple violations, illicit drug sales, or 

prostitution--occur on licensed premises. 

9 
A few States do not penalize vendors for their employees’ actions. Employees may be 

subject to criminal penalties, but agencies do not take administrative action against the 

vendors, unless the vendor--rather than his employees--commits the violation. 

Penuh against youth ojkn are rwt detemenfs 

Although youth alcohol violations are classified as misdemeanors in most States, 

penalties can be insignificant. One State fines youth $15. An official from-a State 

with a $25 penalty stated, “Many police do not even cite the minor, but they’ll cite the 

licensee. For the kid who’s caught, sometimes the only inconvenience is having to 

show up at our court as a witness.” The chart below indicates the range of youth 

penalties: 

I RANGES OFPENALTIES FORMINORS

FROM TO 

$10 $5,000AND/OR

1YEARIN JAIL 

A few States have developed separate fine structures for different age groups. In 

Iowa, the law distinguishes between persons under 19 and those 19 and 20 years of 

age. While persons under 19 are subject to a $100 fine and 30 days in jail for alcohol 

violations, persons 19 to 20 are subject to a $15 fine which may be paid like a parking 

ticket. 

CbunB are lenient 

Even when strict penalties exist, courts do not apply them, according to most State 

officials. “Judges do not like mandatory penalties,” said one official. “Sometimes they 

ignore the statutes. Kids are not held accountable for breaking the law.” Such 

leniency translates into enforcement difficulties for the alcohol-control agencies. 

Another official illustrated the problem. “I caught a kid in the parking lot with beer. 

He was unconcerned. This was the second time in 8 months that he’s been caught.” 

Court leniency is partly the product of priorities and overload. One official said, “The 

courts look at alcohol as a nuisance. Drugs are a higher priority.” Overcrowding 

results in lowered penalties, asserted a State official. He added, “Our courts are 

virtually going to break down due to antiquated procedures and case overload. A 

police officer can spend up to 3 days a week in court rather than on his or her 

territory.” 

10 
Court officials’ personal feelings may influence judgments. ‘There is definitely an ‘oldboy network’ in some of the smaller towns,” said an official. Another official described 

the social pressures the courts encounter. ‘The court system faces attitudes, both 

internally and externally. They hear that ‘it’s all part of growing up’ and ‘please don’t 

give our son a police record’.” Another official summarized, ‘They have other 

concerns. There is a prevailing attitude that ‘we did that when we were young’.” 

STATES HAVE DIFFICULTY PRE VENTING FALSE ID USE , 

Thirteen States admitted that they are having difficulty preventing youth from using 

false identification documents (ID) to purchase alcohol. ‘There are kids who look 

over 21, and their IDS look real,” said one official. Another official called his State’s 

false ID problem “rampant.” 

Although 46 States have laws and penalties against minors’ misrepresenting their age 

and/or presenting false ID to purchase alcohol, these do not deter youth. “Kids do not 

have a problem with using fake ID,” said one official. Another official stated that 

minors will attempt to buy alcohol no matter how poor the identification is: 

We recently had an administrative hearing about a vendor who sold alcohol to 

a minor. The vendor asked for ID. The 16-year-old boy--who looked 16--

presented the ID of 5-foot 4-inch female, except he had taped his picture on it. 

He was a 6-foot 5-inch male. Nonetheless, the clerk sold beer to him. Luckily, 

our officers had the store under surveillance and saw him carrying the beer out. 

States have difficulty taking enforcement actions against vendors when minors use 

false ID. “When fake ID is used, we cannot get the retailer for selling to the minor,” 

said one official. Another official added, “An l&year-old used fake ID to buy alcohol 

and got killed. The seller was sued, but the case was dismissed. The ID met statutory 

requirements.” 

Although States have attempted to combat the problem, they have had limited success. 

Some States recommend that vendors purchase a book that contains pictures of all 

legal State IDS. However, minors may obtain legal driver’s licenses with false birth 

documents. Some manufacturers use counterfeiting equipment to produce nearperfect reproductions. ‘There are sophisticated ID rings,” said one official. “We 

cracked one that had stolen driver’s license material. Multiple felonies could have 

been charged, but it was reduced to a municipal violation.” 

State officials believe the Federal government must take action, because minors obtain 

false ID from other States or through the mail. A Connecticut official stated, “Minors 

can get State driver’s licenses in Times Square in New York City for $10 to $15 each.” 

