Motive For Murder

Here is the latest remark by Julie Lynch. She says my sister asked her husband for a divorce on the grounds she “decided” Garth might hurt their seven-year old daughter in a sexual manner. I doubt Garth agreed to this SLANDER, and got an attorney in order to FIGHT Christine, who must have sued for CUSTODY. If Garth were alive, I’m sure he would testify about how much he regrets having asked my sister to dig deeper into her subconscious.

Rosamond Publishing – About the Artist

“Though Christine had stopped the meditations, Garth continued to encourage her to dig into her subconscious. He believed that there was unexamined trauma that needed her attention. As if on cue, the universe cooperated and Christine’s father, Vic, who had left the family when Christine was eleven years old, returned to reacquaint himself with his daughter.  Within months, Vic molested a teenage girl. The moment that Christine heard of the attack, she knew that this was not the first time Vic had transgressed. Childhood memories of being violated came flooding back to her. This epiphany was too much for Christine. Aware that she had a problem with alcohol, she’d been abstaining throughout her marriage to Garth. But now, she needed an anesthetic and started drinking with a vengeance. She also decided that all men were capable of abusing their daughters and, fearing that Garth might hurt their seven-year-old daughter, Drew, she asked him for a divorce.

Rosamond Publishing – About the Artist

What is so impossible about this claim, is the two women who Christine named in her will as executors, dropped out, and nominated Garth Benton, who successfully sued Gordon and Anne Getty, the major owners of PlumpJack – that was sued by Alcohol Justice! Vicki and Jacci Belford worked with Garth’s divorce attorney against Shannon, the adult heir, who Garth had arrested after she was allowed to stay in her mother’s home – after the fake looting incident! This is why I forbid my minor child to have anything to do with my family, and the outside-insiders. They are not being truthful – and they employ children in LIE-MAKING! Did Vicki Presco concur with her sister about the danger from fathers? Did Vic molest her? If Christine did sue Garth for divorce, believing he is capable of molesting Drew, then she is horrified while in her grave to see her sister and best friend betray her – and her daughters!

The Frog and King of California | Rosamond Press

Above are group paintings Christine did. Did she reveal her belief all fathers are capable of sexually abusing their daughters? Did she tell these group of women she hid in a closet as a child because our mother only wanted me to become a famous artist? Did she share her belief at a AA meeting, or, with her sponsor?

Anonymity letter to the media – Alcoholics Anonymous (

I am asking Alcohol Justice to champion my late sister, the world famous artist who is kin to Elizabeth Rosemond Taylor, who also struggled with the disease of Alcoholism. Christine drowned on her first sober birthday. The word JUSTICE has a specific meaning. Here is my e-mail to Gavin Newsom.

Dear Governor: I came across a article by Dr. David J. Hanson, who questions the validity of Alcohol Justice and its effectiveness. He claims AJ is Temperance-Orientated Org. I am a member of AA and have thirty-four years of sobriety. The eleventh tradition discourages us from getting involved in outside controversies so we can maintain our integrity. I am forced to do so because the law firm of Robert Buck sold our Sober Family Legacy to outsiders, and via a website, a biography, and a movie script, they keep revealing things about my late sister and our family – that are not true – and involve alleged CHILD ABUSE.

Alcohol Justice has helped form several children’s group in their Temperance movement that includes anti-Marijuana campaigns, and a write-in campaign that involves you. Children are not old enough to grasp the complexity of politics. Many adults have trouble. For instance, Trump got on television to encourage his followers to get vaccinated after millions of them refused, they going by what the ex-President claimed in his bid for reelection. We are talking about a cult following that are endangering the lives of millions – who do not subscribe to the dangerous belief systems of Trumpites, many of them Christian, who are told the blood of Jesus will protect them.

I took the Vow of the Nazarite in regards to owning a HIGHER POWER. This simple vow bids one to abstain from alcohol. I am not bid to sign a petition to force those in political office to enforce TEMPERANCE BELIEFS, verses Temperance Laws, that were done away with with the repeal of Prohibition. Please help me in thwarting this growing cult that should not be allowed to use the word JUSTICE as it is applicable to us all. We all want Justice. I subscribe to the Twelve Steps of Alcoholic Anonymous, where anonymity is is key to our recovery.

