From: [a--s--y] at [vela.acs.oakland.edu] (awesley)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: BOYCOTT BUDWEISER
Date: 19 Jun 1993 01:41:46 -0400

[r--gg--s] at [vax1.umkc.edu] writes:

>For those of you interested, I recently heard from the head of Missouri NORML
>that Anheiser-Busch provides 80% of the PDFA (partnership for a drug free
>america) budget. Now I don't know if this is just in Missouri or nationwide,
>[...]

   I dredged this from my hard drive, file dated Feb 92.
     =================================================================
allen h. lutins: More on PDFA...
...i noticed the PDFA's been a topic of late, but i haven't followed
the thread, so excuse me if any of this stuff is dated...*but*...in
case you were looking for nice $ amt. figures:
 
...this week's _Nation_ has a nice article entitled "Condoning the
Legal Stuff? Hard Sell in The Drug War" about the Partnership for a
Drug-Free America.  It begins (well, second paragraph, actually):
 
     The Partnership means well, but it sends a self-serving message.  The
     ads themselves exaggerate and distort, relying on scare tactics to get
     people's attention.  Ad strategies are based on market research rather
     than public health policy.  Even worse, the Partnership has accepted
     $5.4 million in contributions from legal drug manufacturers, while
     producing ads that overlook the dangers of tobacco, alcohol and pills. 
     This "drug-free" crusade is actually a silent partner to the drug
     industry, condoning the use of "good" drugs by targeting the "bad"
     ones.
 
...they cite excellent examples of ads which PDFA had to pull because of the
inaccuracies, and conclude (O.K., next to last two paragraphs) with these
titillating numbers:
 
     The Partnership's funders are usually kept secret, says [Partnership
     spokesperson Theresa] Grant, to protect them from other grant seekers
     and from the legalization lobby.  But the Partnership's 1991 tax
     return reveals another motive for secrecy: conspicuous support from
     the legal drug industry.  From 1988 to 1991, pharmaceutical companies
     and their beneficiaries contributed as follows: the J. Seward Johnson,
     Sr., Charitable Trusts ($1,100,000); Du Pont ($150,000); the Proctor &
     Gamble Fund ($120,000); the Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation
     ($110,000); Johnson & Johnson ($110,000); SmithKline Beecham
     ($100,000); the Merck Foundation ($75,000); and Hoffman-La Roche
     ($50,000)
 
     Pharmaceuticals and their beneficiaries alone donated 54 percent of
     the $5.8 million the Partnership took from its top twenty-five
     contributors from 1988 to 1991.  That 54 percent is conservative.
     It doesn't include donations under $90,000, and it doesn't include
     donations from the tobacco and alcohol kings: The Partnership has
     taken $150,000 each from Phillip Morris, Anheuser-Busch ad RJR
     Reynolds, plus $100,000 from American Brands (Jim Beam, Lucky Strike).
 
...hmmmm       :-\
 
 
[Note:  reprinted without permission...no malice intended :) ]
-- 
"In times of difficulty we must not lose sight / allen h. lutins
 of our achievements, must see the bright    / [vy 8934] at [bingvaxa.bitnet]
 future and must pluck up our courage."    / [vu 0350] at [bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu]
 -Mao Zhedong, "Serve the People" 9/8/44 / "Individualists of the world Unite!"
-- 23:02 --.politics.drugs-- LAST --help:?--Bot--
   =================================================================
-- 
Here's a little .sig you can all join in with   |  
It's very simple and I hope it's new            |  Tony Wesley
Make your own .sig up if you want to            |  [a--s--y] at [vela.acs.oakland.edu]
Any old .sig that you think will do.            |  Compu$erve: 72770,2053