Two other State officials argued that the Federal government must crack down on 

illegal ID manufacturers. “We’ve located the manufacturers, but we can’t regulate 

those in other States,” said one official. “Federal legislation could make it illegal to 

11 
i 

i 

sell anything through the mail which is designed to pass for a legal ID or State 

license,” added another. 

SOME STATES HAVE DEVELOPED CREATIVE METHODS TO ENFORCE 

ALCOHOL LAWS AND PENALIZE OFFENDERS 

Faced with limited resources, States have developed innovative methods to prevent 

youth from obtaining alcohol. Some of the more popular ideas include suspending 

youth driver’s licenses, establishing alternative penalties for minors, allowing vendors 

to obtain signed statements from suspected minors, conducting decoy or “sting” 

operations, educating vendors on laws and penalties, and enacting stringent “dram 

shop” laws. 

Drivers license supension may be the only per&y that deters youth 

‘Tae one thing that a minor 11 

,” of fines go u&lected 

became there’s nothing the 

:. court can do if the minor 

doesn’t pay:” 

Of the 28 States that delay, suspend, or revoke 

youth drivers’ licenses for alcohol-related 

violations, some take action for any alcohol 

violation, while others do so for specific violations 

only. The suspension varies from several days to 

several years, depending on the State, violation, 

and minor’s record. 

Officials from States with this option argue that 

traditional, statutory penalties do not deter youth. 

Judges rarely sentence minors to jail, and parents 

usually pay the monetary penalties, not the minors. One State official complained that 

“because of our State’s weak laws, kids come from surrounding States, both of which 

provide for license suspension.” 

cornnukty senke and comse&g programs are other divemmary penah 

Alternative penalties are one way to direct the 

penalty at the minor. Judges often suspend a 

sentence pending a minor’s completion of a 

community service or counseling program. Youth 

that are assigned community service often must 

surrender dozens of hours to various community projects. Other minors need help 

with alcohol dependency, and they are required to enroll in a counseling program. 

12 
. 

Some States ofer vendors the opporlunity to require swpected minors to sign affivik3 

i 

Eleven States allow vendors to require buyers to sign 

“Wiile minqrs may have affidavits stating that they are 21. The affidavit 

no problem., using fake ._ explains the penalties against minors who attempt to 

f ‘icientifitiatitins, thkj d&a’! ...:: purchase alcohol or misrepresent their age. 

.;.;likk to.sign’their nati+.@ 1.1, 

.I;.tegfil d.ofxmen&” ,..I ’...:i.’ Vendors support this because the affidavit serves as 

proof that the minor misrepresented his or her age. 

Decoy or “stir@ operations succ- limit vendo?sfhom sellihg to minors 

Twenty-four officials volunteered that either the 

State ABC or the State or local police perform 

successful youth decoy operations otherwise known 

as “stings.” These operations consist of sending 

minors into stores and restaurants to purchase 

alcohol. If the employee sells alcohol to the minor, 

an undercover agent will cite or arrest the 

employee and/or vendor. The major purposes are 

to identify and penalize vendors that sell to youth. 

Many States do not by law allow “stings.” One 

State official admitted that his State does not use 

stings because authorities feel uncomfortable 

having minors attempt illegal actions. 

.; . 

“Sting opertitiorts allow us to 

control our vtindors much 

‘. more effectivelj. Iii one 

parish, we had minors buy 

‘, alcohol in 21 of 22 

convenience stores. 7Iie 

vendors attended hearings 

and were either jined and/or 

had their licenses suspended. 

The next year, only three 

vendors sold alcohol to ok 

.I minors.” 

States perform reverse minor decoy programs, such as Indiana’s “Operation Grab” and 

Delaware’s and Oklahoma’s “Cops-in-Shops.” In these programs, agents pose as clerks 

and servers to arrest minors and adults who buy for minors. Vendors have been 

receptive to this program and have cooperated with enforcement agencies. 

Educaling vendors about kzws andpe~lries reducessak to minors 

Although most States have provisions for either 

‘!J’ve&n’~‘&~&.&&~ by : mandatory or voluntary server training programs, 

,‘.-sotie bf the qU&ions .,.’ 47 of the 51 State officials believe that increasing 

? vendors ask’ me durfng these server training would be effective in preventing 

II:’traini& s6ki6its.1’ minors from obtaining and consuming alcohol. .. :::.,‘. Server training involves educating vendors about 

the State’s alcohol control laws, regulations, and 

penalties, their civil liability for selling to a minor, how to identify an underage drinker, 

and how to determine whether an identification card is genuine. Server training may 

be offered by AIKs or other public or private organizations. 

