THE NEW YORK TIMES

Tuesdays July 29, 1997

FACE THE FACTS ABOUT ALCOHOL AND CRIME

By William J. Bennett

WASHINGTON, As a former director of national drug policy, I have been an outspoken advocate of tougher drug policies, and I believe that one of the social trends of this is the explosive increase in marijuana use by young people. But is another area that the public attention to as well the link between the alcohol and crime.

Most crime is not related to drinking, and most drinking never results in crime. But- some people are far more prone to violence when they are drinking or drunk. The scientific literature strongly suggests that alcohol, like drugs, acts as a "multiplier" of crime. The use of alcohol, like drugs, results in higher levels of aggression and crime. And where you find a concentration of liquor stores, you often find the neighborhood, to be suffering from alcohol-related social problems.

Those who care about community breakdown and crime should be trying to reduce the concentration of places that sell alcohol. The best point to begin this experiment is in poor, high-crime neighborhoods where there are more liquor outlets per square mile than the citywide average.

Imposing stricter zoning on liquor stores would be a good start. Such rules could increase the distance between liquor outlets and reduce the total number of a city's bars and liquor stores. And city officials should take the lead in enforcing zoning limits on alcohol billboard advertising, banning such ads from the horizons of schools, churches and public housing.

How have some in the alcohol industry reacted to the evidence and such recommendations? On May 9, Richard Crawford, the Coors Brewing Company's director of Federal Government affairs, requested a meeting with me I was told that Mr. Crawford and his superiors were worried about some conclusions of "Body Count: Moral Poverty and How to Win America's War Against Crime and Drugs," a book I wrote with John J. Dilulio Jr., a professor of politics at Princeton, and John P. Walters, director of the Council on Crime in America. -

At our meeting (which Mr. DiIulio, among others, attended) Mr. Crawford told me that he was disappointed in what I wrote and that his superiors were upset with the book's discussion of alcohol and crime. He said that Coors war proud of what it does to create jobs. Coors, a big supporter of conservative causes, can be proud of creating jobs and of its philanthropy. But I told Mr. Crawford that it would have been unconscionable to omit the facts as they were and that responsible beer and alcohol companies should accept them.

On June 3, the National Beer Wholesalers Association canceled a speech I was scheduled to give in September. In a letter to my agent, the association's president, Ronald A. Sarasin, mentioned, "Body Count" and said: "We had looked forward to having Dr. Bennett on our program. However, his recent positions concerning the products we proudly distribute require us to find another presenter."

Under the contract it had written, the association had the right to cancel my speech. But Coors, the beer wholesalers and the liquor industry are not going to succeed in the court of public opinion if they ignore or deny what we know to be true.

I have a reputation for being a conservative. And I am. But conservatives need to go where the facts, not ideology, lead. And the facts tell us that there is a very strong link between alcohol availability, consumption and crime.

Here's a prediction: If the liquor Industry does not start acting in a more socially responsible way; it may soon find itself held in the same kind of esteem in which the tobacco companies are now held. The alcohol industry can act now. Or Ican deny reality, and pay later.