Thank you

Alcohol Justice: A Temperance-Oriented Activist Organization (

John Presco

Office of Governor Gavin Newsom


You have successfully sent your message. Click here to return.

Thank you for the message – your feedback and ideas are a priority to me and my administration. Californians like you are helping us build an even stronger Golden State, and I thank you. Your comments are being reviewed by my staff. Please allow some time for us to get back to you as we build an inclusive, responsive, and people-powered government. I encourage you to revisit my website in the coming days to learn about what my administration is doing to keep our state moving forward and to expand opportunity to every Californian.

Thank you again for sharing your feedback and helping us shape California’s future.

Governor Gavin Newsom

This is the personal web site of Dr. David J. Hanson, who has received no financial support or other consideration from any agency, company, organization, group or person to post or maintain it.

The former president then mentioned in passing, “You know, they all want me to do a commercial because a lot of our people don’t want to take the vaccine. I don’t know what that is exactly, Republican, I don’t know what it is.”

“You encourage people to take it,” Hannity said.

“I encourage people to take it. I do,” Trump responded. “I had it and I took it.”

“They want me to do a commercial saying take the vaccine,” he continued. “And they think that’s very important and I’d certainly do it.”

Trump Says He Has Been Asked to Do a Vaccine Commercial ‘Because a Lot of Our People Don’t Want to Take’ Them ( (Tom Snyder)
To: John Presco
Sent: March 30, 2001 5:46:49 PM GMT
Subject: Question on RRR

Hi, John –

Visited your website the other day and noticed you have the poem,
“Your Name” posted. I think it’s beautiful.

Lillian had given me a copy some time ago, and I am wondering if you know
where it was published.

Have you met Heather yet?


— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Tom Snyder: Writer, collector of neat
quotes. Otherwise, mostly all thumbs.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
You see, you can’t please everyone,
So you got to please yourself.
– Rick Nelson
“Garden Party”

Vicki Presco was named by Christine Presco to be the Executor of her estate. Vicki declined to serve, and nominated our ex-brother-in-law, Garth Benton. He served for about a month, and was dismissed. The No.1 creditor, Lawrence Chance made an appeal to the court to be the Executor, and failed. Vicki spent much time on the phone with Robin Beare who represented Garth in the vicious divorce. I have documents containing Christine’s words, accusing Garth of harassing her. Robin Beare went after the adult heir, Shannon Rosamond. At Beare’s encouragement, Garth and Vicki made an affidavit accusing Shannon from looting the estate where she was living. The day of the funeral Vicki changed the locks and gave our niece the key. Vicki asked me to move in and prevent Shannon from stealing. I refused and bid my dark sister to video tape the contents. In Snyder and Faulkner’s biography, Vicki claims she and gallery people tried to stop members of OUR family from looting the estate. Shannon was there. There was no looting. So was Garth’s best friend, lurking in the background. Vicki took hundreds of partnership prints from the house and out them in the trunk of her Rambler.

If there had been looting as Vicki and gallery people claimed, why did they let Shannon stay in Christine’s home for several months? The house should have been sealed – by Vicki Presco. Two of her best friends stayed the night after the funeral; Pip Burns, and, Cindy Blake. Raphael was there and came outside to talk to me when I left with my Private Detective friend.

In Mr. Sydney Morris’s Report of the Administration he says on page 4 line 10;

“Petitioner hired Stacey Pierrot, who had been assistant manager of the gallery during Decedent’s lifetime, to run the gallery and prepare and execute a marketing plan. The gallery was run by the estate until March 1996 when the gallery was sold to Ms. Pierrot through a contract approved by this Court. During the time that the estate operated the gallery, aggressive marketing efforts were made in an attempt to stir interest in Decedent’s work and increase the potential market for her work. In spite of these efforts, interest in Decedent’s work continued to wane.”