13 
When asked if they have undertaken any special initiatives to prevent alcohol sales to 

minors, one-third of the officials volunteered that their States’ effective server training 

programs have been vital. “We know server training works. We can demonstrate 

this,” said one State official. “In the past year, we have educated 2,000 people,” added 

another official. “And there has been only one infraction from that group.” 

While 11 States mandate server training for all vendors, most programs are voluntary. 

As an incentive, States may reduce penalties for vendors who have completed training 

and have illegal sale violations. One official reported that vendors in his State are 

protecting themselves by installing hidden cameras that show people entering the 

establishment and presenting IDS to the clerk. 

Sbict W-am shop” laws deter i&gal sales to minors 

Twenty-three States have civil liability or “dram 

shop” laws which specifically allow lawsuits 

against persons who provide alcohol to minors. 

Several other States allow lawsuits, but only 

under certain conditions. South Dakota clearly 

prohibits such lawsuits. Several State officials 

mentioned that the threat of costly litigation 

causes vendors to refuse to sell alcohol to 

minors. 

In 1985, the American Bar Association (ABA) 

recommended that all States enact statutes to 

allow lawsuits against persons who knowingly sell 

alcohol to minors. The ABA reasoned that such 

a statute would promote responsible serving 

practices.’ In 1985, the Federal government 

!‘We have strong ‘dram-shop’ 

liability laws. Vendors have 

.been more concemed since 

these were passed. Being sued 

does not put them out of 

business, but their insurance 

premiums go through the roof. 

Then they have to rake ptices, 

and they lose business. Our 

.dram-shop laws have made 

industry more responsive. You 

have to empower the people to 

affect vendors’ well-being.” 

funded the development of a model dram shop law. During this development, a 

review of court cases in three States revealed that “the legal system was not 

establishing clear guidelines for applying dram shop liability provisions or concepts.“’ 

The model dram shop law clearly allows lawsuits for damages resulting from negligent 

alcohol sales to minors. It also promotes responsible serving practices by allowing a 

vendor to use evidence of server training as a defense in a lawsuit. 

‘American Bar Association, American Bar Association Policv Recommendation on Youth 

Alcohol and Drue Problems (Washington: American Bar Association, 1986), p. 39. 

‘Victor Colman et al., “Preventing Alcohol-Related Injuries: Dram Shop Liability in a 

Public Health Perspective,” Western State University Law Review (12), Spring 1985, p. 444. 

14 
Officials reported other practices that they believe are effective: 

New Jersey issues a minor’s drivers licenses with profile photographs, rather 

than the frontal photograph used for adults. 

Many States require visible notices posted in establishments explaining penalties 

for serving to minors, and for minors themselves. 

In Florida, employees sign affidavits acknowledging that alcohol sales to minors 

are immediate cause for dismissal. 

Alabama issues press releases listing names of minors arrested for alcohol 

violations. Michigan publishes the results of vendor sting operations. 

Ohio and New Hampshire send letters to school principals about enhanced 

enforcement activities during proms or graduation time. 

In Oregon, when schools hear of parties, the ABC sends letters to the parents 

about the party and the parents’ potential liability. 

North Dakota, Oregon, and Washington require vendors to register beer kegs 

for identification purposes. In addition, North Dakota vendors use invisible ink 

on tags that allows authorities to track purchasers. In Washington, if the police 

raid a party and find that the beer keg does not have the tag, the 

21-year-old who is nearest to the beer keg may be cited with a violation. 

Some States have parents attend court and diversionary programs with their 

youth who have been cited for an offense. 

New Hampshire, Ohio, and Virginia offer toll-free telephone numbers for 

citizen complaints. 

ENFORCEMENT IS INHIBITED BY PUBLIC ATTTPUD EANDDEFICIENCIES 

IN EDUCATION 

According to State officials, the public’s attitude about youth drinking and deficiencies 

in comprehensive, early alcohol education in schools are common enforcement 

obstacles. One-third of the officials mentioned that public indifference makes 

controlling underage drinking difficult. Forty-eight of 51 officials believe that 

increasing alcohol education in schools would decrease students’ alcohol use. 

public indifference prevents changes in youth attihuk 

State officials mentioned problems with parental and social attitudes. “A lot of kids 

are encouraged to drink by lax parental behavior,” said one official. In some States, 

social attitudes have changed when community groups challenge the status quo. State 

15 
officials believe that organized community groups, such as MADD, influence State 

legislators, enforcement agencies, and courts. One official commented, “Society is 

going to have to become responsible for itself. It will have to expand from the family 

to the workplace to the community.” 