On page six, Mr. Morris explains why there was a delay in the closing of the estate;

“By September 2000, however, plans were underway for a biography of Decedent, which Petitioner hoped might create interest in her work. The book was published in 2002. Although the book did not spur the hoped-for interest in Decedent’s life and work, efforts continued to market the concept of a screenplay based upon Decedent’s life. Petitioner hoping that this might be brought to fruition, elected to keep the estate open. However, it is the Petitioner’s belief the likelihood of an increased interest in Decedents work is negligible, and the time has come to close the estate.”

Daddy! Buy Me A Beautiful Identity | Rosamond Press

Tell Gov. Newsom: California Communities Lose When the Booze is Loose – Alcohol Justice

SAN FRANCISCO, July 22, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — The California Alcohol Policy Alliance (CAPA) held a virtual press event today to acknowledge California Governor Gavin Newsom’s failure to make public health and safety essential by instead making alcohol essential in the state during the #COVID19 pandemic. The event launched a letter writing campaign to Newsom urging him and the California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) to remove alcohol outlets from essential services, to protect public health and safety. Several youth groups across the state say many of their teenaged peers are getting creative to get alcohol, and it’s working.

California Alcohol Policy Alliance (CAPA) holds Governor Gavin Newsom accountable for COVID-19 response failure of making alcohol “essential” (

Because of the high potential for risky behaviors and subsequent community disruption during the pandemic, CAPA and its community partners strongly urge Governor Newsom to remove alcohol from the list of essential businesses and reinstate ABC regulations that prevent alcohol takeout, delivery, and expanded public consumption in public spaces

The Buck Trust Legacy
Alcohol Justice’s core funding is from the Leonard and Beryl Buck Foundation, commonly known as the Buck Trust. The Trust also funds the Buck Institute for Research on Aging, the Buck Institute for Education, and the Marin Community Foundation. The Trust was formed after Beryl Hamilton Buck passed away in 1975, leaving an amazing legacy dedicated “for the benefit of Marin Residents and all humankind.” Alcohol Justice is a supporting organization of the Marin Community Foundation, which administers the Buck Trust. Alcohol Justice receives one of the portions at approximately 3% of the annual return on the fund in perpetuity – for the benefit of anyone in any city, county or state, or the United States or globally.
Other Funding
FoundationsSan Francisco FoundationGinnie and Peter Haas Jr. FundMarin Charitable FoundationSierra Health Foundation, MAT AccessSierra Health Foundation, Elevate YouthDaniel E. Koshland Civic Unity Program, Neighborhood FellowsAnonymousGrants and Contracts

Tell Gov. Newsom what you think – Alcohol Justice

(1) Youth for Justice | Facebook

AJ-2018-Form-990.pdf (

Funding & Organization – Alcohol Justice

Who We Are – Alcohol Justice

The position description emphasize that the Executive Director is responsible for the developing and implementing the activities of the Institute “including monitoring the marketing and public influence of the alcohol industry; exposing the industry’s harmful activities and efforts to hide the truth, and mobilizing community action against the industry.”

“The successful candidate must have demonstrated accomplishment in efforts to change industry behavior (i.e. tobacco, firearms, etc.), influence social/public policy and shift public opinion. Significant experience working as a watchdog of corporate bad acts, with a record of success using media advocacy and other counter marketing techniques to weaken an industry adversary and change behavior” is a required qualification.

The successful candidate should also have the “Demonstrated ability to represent the Institute and deliver key ‘counter industry’ messages in media interviews, fundraising pitches and public speaking opportunities.”

n (alcoh

Alcohol Justice: A Temperance-Oriented Activist Organization (

Alcohol Justice: A Temperance-Oriented Activist Organization

by David J. Hanson, Ph.D.

Alcohol Justice is the newest name of the Marin Institute, formerly known as the Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems.

In reporting its new name, the former Marin Institute finally acknowledged that “we aren’t a research organization as ‘institute’ implies.” The fact that the Marin Institute wasn’t a research organization has long been noted by observers, although the activist group has often presented itself to the public and media as engaging in research.

Alcohol Justice is a massively endowed temperance-oriented organization that has picked up the anti-alcohol banner previously carried by earlier temperance groups. It is even recognized for its activities by the Prohibition Party. 1 Yes, the Prohibition Party still exists and has thousands of members and millions of supporters.

Alcohol Justice is funded by the Buck Trust, whose founders directed that its resources be used exclusively for the good of the people of Marin County, California. 2 In spite of that mandate, Alcohol Justice now engages in nation-wide temperance activities. 3 The Buck Trust assets are reported to be about one billion dollars. 4

In addition, Alcohol Justice has received many millions of dollars of taxpayer’s money at both state and federal levels. Millions of that have been channeled through the federal Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, a very controversial agency.

Alcohol Justice

  • Aggressively promotes neo-prohibition alcohol policies.
  • Ignores repeated Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigations that have all concluded that alcohol producers do not target underage persons in their ads and marketing. Alcohol Justice continues to insist, in spite of the evidence, that such targeting is widespread. 5
  • Presents attacks of alcohol beverage vendors as comparable to illegal drug pushers victimizing our young people.
  • Insists on using the highly misleading term “binge” to refer to alcohol consumption that may not be high enough to cause any level of intoxication. 6
  • Promotes the temperance-oriented “A Matter of Degree” program, whose own supporters have reported it to be ineffective in reducing alcohol problems. 7
  • Promotes alcohol beverage bans.
  • Promotes the false belief that alcohol problems are increasing in the U.S., although they are actually decreasing. 8
  • Crusades against First Amendment constitutional free speech rights in pursuit of its agenda.

Alcohol Justice repeatedly reports the often deceptive and misleading “research” and statistics produced by the other anti-alcohol groups. The Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY), the Alcohol Policies Project of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the Center for Substance Abuse and Addiction (CASA) and Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) all produce flawed and even pseudo-scientific reports to promote their agenda. Cooperation and interaction among groups in the anti-alcohol industry tends to be high. For example, David Jernigan, who co-founded the Alcohol Justice, now works at CAMY. 9

Like the $10 billion dollar Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a major financier of temperance in the U.S., Alcohol Justice is very aggressive in promoting its temperance-oriented agenda across the country both publicly and clandestinely. 10

Alcohol Justice is very active politically. In testimony to the United States Congress, Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute revealed that

Politics is not merely a byproduct of CSAP grants to groups like Alcohol Justice. It often appears to be the agency’s goal. CSAP has, for instance, labored mightily to equip activist organizations to lobby not only federal officials, but also state and local governments. The agency provided nearly one million dollars between 1990 and 1993 for the Marin Institute’s youth Alcohol Environment On-Line Information Project. The project was directed against the alcohol industry which, of course, was considered to be creating the “environment” with which the Institute was dissatisfied. According to the formal grant proposal, the Institute intended to “compile the only special collection of materials on the alcohol beverage industry in existence outside of the industry itself.” Indeed, the Institute’s Media and Policy Center, explained the proposal, “is creating ALCNET, an on-line computer network to meet the needs of media advocates in the alcohol field for rapid communication regarding media opportunities.” Federal funds underwrote the creation of a daily on-line news summary regarding youth alcohol problems, an on-line database consisting of industry materials “relevant” to the prevention of such problems. The Institute then planned to promote use of the network by the individuals and organizations with which it had been working.

Although the project was formally directed at drinking by children, it was clearly intended to assist political activists in counteracting advertising by the alcohol industry. Advertising, explained the Institute, “creates an environment in which the messages of the alcohol beverage industry’s multibillion dollar promotional campaigns are reinforced at every turn.” Hence, enter Washington doling out taxpayer funds. The federally-subsidized “media advocacy” project, explained the Institute’s grant proposal, “tries to reframe health issues to focus on industry practices as a primary problem, exposing them as exploitive and unethical.” 11

Family Friendly = No Alcohol

Family friendly events involve no alcohol consumption or possession in the view of the Alcohol Justice.

Jews, Italian-Americans, Greek-Americans, French-Americans, German-American, Spanish-Americans or Portuguese-Americans tend to drink in family situations. In these groups young people typically learn how to drink within the safe environment of the family and they do so from an early age. And these groups are characterized by low rates of drinking problems because of their healthy attitudes toward beverage alcohol.