Although officials complained that the public accepts youth drinking, they believe that 

the Surgeon General can change public attitudes. One State official mentioned the 

cigarette smoking campaigns that publicize adverse health effects. He commented, 

“The Surgeon General’s research on the effects of cigarette smoking had an effect on 

behavior. Increased research and documentation of alcohol problems might help. 

The same thing needs to happen with alcohol as happened with smoking.” Another 

added, “It needs to be socially unacceptable for youth to drink.” 

Early education, innovation, and focw on penalties and health are kzys to succw 

State officials volunteered techniques they use to increase education’s effectiveness: 

b Start education early. State officials believe that early alcohol education, as 

early as kindergarten, shapes life behavior. “‘Why are kids drinking?’ is the 

question that needs to be answered,” said one official. “People are better 

educated about alcohol than ever before, but youth continue to drink. We 

need to focus our message on younger students. By the time they reach 

college, it’s too late.” 

b Use peer pressure to make drinking unpopular. State ABCs, in conjunction 

with schools and local communities, have attempted to create a group of nondrinking youth through various promotions. In turn, the group uses peer 

pressure to discourage youth drinking. In North Carolina, a national insurance 

company enlisted the help of local radio stations to convince students to sign 

no-drinking pledges by offering prizes and other incentives. Under a federal 

grant, Ohio worked with MADD to create an animated character/mascot, called 

Hoola the Hippo, and a video that encourages younger students to make 

responsible decisions and resist peer pressure to drink. 

b Educate youth on laws and penalties as welI as health consequences of 

drinking. Some State officials believe that youth should be educated about the 

health consequences and legal penalties they face for drinking alcohol. “Kids 

do not understand what alcohol does to the body and the mind. We should 

show them the victims of drunk driving, for instance, in driver’s education.” 

Another State official believes that programs will be effective only if they show 

the potential liability--such as suspension of their drivers’ licenses--as well as the 

health effects. One official cautioned that educators must be careful and not 

equate alcohol with illegal drugs. “A lot of education is done clumsily. It 

disturbs me that they talk about a glass of beer in the same sentence as crack 

cocaine. Beer is a legal, socially acceptable substance. Treat it like it is.” 

16 
CHECKLIST FOR STATES 

The OIG report has identified loopholes in State laws and weaknesses in law 

enforcement and education. We encourage States to examine their laws and policies 

concerning youth accessto alcohol and offer the following checklist. 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

YOUR ALCOHOL LAWS: 

prohiiit youth from purchasing and attempting to purchase, 

prohibit youth from consuming and possessingin public places, 

prohibit youth from consuming and possessingin private places without 

parent or guardian supervision, 

contain employment provisions which reduce the opportunity for youth to 

sell alcohol to peers, 

ban youth from entering bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, and other 

establishments that are primarily drinking establishments, 

contain specific civil liability provisions addressing establishments and individuals 

that illegally provide alcohol to minors, 

contain provisions such as California’s “Kegger Statute” that allow enforcement 

agents to take action against minors who drink in private residences, 

provide decoy operation authority, and 

provide options for diversionary penalties, such as driver’s license suspension? 

DO YOU EMPHASIZE THE NEED FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ABC 

AGENCIES TO PREVENT YOUTH FROM ILLEGALLY PURCHASING 

ALCOHOL BY: 

0 giving high priority to detecting and prosecuting alcohol-related offenses, 

0 ensuring that alcohol enforcement agencies are adequately funded and staffed, 

q giving your ABC jurisdiction over minors, and 

0 assuring that penalties are adequate, appropriate, and uniformly applied? 

17 

0 
ARE YOUR EDUCATION EFFORTS DIRECTED AT: 

0 youth at early ages, using unique approaches whenever possible, 

0 the general public to change attitudes about youth drinking, 

fl law enforcement agencies to emphasize the need to eliminate youth accessto 

alcohol, I 

•J the judicial system to stress the need to impose penalties, and 

0 alcoholic beverage sellers through vendor and server training programs? 

DO YOU INHIBI’T THE USE OF FALSE IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS (IDS) 

By: 

Cl prohibiting the manufacture and sale of false IDS, 

0 prohibiting minors from misrepresenting their age, 

Cl providing adequate penalties for violations of false ID laws, 

0 vigorously prosecuting offenders, and 

0 issuing drivers’ licenses and identification cards that cannot be duplicated 

or counterfeited? 

18