But Alcohol Justice calls for laws prohibiting parents from serving their children alcohol beverages within their own private homes for religious, cultural or other reasons. It does this in spite of the fact that federally-funded research has demonstrated that young people who drink with their parents are less likely to drink elsewhere or to have alcohol problems. 12

Alcohol Justice promotes the idea that individuals are helpless and not responsible for their own behavior. Therefore, it has promoted “environmental prevention” to reduce the availability and consumption of alcohol. The last major experiment with environmental prevention was National Prohibition, which was imposed from 1920 through 1933.

Alcohol Justice calls for alcohol prevention rather than for alcohol abuse prevention. In reality, it seeks to reduce the availability of alcoholic beverages and to marginalize (de-normalize) and stigmatize their consumption.

The temperance-oriented group even calls for its neo-prohibition program as a way to create a dry, supportive environment to decrease the risk of relapse among alcoholics. Society is responsible for causing the behavior of individual alcoholics, at least in the view of the activists at Alcohol Justice. 13

Alcohol Justice has its own preferred terminology:

  • alcohol-free instead of non-alcohol
  • positive choices about alcohol instead of decisions not to drink
  • kids instead of adolescents or young people
  • environmental prevention instead of neo-prohibition 14

It’s clear that Alcohol Justice has a neo-temperance agenda.

Alcohol Justice Opposes Debate of Public Issue

The U.S. currently has the highest minimum drinking age of any country in the entire world. This is a radical social experiment both historically and internationally. Unfortunately, there is considerable evidence that such a high minimum drinking age, which criminalizes drinking by millions of citizens who are socially and legally adults, has many unintended consequences.

The high drinking age drives drinking “underground” into venues where it is not subject to the usual moderating norms of society. To the contrary, such unsupervised drinking environments encourage the rapid and excessive consumption of alcohol just as speakeasies did during National Prohibition. When people have to go to great effort to obtain alcohol beverages, they don’t sip and savor them but gulp them down while they have access to them.

Similarly, raising the minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) has made consuming alcohol a desirable “forbidden fruit” that’s now seen as a major symbol of maturity and independence. Empirical research has clearly demonstrated this fact.

There are numerous moral, constitutional, law enforcement and other arguments against such a high minimum drinking age. But these are important issues about which reasonable people can and do disagree.

Public policy issues should always be open to debate in a democratic society. Therefore, it disturbs some observers that Alcohol Justice has launched an attack upon a congressional candidate for daring to suggest that the issue should be publicly debated. In trying to prevent debate, the temperance-oriented group has attacked the candidate’s motives and integrity rather than the strength of his arguments. 15 That kind of behavior might be expected from a playground bully but not from a powerful organization that desires legitimacy and respectability.

Exactly what constitutes the best minimum drinking age is an important issue. Let the debate begin. For more, visit Choose Responsibility.

Alcohol Justice Opposed Alcohol Producer’s Charitable Activities

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, a large brewery and its wholesalers donated $3.8 million in cash to the Red Cross and other relief agencies, stopped beer production in the region to can free water instead of beer, made its fleet of trucks available to the Red Cross for deliveries of food, water, power generators, and other critically needed supplies. In many cases across the devastated areas, the brewer’s trucks were the first on the scene to deliver the food, water and other life-saving supplies. The brewer and its wholesalers saw a need and quickly responded with massive relief efforts.

However, in the view of Alcohol Justice, the response of the brewer and its affiliates was a “second disaster” visited upon the suffering region. Although hurricane victims greatly appreciated the help, Alcohol Justice didn’t. The anti-alcohol group insisted that “Anheuser-Busch’s charitable efforts took its predatory practices to a new low.” It insisted that “packaging water in Budweiser beer cans – delivered in Budweiser trucks – is just another example of how the alcohol industry exploits vulnerable people.”

Editorials and letters to the editor throughout the stricken region suggest that residents greatly appreciated the brewer’s relief efforts, the Red Cross praised the brewer, Florida Sen. Steven A Geller said that if more companies had acted as the brewer did “my state and country would be far better off,” and Mississippi state legislators were critical of Alcohol Justices cynical attack.

Apparently only the radical Alcohol Justice understands in what way the brewery’s charity is predatory and exploitive. It also appears that “there’s no level to which this group won’t stoop” in order to criticize any action by any alcohol beverage producer.

Alcohol Justice has earlier attacked Coors Brewing Co. for an “involved parenting” program, and the Sutter Home winery for donating money to breast-cancer research. In the eyes of Alcohol Justice, no alcohol producer can ever do good. This really tells us much more about the anti-alcohol group itself than about the alcohol producers it criticizes. 16

Anti-Alcohol Leadership Career Opportunity

When Alcohol Justice began looking for a new Executive Director, it knew exactly what it wanted. According to its official announcement, 17 “The Marin Institute [Alcohol Justice] is an alcohol industry watchdog that works to stop the alcohol industry from harming public health. Alcohol Justice is a national organization, based in Marin County, California that monitors the alcohol industry’s marketing and public influence activities, exposes its harmful practices and efforts to hide the truth, and mobilizes community action to counter the industry.”

Because of its secure funding and resources “the Institute is poised to build on its record of success countering the alcohol industry’s predatory practices.”

The position description emphasize that the Executive Director is responsible for the developing and implementing the activities of the Institute “including monitoring the marketing and public influence of the alcohol industry; exposing the industry’s harmful activities and efforts to hide the truth, and mobilizing community action against the industry.”

“The successful candidate must have demonstrated accomplishment in efforts to change industry behavior (i.e. tobacco, firearms, etc.), influence social/public policy and shift public opinion. Significant experience working as a watchdog of corporate bad acts, with a record of success using media advocacy and other counter marketing techniques to weaken an industry adversary and change behavior” is a required qualification.

The successful candidate should also have the “Demonstrated ability to represent the Institute and deliver key ‘counter industry’ messages in media interviews, fundraising pitches and public speaking opportunities.”

Another Anti-Alcohol Activist Career Opportunity

The Marin Institute [Alcohol Justice] posted the following job announcement under “Job Opportunities for Activists” for an organization (that is, itself) “fighting for social and racial justice.” 18 It described itself as “an alcohol industry watchdog based in San Rafael, California. We envision communities free of the alcohol industry’s negative influence.”

The Marin Institute [Alcohol Justice] is looking for an Advocacy and Outreach Organizer to join our action oriented group of dedicated public health, public policy, and advocacy experts. We are looking for a media-savvy candidate with experience in counter- marketing messages, public relations, and community organizing. The Advocacy and Outreach Organizer is responsible for helping to develop, implement, and manage programs that focus on exposing negative alcohol industry practices through strategic use of media and coalition advocacy.

If you want to help expose the alcohol industry’s dirty tricks in promoting harmful products, engaging in deceptive marketing (particularly targeting youth), and undermining public policy, and have performed a similar function in another industry watchdog or public health-oriented advocacy group, this job is for you. With primary responsibility for managing one or more projects, responsibilities include creating coalitions, providing technical assistance to local, state and national organizations, contributing content to the website, and assisting in media advocacy efforts both locally and nationally.

There are two sides to every important issue or controversy and things are rarely completely black and white. So Alcohol Justice was apparently hoping to find a candidate who would leave all objectivity, critical thinking, open-mindedness, independent judgment, and personal integrity at the door.

  • Brickley, P., and Powledge, F. The Buck Bequest: A Case Study in Philanthropy. NY: Nation Institute, 1983.
  • Hawken, Paul. Marin Institute, Paul Hawken, Marin Institute Founding Committee. San Raphael, CA: Superior Court of California, 1987.
  • Jernigan, David H. Thirsting for Markets: The Global Impact of Corporate Alcohol. San Raphael, CA: The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs, 1997.
  • Jones, R.J., et al. Alcohol and Other Drug Problems in Marin County, California: Results From a General Population Survey. San Raphael, CA: The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs, 1991.
  • Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs. The Marin Institute Thesaurus. San Raphael, CA: The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs, 1995.
  • The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs. San Raphael, CA: Leonard and Beryl Buck Foundation. 1987- (annual).
  • Moshier, James F. Alcohol Beverage Control in a Public Health Perspective: A Handbook for Action. San Raphael, CA: Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs, 1989.
  • Moshier, James F. The Model California State Alcoholic Beverage Control State/Local Partnership Act. San Raphael, CA: The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs, 1995.
  • Newsletter of the Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs. San Raphael, CA: Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs (quarterly)
  • Wechsler, R., and Schnepp, T. Community Organizing for the Prevention of Problems Related to Alcohol and Other Drugs. San Raphael, CA: Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drugs, 1993.


This is the personal web site of Dr. David J. Hanson, who has received no financial support or other consideration from any agency, company, organization, group or person to post or maintain it.


This site is maintained by:
David J. Hanson, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus of Sociology
State University of New York, Potsdam, NY

Alcohol Justice is a San Rafael, California-based non-profit advocacy, research and policy organization describing itself as “the industry watchdog.” The Marin Institute was renamed and re-branded as Alcohol Justice in 2011; it was originally named The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems.[1]

In 2006, Alcohol Justice shifted its focus to the practices of alcohol corporations who produce, distribute, retail and advertise alcoholic beverages. Until 2006, Alcohol Justice focused strictly on alcohol harms and environmental prevention strategies. These strategies included reducing the hours during which time alcohol can be sold, increasing the size of warning labels on alcoholic beverage containers, requiring warnings on all alcohol advertisements, restricting the content and placement of alcohol ads, and prohibiting alcohol sponsorship of athletic events.



Alcohol Justice was established in 1987 as one of three major projects funded by the Leonard and Beryl H. Buck Trust at the same time the Marin Community Foundation was formed. The Marin Institute reported in 2006 that “countering the alcohol industry has always been a high priority for the Marin Institute, but we now want to make it the central focus of our efforts. That means we’ll put 100% of our energy into stopping the alcohol industry from harming public health.”[citation needed] In July 2011, the Marin Institute changed its name to Alcohol Justice to better align the organization’s name with the national reach of its network.[2]

Campaigns and programs

Alcohol Justice, although based in San Rafael, California, plays a research and advocacy role in other cities and counties of California, such as Los Angeles and San Francisco, and has led numerous campaigns for legislation and regulatory reform in Sacramento, California. Nonetheless, it is a national organization that has conducted national and international research projects, conducted hundreds of trainings of youth, community leaders and public health advocates throughout the United States, and participated in international activities as well in Canada, Europe, Africa and Thailand.

Alcohol taxes and fees: Charge for Harm

The Marin Institute participated in a flurry of alcohol tax increase campaigns in the early 1990s, which resulted in small increases in beer excise taxes in California at the U.S. federal level in 1991 and 1992. From December 2006 to November 2010, The Marin Institute convened and organized a California coalition to promote proposals for nickel or dime a drink excise taxes or mitigation fees, including AB 1019 (Assm. Jim Beall, Dem-Santa Clara) supported in a testimonial video by John O. Whitaker, Jr.[3]

The Charge for Harm campaign supported various bills in Sacramento and the San Francisco “Alcohol Cost Recovery Fee” ultimately vetoed by PlumpJack wine-distributorship owning Mayor Gavin Newsom in September 2010.[4][5][6] (More info at San Francisco Alcohol Cost Recovery database.)

Ultimately the California campaign ground to a halt in November 2010 with the passage of Proposition 26 with 51.4% of the vote, supported by the Wine Institute, the California Chamber of Commerce, Chevron, and collectively oil, tobacco, and alcohol corporations. Proposition 26 now requires in California a 2/3 vote of both legislative houses to pass impact or mitigation fees to charge industries for the harm caused by production or consumption, and requires a 2/3 vote of the electorate to pass such fees at the municipal or county level.[7][8]

Stop Alcopops

Alcohol Justice argues that alcopops should be regulated because they appeal to youth, who might not like other alcoholic beverages. When caffeinated alcoholic beverages, commonly containing 12% ABV and packaged in 24-oz cans, went off the market, the manufacturers of these beverages reformulated the beverages so as to be without caffeine. Alcohol Justice especially argues against the reformulated products partly due to the fact that the alcohol content has not changed.[9] Alcohol Justice is currently lobbying for legislation to limit the size and alcohol concentration of alcopops.[10]

About Royal Rosamond Press

I am an artist, a writer, and a theologian.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.